Babb, J

Celia, D

Konski, A

Kulkarni, SG

Lai, JS

Uzzo, R

Watkins Bruner, D

Elsevier - Publisher Connector 

235Abstracts
PCN19
QUALITY OF LIFE PROFILE OF MEN AT-RISK
FOR PROSTATE CANCER:THE FIT AND THE
WORRIED WELL 
Kulkarni SG1,Watkins Bruner D1, Babb J2, Uzzo R2,
Konski A2, Lai JS3, Cella D3
1Fox Chase Cancer Center, Cheltenham, PA, USA; 2Fox Chase
Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 3Evanston
Northwestern Healthcare, Evanston, IL, USA
OBJECTIVES: Men’s motivation to attend a Prostate
Cancer Risk Assessment Program (PRAP) is under study.
Previous PRAP work shows motivation to be unrelated
to risk-knowledge and perceptions. This study assesses
differences in quality of life proﬁles between two cohorts;
men “at-risk” for prostate cancer (PC); and “normal”
men without known risk of PC. METHODS: Functional
Assessment Cancer Therapy (FACT) sub-scale scores
were compared between cohorts; 331 men participating
in PRAP in the NE United States and 456 men with com-
plete FACT data, from an internet-based survey sample
(1400 men randomly drawn from a demographically 
balanced sample of the United States population)
recruited through Knowledge Networks, Menlo Park,
CA. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-six (82%) of
“normal” men vs. 142 (43%) of “at-risk” men were Cau-
casian. Mean [median] age was 48.1 [46] for “at-risk”
and 43.5 [42] years for “normal” men. Age and ethnic-
ity were controlled in subsequent analyses. The “at-risk”
group demonstrated higher physical and functional well-
being (PWB/FWB) scores than the “normal” group (p <
0.0001). Analyses showed that the effect of PC risk on
emotional well-being (EWB) depended on subject’s age (p
< 0.027). When separated into 2 groups depending on the
overall median age, both younger (<44 years) and older
(>45 years) “normal” men showed signiﬁcantly higher
EWB scores than “at-risk” men; the difference being more
pronounced among younger men. EWB score did not
depend on the race of the subjects. CONCLUSION:
The results indicate that although the men “at-risk” were
older, they report being more physically ﬁt than the
younger “normal” group but had poorer EWB. Since risk
knowledge and perceptions have been poor predictors of
motivation to screen, it may be that motivation is associ-
ated with an emotional “gestalt” related to risk and a
desire to stay ﬁt to overcome risk.
PCN20
FEAR OF CANCER RECURRENCE AFTER
TREATMENT FOR PROSTATE CANCER: DATA
FROM CAPSURE
Mehta SS1, Lubeck DP2, Pasta DJ2,Ye J2, Carroll P2
1TAP Pharmaceutical Products Inc, Lake Forest, IL, USA;
2University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA,
USA
OBJECTIVES: Fear of cancer recurrence has been well
documented for colorectal cancer, breast cancer and bone
marrow transplantation. Limited information exists for
prostate cancer. This study describes fear of cancer recur-
rence (FOCR) in patients undergoing radical prostatec-
tomy (RP) radiation (XRT) and brachytherapy (BT) as
prostate cancer treatment. METHODS: Five hundred
twenty-seven patients who underwent initial treatment
(RP = 328, XRT = 56, BT = 143) were identiﬁed from
CaPSURE, a national longitudinal registry of men with
prostate cancer. Patients in this analysis completed at least
one pretreatment and two post-treatment health related
quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires and had complete
clinical information. HRQOL was assessed using the SF-
36 and the UCLA Prostate Cancer Index (PCI). FOCR
was assessed with a ﬁve-question scale and was described
at baseline and after treatment. All questionnaires at each
time interval were used to calculate the cross-sectional
mean FOCR score. Linear regression was performed to
determine predictors of FOCR. RESULTS: RP patients
were younger (mean 61.2) than XRT (mean 71.6) and 
BT (mean 69.3) patients. Clinical characteristics among
groups were similar except mean PSA, which was higher
for XRT (8.3) as compared to RP (5.7) and BT (6.2).
Mean FOCR scores were similarly low pretreatment
(more fear) for RP (64.1), XRT (60.4) and BT (62.3),
increased after treatment (less fear) for RP (77.4), XRT
(72.9) and BT (68.9) but did not change substantially
over 24 months thereafter. Regression revealed that only
general health was a signiﬁcant predictor of FOCR. No
other general or disease speciﬁc HRQOL domains or 
clinical characteristics were signiﬁcant predictors. CON-
CLUSIONS: Undergoing treatment for prostate cancer
decreases the FOCR that patients experience; however,
fear level does not change substantially over time. General
health is the strongest predictor of FOCR and thus eval-
uation of this one domain is important for understanding
overall HRQOL outcomes in prostate cancer patients.
PCN21
DIFFERENCES IN HUSBAND/WIFE
PREFERENCES AND UTILITIES FOR PROSTATE
CANCER THERAPIES
Bruner DW1, Hanlon A1, Kulkarni S1, Mazzoni S1, Linton S1,
Konski A2, Pollack A2, Greenberg R2, Beck JR2
1Fox Chase Cancer Center, Cheltenham, PA, USA; 2Fox Chase
Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
OBJECTIVE: This pilot study compared the preferences
and utilities for impotence and incontinence associated
with prostate cancer (PC) treatments between men with
PC and their wives. Several studies have shown little 
congruence between stated and observed preferences. We
hypothesize that spousal inﬂuence may be a signiﬁcant
predictor of observed, versus stated, preferences.
METHODS: Seven husband/wife dyads were recruited
from radiotherapy and urology follow-up clinics. Each
spouse was interviewed without the other present, using
the Time Trade-Off Technique. RESULTS: The husband-
wife dyads demonstrated disparate preferences 50% of


PCNI9: QUALITY OF LIFE PROFILE OF MEN AT-RISK FOR PROSTATE CANCER:THE FIT AND THE WORRIED WELL 

file:///data/remote/core/dit/data/elsevier/pdf/031/aHR0cDovL2FwaS5lbHNldmllci5jb20vY29udGVudC9hcnRpY2xlL3BpaS9zMTA5ODMwMTUxMDYzOTM5Mw==.pdf

PCNI9: QUALITY OF LIFE PROFILE OF MEN AT-RISK FOR PROSTATE CANCER:THE FIT AND THE WORRIED WELL

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Elsevier - Publisher Connector

Elsevier - Publisher Connector