Advertisement

Patient Perceptions Regarding Routine Oncologic Follow-Up for Urologic Malignancies

Published:January 27, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2022.01.014

      abstract

      Introduction

      In colorectal, cervical, and breast cancers, oncologic follow-up can exacerbate or alleviate patient stress about disease recurrence. Such patient experiences are less well defined for urologic malignancies. We developed a cross-sectional prospective survey study to assess kidney (Kid), prostate (Pros), and bladder (Bld) cancer patient perceptions of oncologic follow-up following surgical treatment.

      Patients and Methods

      Patients with pTanyNanyM0 Kid, Pros, and Bld cancer presenting at least 60 days following primary surgical treatment of their cancer were eligible. Receipt of adjuvant therapy or disease recurrence were exclusion criteria. Questionnaires assessing attitudes towards follow-up and stress-reducing strategies were administered prior to revealing testing results. Analysis was performed according to cancer type and level of recurrence risk, with pathologic stage used a proxy for recurrence risk.

      Results

      Three hundred thirty-seven patients were prospectively surveyed from 2018 to 2020: 127 (38%) Kid, 134 (40%) Pros, and 76 (23%) Bld. Patients showed satisfaction with provided strategies to combat recurrence anxiety (Kid 86%, Pros 81%, Bld 85%). However, approximately 16% of patients reported wanting, but not receiving, strategies for fear reduction. Most patients reported diagnostic tests were “Not at All” burdensome (Kid 86%, Pros 94%, Bld 82%) and disagree that fewer tests would alleviate anxiety (Kid 89%, Pros 91%, Bld 84%). The majority reported an increased sense of worry if there were no cancer follow-ups (Kid 84%, Pros 80%, Kid 81%), and preferred their specialist to their family physician to direct such care (Kid 89%, Pros 91%, Bld 95%). When stratified by recurrence risk, no significant differences existed across cancers in patients’ attitudes toward follow-up. However, Pros cancer patients showed a difference in fear of recurrence (“Not at All” worried about recurrence ≤T2 38%, ≥T3, 19%; P= .04).

      Conclusion

      Urology patients appear satisfied with their oncologic follow-up. Sixteen percent of patients sought additional strategies to combat fear, indicating opportunity for improvement.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Clinical Genitourinary Cancer
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Firkins J
        • Hansen L
        • Driessnack M
        • Dieckmann N.
        Quality of life in "chronic" cancer survivors: a meta-analysis.
        J Cancer Surviv. 2020; 14: 504-517https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-020-00869-9
        • Ellis EM
        • Varner A.
        Unpacking cancer patients' preferences for information about their care.
        J Psychosoc Oncol. 2018; 36 (2018): 1-18https://doi.org/10.1080/07347332.2017.1357666
        • Richardson WC
        • Berwick DM
        • Bisgard JC
        • et al.
        The Institute of Medicine Report on Medical Errors: misunderstanding can do harm. Quality of Health Care in America Committee.
        MedGenMed. 2000; 2: E42
        • Petzel MQ
        • Parker NH
        • Valentine AD
        • et al.
        Fear of cancer recurrence after curative pancreatectomy: a cross-sectional study in survivors of pancreatic and periampullary tumors.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 2012; 19: 4078-4084https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2566-1
        • Deimling GT
        • Bowman KF
        • Sterns S
        • Wagner LJ
        • Kahana B.
        Cancer-related health worries and psychological distress among older adult, long-term cancer survivors.
        Psychooncology. 2006; 15: 306-320https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.955
        • Stiggelbout AM
        • de Haes JC
        • Vree R
        • et al.
        Follow-up of colorectal cancer patients: quality of life and attitudes towards follow-up.
        Br J Cancer. 1997; 75: 914-920https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1997.161
      1. Kiebert GM, Welvaart K, Kievit J. Psychological effects of routine follow up on cancer patients after surgery. Eur J Surg. 993;159):601-7.

        • Mehnert A
        • Berg P
        • Henrich G
        • Herschbach P.
        Fear of cancer progression and cancer-related intrusive cognitions in breast cancer survivors.
        Psychooncology. 2009; 18: 1273-1280https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.1481
        • Explorer S.
        An interactive website for SEER cancer statistics [Internet].
        Surveillance Research Program, National Cancer Institute. 2021 April 15; ([Cited])
        • O'Brien R
        • Rose PW
        • Campbell C
        • et al.
        Experiences of follow-up after treatment in patients with prostate cancer: a qualitative study.
        BJU Int. 2010; 106: 998-1003https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09292.x
        • Berian JR
        • Cuddy A
        • Francescatti AB
        • et al.
        A systematic review of patient perspectives on surveillance after colorectal cancer treatment.
        J Cancer Surviv. 2017; 11: 542-552https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-017-0623-2
        • Bjelic-Radisic V
        • Dorfer M
        • Tamussino K
        • Greimel E.
        Patients' view of routine follow-up after breast cancer treatment.
        Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2017; 129: 810-815https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-017-1278-8
        • Kjeldsen BJ
        • Thorsen H
        • Whalley D
        • Kronborg O.
        Influence of follow-up on health-related quality of life after radical surgery for colorectal cancer.
        Scand J Gastroenterol. 1999; 34: 509-515https://doi.org/10.1080/003655299750026254
        • Papagrigoriadis S
        • Heyman B.
        Patients' views on follow up of colorectal cancer: implications for risk communication and decision making.
        Postgrad Med J. 2003; 79: 403-407https://doi.org/10.1136/pmj.79.933.403
        • Koo K
        • Zubkoff L
        • Sirovich BE
        • et al.
        The burden of cystoscopic bladder cancer surveillance: anxiety, discomfort, and patient preferences for decision making.
        Urology. 2017; 108: 122-128https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.07.016
        • Latella LE
        • Rogers M
        • Leventhal H
        • et al.
        Fear of cancer recurrence in lymphoma survivors: a descriptive study.
        J Psychosoc Oncol. 2020; 38 (2020): 251-271https://doi.org/10.1080/07347332.2019.1677840
        • Jones JM
        • Ferguson S
        • Edwards E
        • Walton T
        • McCurdy N
        • Howell D.
        Experiences of care delivery: endometrial cancer survivors at end of treatment.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2012; 124: 458-464https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.10.037
        • Lam WWT
        • Kwong A
        • Suen D
        • et al.
        Factors predicting patient satisfaction in women with advanced breast cancer: a prospective study.
        BMC Cancer. 2018; 18: 162https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4085-3
        • Brandzel S
        • Rosenberg DE
        • Johnson D
        • et al.
        Women's experiences and preferences regarding breast imaging after completing breast cancer treatment.
        Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017; 11: 199-204https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S122244
        • Kelly EP
        • Hyer JM
        • Onuma AE
        • Paredes AZ
        • Tsilimigras DI
        • Pawlik TM.
        Identifying subgroups of well-being among patients with cancer: differences in attitudes and preferences around surveillance after curative-intent surgery.
        J Surg Oncol. 2019; 120: 125-131https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.25507
        • Frenkel M
        • Cohen L
        • Peterson N
        • Palmer JL
        • Swint K
        • Bruera E.
        Integrative medicine consultation service in a comprehensive cancer center: findings and outcomes.
        Integr Cancer Ther. 2010; 9: 276-283https://doi.org/10.1177/1534735410378663
        • Polley MJ
        • Jolliffe R
        • Boxell E
        • Zollman C
        • Jackson S
        • Seers H.
        Using a whole person approach to support people with cancer: a longitudinal, mixed-methods service evaluation.
        Integr Cancer Ther. 2016; 15: 435-445https://doi.org/10.1177/1534735416632060
        • Seely DM
        • Weeks LC
        • Young S.
        A systematic review of integrative oncology programs.
        Curr Oncol. 2012; 19: e436-e461https://doi.org/10.3747/co.19.1182
      2. Cancer Assistance and Resource Education Center. 2022;
        • Evans R
        • Taylor S
        • Janes S
        • et al.
        Patient experience and perceived acceptability of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for staging colorectal and lung cancer compared with current staging scans: a qualitative study.
        BMJ Open. 2017; 7e016391https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016391
        • Hudson SV
        • Miller SM
        • Hemler J
        • et al.
        Adult cancer survivors discuss follow-up in primary care: 'not what i want, but maybe what i need'.
        Ann Fam Med. 2012; 10 (2012): 418-427https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1379