Entity

Time filter

Source Type


Sharpley C.F.,University of New England of Australia | Sharpley C.F.,Bond University | Bitsika V.,Bond University | Wootten A.C.,University of New England of Australia | And 2 more authors.
Psycho-Oncology | Year: 2014

Objective: The aim of this study is to explore the associations between hormone treatment variables and depression, and the nature of depression in prostate cancer (PCa) patients by comparing the severity and symptom profile of anxiety and depression in men who were currently receiving hormone therapy (HT) versus those who were not. Method: Self-reports of anxiety and depression on standardized scales of GAD and major depressive disorder (MDD) were collected from 156 PCa patients across two recruitment sites in Australia. Patients who were currently receiving HT were compared with patients not receiving HT for their severity and symptom profiles on GAD and MDD. Results: Participants receiving HT had significantly higher GAD and MDD total scores than patients who were not receiving HT. In addition, the symptom profiles of these two HT subgroups were differentiated by significantly higher scores on the key criteria for GAD and MDD plus fatigue and sleeping difficulties but not the remaining symptoms of GAD and MDD. However, there were no significant differences between HT subgroups for the degree of functional impairment experienced by these symptoms. Conclusion: Although these data confirm the association between HT and anxiety/depression, the range of GAD and MDD symptoms influenced is relatively restricted. Moreover, functional ability does not appear to be impaired by HT. These findings clarify the ways in which HT affects PCa patients and suggests that a simple total scale score for anxiety and depression may not be as helpful in designing treatment as consideration of the symptomatic profiles of PCa patients receiving HT. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Source


Sharpley C.F.,University of New England of Australia | Bitsika V.,Bond University | Wootten A.C.,University of New England of Australia | Wootten A.C.,Australian Prostate Cancer Research Center | Christie D.R.H.,University of New England of Australia
European Journal of Cancer Care | Year: 2014

Although psychological resilience has been shown to 'buffer' against depression following major stressors, no studies have reported on this relationship within the prostate cancer (PCa) population, many of whom are at elevated risk of depression, health problems and suicide. To investigate the effects of resilience upon anxiety and depression in the PCa population, postal surveys of 425 PCa patients were collected from two sites: 189 PCa patients at site 1 and 236 at site 2. Background data plus responses to depression and resilience scales were collected. Results indicated that total resilience score was a significant buffer against depression across both sites. Resilience had different underlying component factor structures across sites, but only one (common) factor significantly (inversely) predicted depression. Within that factor, only some specific items significantly predicted depression scores, suggesting a focused relationship between resilience and depression. It may be concluded that measures of resilience may be used to screen depression at-risk PCa patients. These patients might benefit from resilience training to enhance their ability to cope effectively with the stress of their diagnosis and treatment. A focus upon specific aspects of overall resilience may be of further benefit in both these processes. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Source


Murphy D.G.,The Peter MacCallum Cancer Center | Murphy D.G.,Australian Prostate Cancer Research Center | Bjartell A.,Lund University | Ficarra V.,University of Padua | And 9 more authors.
European Urology | Year: 2010

Context: Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) using the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) is now in widespread use for the management of localised prostate cancer (PCa). Many reports of the safety and efficacy of this procedure have been published. However, there are few specific reports of the limitations and complications of RALP. Objective: The primary purpose of this review is to ascertain the downsides of RALP by focusing on complications and limitations of this approach. Evidence acquisition: A Medline search of the English-language literature was performed to identify all papers published since 2001 relating to RALP. Papers providing data on technical failures, complications, learning curve, or other downsides of RALP were considered. Of 412 papers identified, 68 were selected for review based on their relevance to the objective of this paper. Evidence synthesis: RALP has the following principal downsides: (1) device failure occurs in 0.2-0.4% of cases; (2) assessment of functional outcome is unsatisfactory because of nonstandardised assessment techniques; (3) overall complication rates of RALP are low, although higher rates are noted when complications are reported using a standardised system; (4) long-term oncologic data and data on high-risk PCa are limited; (5) a steep learning curve exists, and although acceptable operative times can be achieved in <20 cases, positive surgical margin (PSM) rates may require experience with >80 cases before a plateau is achieved; (6) robotic assistance does not reduce the difficulty associated with obese patients and those with large prostates, middle lobes, or previous surgery, in whom outcomes are less satisfactory than in patients without such factors; (7) economic barriers prevent uniform dissemination of robotic technology. Conclusions: Many of the downsides of RALP identified in this paper can be addressed with longer-term data and more widespread adoption of standardised reporting measures. The significant learning curve should not be understated, and the expense of this technology continues to restrict access for many patients. © 2009 European Association of Urology. Source


Evans S.M.,Monash University | Millar J.L.,Alfred Hospital | Frydenberg M.,Monash University | Murphy D.G.,Australian Prostate Cancer Research Center | And 12 more authors.
BJU International | Year: 2014

Objective To describe the characteristics of patients with and without positive surgical margins (PSMs) and to analyse the impact of PSMs on secondary cancer treatment after radical prostatectomy (RP), with short-term follow-up. Patients and Methods We analysed data from 2385 consecutive patients treated using RP, who were notified to the Prostate Cancer Registry by 37 hospitals in Victoria, Australia between August 2008 and February 2012. Independent and multivariate models were constructed to predict the likelihood of PSMs. Independent and multivariate predictors of secondary treatment after RP in the initial 12 months after diagnosis were also assessed. Results Data on PSM status were collected for 2219/2385 (93%) patients. In total 592/2175 (27.2%) RPs resulted in PSMs; 102/534 (19.1%) in the low-risk group, 317/1218 (26.0%) in the intermediate-risk group, 153/387 (39.5%) in the high-risk group, and 9/11 (81.8%) in the very-high-risk disease group of patients. Patients having surgery in a hospital where <10 RPs occur each year were significantly more likely to have a PSM (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.93) and those in the intermediate-, high- or very-high-risk groups (IRR 1.34, 95% CI 1.09-1.65, P = 0.007, IRR 1.96, 95% CI 1.57-2.45, P < 0.001 and IRR 3.81, 95% CI 2.60-5.60, P < 0.001, respectively) were significantly more likely to have a PSM than those in the low-risk group (IRR 2.50, 95% CI 1.23-5.11, P = 0.012). Patients with PSMs were significantly less likely to have been treated at a private hospital than a public hospital (IRR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.93, P = 0.006) or to have undergone robot-assisted RP (IRR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55-0.87; P = 0.002) than open RP. Of the 2182 patients who underwent RP in the initial 12 months after diagnosis, 1987 (91.1%) received no subsequent treatment, 123 (5.6%) received radiotherapy, 47 (2.1%) received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and 23 (1.1%) received a combination of radiotherapy and ADT. Two patients (0.1%) received chemotherapy combined with another treatment. At a multivariate level, predictors of additional treatment after RP in the initial 12 months included having a PSM compared with a negative surgical margin (odds ratio [OR] 5.61, 95% CI 3.82-8.22, P < 0.001); pT3 compared with pT2 disease (OR 4.72, 95% CI 2.69-8.23, P < 0.001); and having high- or very-high-risk disease compared with low-risk disease (OR 4.36, 95% CI 2.24-8.50, P < 0.001 and OR 4.50, 95% CI 1.34-15.17, P = 0.015, respectively). Patient age, hospital location and hospital type were not associated with secondary treatment. Patients undergoing robot-assisted RP were significantly less likely to receive additional treatment than those receiving open RP (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.88, P = 0.010). Conclusions These data indicate an important association between hospital status and PSMs, with patients who underwent RP in private hospitals less likely than those in public hospitals to have a PSM. Patients treated in lower-volume hospitals were more likely to have a PSM and less likely to receive additional treatment after surgery in the initial 12 months, and robot-assisted RP was associated with fewer PSMs than was open RP in this non-randomized observational study. PSM status and pathological T3 disease are both important and independent predictors of secondary cancer treatment for patients undergoing RP. A robot-assisted RP approach appears to decrease the likelihood of subsequent treatment, when compared with the open approach. © 2013 The Authors. BJU International © 2013 BJU International. Source


Cathcart P.,Royal Melbourne Hospital | Murphy D.G.,Australian Prostate Cancer Research Center | Murphy D.G.,University of Melbourne | Moon D.,Royal Melbourne Hospital | And 2 more authors.
BJU International | Year: 2011

OBJECTIVE To systematically review the current literature concerning perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes reported after open and minimally invasive prostate cancer surgery specifically from institutions within Australasia. MATERIALS AND METHODS Four electronic databases were searched to identify studies reporting outcome after open and minimally invasive prostate cancer surgery. Studies were sought using the search term 'radical prostatectomy'. In all, 11 378 articles were retrieved. For the purpose of this review, data were only extracted from studies reporting Australasian experience. A total of 28 studies met final inclusion criteria. RESULTS Overall, the data are limited by the low methodological quality of available studies. Only two comparative studies evaluating open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic RP (RALP) were identified, both non-randomized. The mean blood loss, catheterization time and hospital stay was shorter after RALP than with ORP. In contrast, mean operative procedure time was significantly longer for RALP. Overall adverse event rates were similar for the different surgical approaches although the rate of bladder neck stricture was significantly higher after open RP. Incorporation of patient outcomes achieved by surgeons still within their learning curve resulted in a trend towards higher positive surgical margin rates and lower continence scores after RALP. However, there was equivalence once the surgeons' learning curve was overcome. Given the limited follow-up for RALP and laparoscopic RP (14.7 and 6 months vs 43.8 months for ORP) and the lack of data concerning erectile function status, comparison of biochemical failure and potency was not possible. CONCLUSIONS Few comparative data are available from Australasia concerning open and minimally invasive prostate cancer surgery. While perioperative outcomes appear to favour minimally invasive approaches, further comparative assessment of functional and long-term oncological efficacy for the different surgical approaches is required to better define the role of minimally invasive approaches. © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL. Source

Discover hidden collaborations