Interventions for prostate cancer survivorship: A systematic review of reviews

Abstract

Objective: To systematically review the evidence for interventions addressing key domains of the Oncology (ASCO) Prostate Cancer Survivorship Care Guidelines: health promotion, surveillance, physical side effects, psychosocial management, and care coordination. Methods:We conducted a systematic review of systematic reviews and metaanalyses of interventions targeting ACS/ASCO guideline domains. All titles and abstracts were independently assessed for inclusion based on predetermined criteria. Relevant data were extracted, and assessment of methodological quality was performed.Results: Forty-four systematic reviews of interventions targeting ACS prostate cancer guideline domains were included for review. Exercise and psychosocial interventions were effective for improving men's survivorship outcomes in the domains of health promotion, physical side effects, and psychosocial management. Across the domains, evidence quality varied and there was a limited diversity of participants.No reviews of interventions addressing surveillance and cancer care coordination were identified.Conclusions: There are substantive knowledge gaps in prostate cancer survivorship research that are a barrier to real improvements in men's outcomes across the breadth of the survivorship experience. A targeted research and implementation agenda in prostate cancer survivorship is urgently needed if we are to meet the current and future burden of this disease on individuals, families, and communities.

Contemporary consumer perspectives on prostate cancer survivorship: Fifty voices

“…In the case of existing prostate cancer survivorship guidelines, it is not clearly stated what input was obtained from survivors, and indeed such consultation appears to have been absent. Furthermore, gaps in evidence for these existing guidelines suggest further consideration of content is needed …”

Prostate cancer survivorship priorities for men and their partners: Delphi consensus from a nurse specialist cohort

“…A more recent commentary proposed domains of cancer survivorship quality pertaining to prevention and surveillance for recurrences and new cancers; surveillance and management of physical and psychosocial effects and of chronic medical conditions; and health promotion and disease prevention (Nekhlyudov et al, ). This latter review noted a lack of systematically developed, tested and implemented models for delivering and evaluating cancer survivorship care, a gap also identified in our review (Crawford‐Williams et al, ).…”

“…A more recent commentary proposed domains of cancer survivorship quality pertaining to prevention and surveillance for recurrences and new cancers; surveillance and management of physical and psychosocial effects and of chronic medical conditions; and health promotion and disease prevention (Nekhlyudov et al, 2019). This latter review noted a lack of systematically developed, tested and implemented models for delivering and evaluating cancer survivorship care, a gap also identified in our review (Crawford-Williams et al, 2018). Increasingly, prostate cancer specialist nurses (PCSNs) are proposed as an efficient and effective solution for meeting the challenges of delivering survivorship care both in Australia and further afield (Helgesen et al, 2000;Ralph, Chambers, Pomery, Oliffe, & Dunn, 2019;Sykes, 2013).…”

“…The involvement of partners in palliative care planning was nominated and likely driven by the high needs of men and their partners in this illness stage (Chambers et al, ; Zajdlewicz, Hyde, Lepore, Gardiner, & Chambers, ). Care coordination as a priority corresponds to the descriptions of a disjointed survivorship experience that was provided by the PCSNs and is an area where there is little research guidance about effective approaches (Crawford‐Williams et al, ). The development and evaluation of care coordination models that map on to men's priorities, and the priorities of their partners is urgently needed.…”

“…The involvement of partners in palliative care planning was nominated and likely driven by the high needs of men and their partners in this illness stage Zajdlewicz, Hyde, Lepore, Gardiner, & Chambers, 2017). Based on systematic reviews, there is currently sufficient evidence to progress implementing physical and psychosocial care for men (Crawford-Williams et al, 2018), yet while PCSNs reported these as important they were not seen as feasible.…”