Optimizing the Effectiveness of Routine Post-treatment Surveillance in Prostate Cancer Survivors

NCT ID: NCT02957357

Last Updated: 2021-10-20

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

11314 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2016-02-29

Study Completion Date

2019-01-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Through this study, the investigators seek to identify the benefits (improved survival) and harms (more procedures, more treatment, side effects, and quality-of-life impact) from different surveillance frequencies-every three vs. six vs. 12 months. Using the National Cancer Database and quality-of-life data from a large group of prostate cancer survivors, the investigators aim to compare survival, procedures/tests, treatments, and side effects in prostate cancer survivors who are followed with alternative surveillance frequencies and compare quality-of-life outcomes. The overall goal of the study is to provide high-quality data that will allow development of a personalized, risk-based tailored approach to post-treatment surveillance for prostate cancer.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

We seek to identify the benefits (improved survival) and harms (more procedures, more treatment, side effects, and quality-of-life impact) from different surveillance frequencies--every three vs. six vs. 12 months. We hypothesize that patients with a low risk of recurrence may experience more harm than benefit, while patients with a high risk of recurrence may have improved survival from frequent surveillance.

Specific aims: The specific aims are 1) compare survival, procedures/tests, treatments, and side effects in prostate cancer survivors who are followed with alternative surveillance frequencies; and 2) compare quality-of-life outcomes.

Methods:

Aim 1 will use the National Cancer Database, which includes 70 percent of cancer patients across the United States, and will provide results representative of outcomes of prostate cancer survivors. We will compare the effectiveness of the three most common surveillance frequencies (PSA testing every 3 months vs. 6 months vs. 12 months) stratified by risk of recurrence (low-risk, intermediate-risk, high-risk; as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)) and initial treatment (surgery or radiation). The objective of this aim is to quantify the potential benefits (survival) and harms (procedures/tests, treatments, morbidity consequences) of different PSA surveillance frequencies in the 6 patient groups.

The objective of Aim 2 is to quantify the impact of different surveillance frequencies from the patient's perspective. This aim will use quality-of-life data from the North Carolina Prostate cancer Comparative Effectiveness \& Survivorship Study (NC ProCESS), PI Ronald Chen, a prospective population-based cohort of \>1,000 patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, enrolled from January 2011 through June 2013. Comparison groups are the same as Aim 1. PSA frequency will be similarly defined using medical record abstraction.

Patient and stakeholder engagement: Through a five-year process, patients have worked with the PI in all phases of this research, including 1) identifying the highest priority research topic, 2) defining the study population/comparators, and 3) identifying outcomes of highest relevance to patients. Patients and other stakeholders will continue to 4) monitor study conduct and progress and 5) design dissemination activities.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Cancer of Prostate Cancer of the Prostate Prostate Cancer Prostatic Cancer

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

OTHER

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

National Cancer Data Base

Patients within the National Cancer Database with newly diagnosed prostate cancer between 2004 and 2010. Participating institutions each provided a random of sample of 10 patients to be included in the final cohort.

No interventions assigned to this group

NC ProCESS

The North Carolina Prostate cancer Comparative Effectiveness \& Survivorship Study (NC ProCESS) is a prospective population-based cohort of \>1,000 patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer, enrolled from January 2011 through June 2013.

No interventions assigned to this group

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Patient data part of the NCDB
* Diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2004-2005.
* Treated for prostate cancer with surgery (prostatectomy) or radiation therapy


* Newly-diagnosed, histologically-proven, localized prostate adenocarcinoma.
* Completion of baseline interview prior to initiating therapy.
* Patient ability to complete study interview: no cognitive impairment, language or hearing problems.
* Not diagnosed with prostate cancer through transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).
* Age 35-80.
* English speaking.
* Has telephone.

Exclusion Criteria

* Initiation of treatment for prostate cancer prior to completion of baseline interview.
* Cognitive impairment.
* Hearing problems.
* Inability to speak or understand English.
Eligible Sex

MALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Alliance Foundation Trials, LLC.

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Ronald Chen, MD, MPH

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Provided Documents

Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.

Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan

View Document

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

AFT-30

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id