Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33079329›Full record

Trial reportJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2021

Long-term follow-up 3 years after a randomized rehabilitation study among radiated prostate cancer survivors.

Karin B Dieperink, Steinbjørn Hansen, Lis Wagner, Lisbeth R Minet, Olfred Hansen

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Do Patients with Prostate Cancer Benefit from Exercise Interventions? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Karin B DieperinkDepartment of Oncology, Academy of Geriatric Cancer research, AgeCare, Odense University Hospital, Southern Boulevard 29, DK-5000, Odense, Denmark. Karin.dieperink@rsyd.dk.ORCID 0000-0003-4766-3242
Steinbjørn HansenDepartment of Oncology, Academy of Geriatric Cancer research, AgeCare, Odense University Hospital, Southern Boulevard 29, DK-5000, Odense, Denmark.
Lis WagnerFarvergården, Farvergårdsvej 24, 3210, Vejby, Denmark.
Lisbeth R MinetDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Olfred HansenDepartment of Oncology, Academy of Geriatric Cancer research, AgeCare, Odense University Hospital, Southern Boulevard 29, DK-5000, Odense, Denmark.
University of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn the Rehabilitation of Prostate Cancer (RePCa) study, the intervention reduced early adverse effects in prostate cancer 6 months after radiotherapy. This 3-year follow-up study assesses late adverse effects, evaluates rehabilitative long-term effects and identifies patients who benefit the most.

designRePCa was a randomized clinical trial with multidisciplinary rehabilitation (n = 79) or usual care (n = 82). The intervention during the first 6 months consisted of consultations by nurses and physiotherapists focusing on psychosocial support and physical activity, respectively. Here we report the 3-year follow-up. Data consisted of disease-specific quality of life (EPIC-26), general quality of life (SF-12) and pelvic floor strength measured by electromyography.

resultsOne hundred forty-three patients (92%) responded. The primary outcome urinary irritative sum-score was no longer significantly different between groups. In patients with moderate-severe urinary problems at baseline, we observed a significant long-term effect on the urinary irritative sum-score in favour of the intervention (+ 13.4 points P = .014). More patients had moderate-severe bowel problems in the control group (n = 10; 14%) compared to the intervention group (n = 2; 3%) (P = .016). Pelvic floor strength deteriorated significantly in both groups.

conclusionThe short-term rehabilitation was beneficial but of limited benefit in the long term for all patients. A significant and clinically relevant effect was found in irradiated prostate cancer patients with moderate-severe urinary problems at baseline. In both groups, pelvic floor strength was weakened during follow-up. IMPACT FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Prior research showed patients benefit from early rehabilitation. Identification of patients with moderate-severe urinary problems followed by a focused rehabilitation during the first 6 months after radiotherapy results in long-term improvement. Radiated patients have to be aware of their pelvic floor strength. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Patients can be informed that they benefit from early rehabilitation, and they cannot expect larger changes in adverse effects within the first years, but they have to be aware of their pelvic floor strength. Future rehabilitation studies could be applied mainly to patients with assessed rehabilitation needs after radiotherapy and intensified with long-term follow-up.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsProstatic NeoplasmsFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleQuality of LifeLate adverse effectsPelvic floorProstate cancerQuality of lifeRadiotherapyRehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID33079329
OpenAlexW3093272861

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.