ArticleAdvances in therapy2025
A Noninterventional, Cross-Sectional Study to Assess Patient Prostate Cancer Treatment Preferences and Experiences in Europe.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist injection frequency does not affect prostate cancer treatment efficacy; however, it may influence treatment satisfaction, adherence, and overall healthcare utilization. This study addressed the limited information available on real-world patient experience with GnRH treatments by surveying a diverse population of patients with prostate cancer in Europe.
methodsThis noninterventional, cross-sectional study included adults with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer in Belgium, France, Italy, Spain, and the UK. Data were collected via a one-time self-administered electronic survey (October-December 2023) that assessed patient preferences for injection frequency, satisfaction, healthcare resource utilization, and involvement in treatment decision-making.
resultsOf 414 participants, 53.9% preferred a 6-month injection frequency, while 27.3% preferred a 3-month frequency. Among those receiving injections every 6 months, 77.0% were satisfied; 62.7% of those receiving injections every 3 months were satisfied. Two-thirds of participants (65.7%) were aware of different frequencies of injections. Among those who preferred a 3-month injection frequency, routine and perceived control over their disease were important factors, with 38.1% receiving injections at the same frequency as doctor visits. Among those preferring a 6-month frequency, convenience and routine were important; however, 7.2% indicated that their preference was based on a dislike or fear of injections. Of those with no preference, 60.3% indicated that this was because they deferred to their doctor's advice. Most patients required transport to their injection appointment, and of those who were employed, 79.2% required time off from work. Accompaniment to an injection appointment was also important, with 66.2% of patients never attending alone.
conclusionThe high satisfaction rates, particularly among those receiving injections every 6 months, suggest that less-frequent injections may be more convenient and preferable for many patients. These insights can help to guide patient-centric care and treatment decisions in prostate cancer management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.