Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
The College of Family Physicians of Canada
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums
  • My alerts
The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • RSS feeds
  • Follow cfp Template on Twitter
Research ArticleClinical Review

The top 13

What family physicians should know about prostate cancer

Anne Katz and Alan Katz
Canadian Family Physician February 2008, 54 (2) 198-203;
Anne Katz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alan Katz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

OBJECTIVE This article identifies 13 key factors of which family physicians should be aware in the ongoing care of men with prostate cancer.

QUALITY OF EVIDENCE PubMed was searched with the relevant search terms for eachof the 13 topics discussed. Most of the studies described in this article provide level II or level III evidence.

MAIN MESSAGE Family physicians are increasingly involved in the care of men with prostate cancer. The 13 clinical pearls presented in this article will enhance family physicians’ ability to care for these patients along the disease trajectory.

CONCLUSION Men with prostate cancer face unique challenges as they dealwith their disease and its treatment. Family physicians can make a substantial contribution to improving the quality of life of their prostate cancer patients by applying the information in this paper.

Prostate cancer is the most common solid cancer in men. Each year, 20 000 Canadian men are diagnosed with it. The vast majority will not die of the disease.1 In the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) era, most men are diagnosed with early cancer and will opt for curative therapy in the form of radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy. Many men seek the advice of their family physicians in making treatment decisions. Increasingly, these men are referred back to their family physicians by urologists and radiation oncologists for ongoing monitoring within 2 to 5 years of completing treatment. They might also seek help from their family physicians for side effects during treatment. Cancer patients report that they want their family physicians to be involved in their care throughout the cancer trajectory.2

This article identifies 13 key factors of which family physicians should be aware in the ongoing care of their prostate cancer patients. It is not intended as a comprehensive overview of treatment decision making, but rather to provide family physicians with useful information for their patients during the treatment and recovery phases.

Quality of evidence

PubMed was searched with the relevant search terms for each of the 13 topics discussed. Search terms included prostate cancer, treatment decision making, radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, brachytherapy, erectile dysfunction, incontinence, information sharing, and PSA velocity. English articles published between 1999 and 2007 were reviewed. Most of the studies described in this article provide level II or III evidence.

A) Treatment decision making

1. No need to rush into treatment or decisions

Men and their partners or families frequently panic when they hear the diagnosis of prostate cancer and want immediate treatment. This is not unusual following a cancer diagnosis, where there is often a need for rapid treatment to slow the progression of disease or to alleviate symptoms. Prostate cancer, however, is usually an indolent disease, and, in the post-PSA era, most men are diagnosed with localized disease at an early stage.3 Men need to take some time between diagnosis and definitive treatment to consider their treatment options. All the treatments currently available have substantial quality-of-life implications and patients need to be adequately prepared for them. It appears that time from biopsy or diagnosis to surgery does not increase the risk for biochemical failure (rising PSA as a marker for treatment failure or disease progression).4,5 The time from biopsy to surgery does not affect postoperative outcomes such as surgical margins, length of stay in hospital, length of operative time, and surgical complications.6 Men who waited for more than 1 month but fewer than 4 months did not have a statistically higher risk of biochemical recurrence in one study.7

2. Involve the partner

Cancer has been described as a couple’s experience in that life-threatening illness in one partner affects all aspects of the other partner’s life, as well as their life together. Initially the focus is on survival, fear that the man will die, and finding some control in what feels like an uncontrollable situation. Women tend to focus on the survival of their partners8 and often are the more stressed of the two.9 Couples will often find themselves talking about their relationships and connecting with each other on an emotional level between the time of diagnosis and treatment. Communication between partners might decrease, however, as men withdraw and refuse to talk, and the female partners are reluctant to insist on talking about it as they do not want to make the situation for their husbands any worse.10

It is recognized that involvement of partners in decision making can be helpful to men.11,12 Partners are often left out, however, either because the men do not involve their partners or because the care providers do not invite them to be part of the consultation. The men might not fully understand the details of what they are told, and when they relay this information to their partners, it is often highly inaccurate.13

3. Ask the man what he believes and what stories he has heard

It is difficult for men to decide among the different choices of treatments, especially in the light of the considerable threat to quality of life that each imposes. A landmark study recently found that patients’ treatment A companion article on monitoring prostate-specific antigen levels posttreatment can be found on preferences were not based on careful risk assessments, but rather on fear and uncertainty. Patients’ treatment preferences were found to be heavily influenced by misconceptions (for example, that surgery would remove the cancer entirely, hence guaranteeing a complete cure) and anecdotes about the cancer experiences of others (for example comparing themselves with celebrities or relatives who might well have had different stages or grades of cancer).14

4. Men tend to minimize the risk of side effects

The time around diagnosis is when rationalization about treatment side effects takes place. Men might minimize the anticipated loss of sexual function and risk for incontinence in an attempt to control uncertainty and take action. This is corroborated by their partners’ support and desire for their survival above all else.15 Anticipating how sexual problems might affect the relationship is different for men and women. Men are aware that erections are more important to them than to their female partners. Women might in fact overestimate the importance of erections to their husbands.16,17 Women also tend to believe that penetrative sex is less important than the emotional aspects of the relationship. Couples might be hopeful that medication will allow them to continue at the same level of sexual functioning after treatment18 and might be unable to conceive of a life devoid of sex.

B) After radical prostatectomy

5. Pelvic pain is common, especially among younger men after RP

The urinary catheter is left in situ for up to 14 days after surgery. This can cause swelling, excoriation, and pain at the urethral meatus. Leakage of urine past the catheter is common. The indwelling catheter can be a source of spasms and rectal pain and is described by some as the worst aspect of the prostatectomy experience.19 Men might feel unprepared for the amount of postoperative pain and discomfort they experience, and younger men tend to report more pain and be less tolerant of the catheter than their older counterparts.

6. Incontinence will occur in the postoperative period

After removal of the catheter, urinary incontinence and urgency are common and can last from a few days to weeks, months, or years with maximum continence being achieved only by 24 months after surgery.20 Damage to the nerve supply of the distal urethral sphincter and the development of strictures at the site of the anastomosis of the urethra are the most common causes of postoperative incontinence.21

This is a source of great distress for many,22 and can have long-term psychological consequences for men and their self-image. The information provided to men about the risk of incontinence in written material tends to be overly optimistic and minimizes the experience, so men are often ill prepared for the postoperative realities.23 Men and their partners appear to have difficulty processing information about the probability of postoperative incontinence and the degree to which this will have an adverse effect on quality of life.24

7. Erectile functioning might return slowly over years

Recovery of sexual function is dependent on age (younger men have greater success), erectile function before surgery, size of the prostate gland (smaller size has better outcomes), and surgical technique.25 Sexual problems can persist for years following the surgery; however, a trend toward improvement is seen up to 5 years later.26 Among men reporting ongoing problems with erectile dysfunction,27 the effects are seen in general quality of life, self-confidence, and self-esteem.28 Changes in social and intimate relationships can result, and masculine self-concept is also changed.29 Erectile dysfunction, however, might be interpreted differently by men with prostate cancer, as they can rationalize this as a result of cancer treatment and might have better psychological health than men with erectile dysfunction who do not have cancer.30

8. PDE5 inhibitors help only 50% of the time

Phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5) inhibitors sildenafil, vardenafil, and tadalafil act by causing the relaxation of smooth muscle in the corpus cavernosa of the penis, allowing blood to enter this spongy tissue during sexual stimulation.31 There are no independent comparisons of the 3 PDE5 inhibitors in men after RP32 to help in choosing the best drug.

Response is mediated by type of surgery, age, and preoperative erectile functioning.33 If both nerve bundles are spared and age is younger than 55 years, 80% of men respond with erections firm enough for penetration in more than 50% of attempts. For men between the ages of 56 and 65 years, 45% respond in similar fashion with bilateral nerve-sparing surgery, but this drops to 33% for men older than 66 years.34 If one nerve bundle is spared, only 44% of men younger than 55 years have a positive response, and when both nerve bundles are cut, there is no response regardless of age and previous erectile functioning. Once again, the information that men read about this prior to making treatment decisions is often vague and overly optimistic.

9. Penile shortening or fibrosis might occur after surgery

Almost 70% of men can expect to experience some degree of penile shortening and decrease in girth following RP.35,36 The overall range of shortening is from 0.5 to 4 cm. Reduction in girth might in fact be more significant than reduction in length.37 This probably occurs for several reasons: anatomical changes to the structure of the penis; cavernosal nerve injury that alters penile structure; hypoxia to the corpora cavernosa that alters the anatomical structure of the penis; and sympathetic hyperinnervation as a result of damage to autonomic nerves that results in unantagonized sympathetic tone, and hence a penile hypertonic state.38

Treatment is unproven and, minimally, men should be warned that penile shortening and shrinkage is probable. There is some suggestion that hyperthermia from ultrasound is effective in reducing the amount of shortening.39 There is also a suggestion that regular use of a penile vacuum erection device can stretch the penis.

10. PSA velocity is a more reliable indicator of recurrence than an isolated PSA measurement is

Identification of treatment failure is important so that men can be given salvage therapy to prevent metastatic disease and death. There is some controversy about how to measure treatment failure. Any elevation of PSA levels following primary treatment is thought to be suggestive of treatment failure; however, a generally accepted cut point above 0.2 to 0.4 ng/mL is used to define this.40 This should be measured on 2 consecutive occasions.41 Prostate-specific antigen velocity (the time taken for the PSA level to double or triple) is a more useful measure and can help to identify whether recurrence is local (and thus amenable to salvage radiation therapy) or distant (requiring systemic treatment).42 Pretreatment PSA velocity is also an important predictor of relapse after definitive treatment and should be considered in addition to grade, surgical margins, and clinical stage.43 After completion of definitive treatment for prostate cancer, it is standard follow-up to monitor PSA levels every 3 months for the first year and every 6 months thereafter.

C) After radiation therapy

11. Bladder irritation is common after radiation therapy

Men treated with radiation therapy, particularly brachytherapy, are more likely to experience urinary frequency and dysuria during and after treatment than men who have undergone surgical treatment (who typically suffer incontinence). Eighty-five percent of men might experience dysuria after brachytherapy and α-blockers can be used as prophylaxis with good results.44 The use of α-blockers decreased from 88% of the sample at 3 months posttreatment to 31% at 3 years, indicating a decrease in need.45 Urinary frequency is quite common among aging men, and radiation therapy appears to compound the problem.46

12. Bowel complications might occur in the long-term

In addition to a high incidence (45%) of proctitis (rectal pain or irritation) during external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), men also experience diarrhea.46 Brachytherapy appears to have different short-term bowel sequelae (20% with some rectal bleeding in the first 12 months) than EBRT45; however, this complication might be more common 12 to 24 months after completion of treatment.47 Radiation therapy has also been implicated in the development of rectal cancer (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.4–2.2)48; however, brachytherapy patients are not seen to have this complication.49

13. Later onset of erectile dysfunction

Erectile dysfunction tends to occur later among men treated with radiation therapy compared with surgery.50 This is associated with venous leak, particularly from the crura of the penis.51 Brachytherapy tends to have better sexual outcomes than EBRT, with only 9% of brachytherapy patients experiencing erectile dysfunction 18 months after treatment when using PDE5 inhibitors compared with 53% of EBRT patients.45 Five years after brachytherapy treatment, 50% of treated men were able to have erections sufficient for intercourse, with 22.1% of these using PDE5 inhibitors.52 It is suggested that use of PDE5 inhibitors soon after treatment preserves erectile function, and men should be encouraged to use them.53 Interestingly, there have been reports of pregnancies in couples when the men were treated with brachytherapy; loss of fertility in men should not be presumed.54

Conclusion

Men with prostate cancer face unique challenges as they deal with their disease and its treatment. Family physicians can make an important contribution to improving the quality of life of their prostate cancer patients by applying the information in this paper to their interactions with these patients.

Levels of evidence

Level I: At least one properly conducted randomized controlled trial, systematic review, or meta-analysis

Level II: Other comparison trials, non-randomized, cohort, case-control, or epidemiologic studies, and preferably more than one study

Level III: Expert opinion or consensus statements

Resources

Canadian books

Goldenberg L, Thompson I. The intelligent patient guide to prostate cancer. 3rd ed. Vancouver, BC: The Intelligent Patient Guide Ltd; 2001.

Gray R. Prostate tales: men’s experiences with prostate cancer. Harriman, TN: Men’s Studies Press; 2003.

Jamnicky L, Nam R. So you’re having prostate surgery. Toronto, ON: SCRIPT Medical Press Inc; 2003.

Klotz L. Prostate cancer: a guide for patients. Toronto, ON: Coles Publishing; 2001.

US books

Centeno A, Onik G. Prostate cancer: a patient’s guide to treatment. Omaha, NE: Addicus Books; 2004.

Grimm P, Blasko J, Sylvester J. The prostate cancer treatment book. New York, NY: McGraw Hill; 2003.

Lange P, Adamec C. Prostate cancer for dummies. New York, NY: Wiley Publishing Inc; 2003.

Marks S. Prostate and cancer: a family guide to diagnosis, treatment & survival. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing; 2003.

Walsh P, Worthington J. Dr Patrick Walsh’s guide to surviving prostate cancer. New York, NY: Warner Books; 2001.

Specialty books

Alterowitz R, Alterowitz B. The lovin’ ain’t over: the couple’s guide to better sex after prostate disease. West Bethesda, MD: Health Education Literary Publisher; 1999.

Alterowitz R, Alterowitz B. Intimacy with impotence. Cambridge. MA: DeCapo Life Long; 2004.

Perlman G, Drescher J. The gay man’s guide to prostate cancer. Binghampton, NY: Haworth Medical Press; 2005.

Websites

Mayo Clinic: www.mayoclinic.com/health/prostate-cancer/PC99999

Memorial Sloan Kettering: www.mskcc.org/mskcc/html/403.cfm

Canadian Cancer Society: www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/standard/0,2939,3172_10175_87671_langId-en,00.html

Notes

EDITOR’S KEY POINTS

  • Each year, about 20 000 Canadian men are diagnosed with prostate cancer.

  • In most cases, there is no need to rush into treatment. It is important to spend adequate time discussing treatment options, potential side effects, and future monitoring.

  • The type of treatment chosen will affect the post-treatment course and the likelihood of side effects, particularly erectile dysfunction and its response to phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors.

  • Ongoing monitoring after treatment is essential. Prostate-specific antigen velocity is a more reliable indicator of recurrence than is an isolated measurement.

POINTS DE REPÈRE DU RÉDACTEUR

  • Chaque année, environ 20 000 Canadiens reçoivent un diagnostic de cancer prostatique.

  • Dans la majorité des cas, il n’y a pas d’urgence à traiter. On doit prendre le temps de discuter des choix de traitement, des effets indésirables potentiels et de la surveillance future.

  • Le type de traitement choisi influencera la période post-traitement et la probabilité d’effets indésirables, notamment la dysfonction érectile et sa réponse aux inhibiteurs de la phosphodiestérase de type 5.

  • Une surveillance continue est essentielle après le traitement. Le taux d’augmentation de l’antigène prostatique spécifique est un indicateur plus fiable qu’une mesure isolée.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests

    None declared

  • This article has been peer reviewed.

  • Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada

References

  1. ↵
    Canadian Cancer Society, National Cancer Institute of Canada. Canadian cancer statistics 2005. Toronto, ON: Canadian Cancer Society; 2005.
  2. ↵
    1. Sisler JJ,
    2. Brown JB,
    3. Stewart M
    . Family physicians’ roles in cancer care. Survey of patients on a provincial cancer registry. Can Fam Physician 2004;50:889-96.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Cooperberg MR,
    2. Moul JW,
    3. Carroll P
    . The changing face of prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:8146-51.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Boorjian S,
    2. Bianco F,
    3. Scardino PT,
    4. Eastham JA
    . Does the time from biopsy to surgery affect biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy? BJU Int 2005;96:773-6.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Vickers AJ,
    2. Bianco FJ Jr.,
    3. Boorjian S,
    4. Scardino PT,
    5. Eastham JA
    . Does a delay between diagnosis and radical prostatectomy increase the risk of disease recurrence? Cancer 2005;106:576-80.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Lee D,
    2. Allareddy V,
    3. O’Donnell M,
    4. Williams R,
    5. Konety B
    . Does the interval between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy affect the immediate postoperative outcome? BJU Int 2006;97:48-50.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Graefen M,
    2. Walz J,
    3. Chun K,
    4. Schlomm T,
    5. Haese A,
    6. Huland H
    . Reasonable delay of surgical treatment in men with localized prostate cancer—impact on diagnosis? Eur Urol 2005;47:756-60.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Harden J,
    2. Schafenacker A,
    3. Northouse L,
    4. Mood D,
    5. Smith D,
    6. Pienta K,
    7. et al
    . Couples’ experiences with prostate cancer: focus group research. Oncol Nurs Forum 2002;29(4):701-9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Crowe H,
    2. Costello AJ
    . Prostate cancer: perspectives on quality of life and impact of treatment on patients and their partners. Urol Nurs 2003;23(4):279-85.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Boehmer U,
    2. Clark JA
    . Communication about prostate cancer between men and their wives. J Fam Pract 2001;50(3):226-31.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Davison BJ,
    2. Gleave ME,
    3. Goldenberg SL,
    4. Degner LF,
    5. Hoffart D,
    6. Berkowitz J
    . Assessing information and decision preferences of men with prostate cancer and their partners. Cancer Nurs 2002;25(1):42-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Hawes S,
    2. Malcarne VL,
    3. Ko C,
    4. Sadler GR,
    5. Banthia R,
    6. Sherman S,
    7. et al
    . Identifying problems faced by spouses and partners of patients with prostate cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 2006;33:807-14.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. McGregor S
    . What information patients with localised prostate cancer hear and understand. Patient Educ Couns 2003;49:273-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Denberg T,
    2. Melhado T,
    3. Steiner J
    . Patient treatment preferences in localized prostate carcinoma: the influence of emotion, misconcpetion, and anecdote. Cancer 2006;107:620-30.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Gray R,
    2. Fitch M,
    3. Phillips C,
    4. Labrecque M,
    5. Klotz L
    . Presurgery experiences of prostate cancer patients and their spouses. Cancer Pract 1999;7:130-5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Wilson K,
    2. Dowling A,
    3. Abdolell M,
    4. Tannock I
    . Perception of quality of life by patients, partners and treating physicians. Qual Life Res 2000;9:1041-52.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Jacobs JR,
    2. Banthia R,
    3. Sadler GR,
    4. Varni JW,
    5. Malcarne VL,
    6. Greenbergs HL,
    7. et al
    . Problems associated with prostate cancer: differences of opinion among health care providers, patients, and spouses. Cancer Educ 2002;17(1):33-6.
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Boehmer U,
    2. Babayan RK
    . Facing erectile dysfunction due to prostate cancer treatment: perspectives of men and their partners. Cancer Invest 2004;22(6):840-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Burt J,
    2. Caelli K,
    3. Moore K,
    4. Anderson M
    . Radical prostatectomy: men’s experiences and postoperative needs. J Clin Nurs 2005;14(7):883-90.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Lepor H,
    2. Kaci L
    . The impact of open radical retropubic prostatectomy on continence and lower urinary tract symptoms: a prospective assessment using validated self-administered outcome instruments. J Urol 2004;171:1216-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Carlson K,
    2. Nitti V
    . Prevention and management of incontinence following radical prostatectomy. Urol Clin North Am 2001;28:595-612.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Moore KN,
    2. Estey A
    . The early post-operative concerns of men after radical prostatectomy. J Adv Nurs 1999;29(5):1121-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Fagerlin A,
    2. Rovner D,
    3. Stableford S,
    4. Jentoft C,
    5. Wei J,
    6. Holmes-Rovner M
    . Patient education materials about the treatment of early-stage prostate cancer: a critical review. Ann Inter Med 2004;140:721-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. O’Rourke ME
    . Urinary incontinence as a factor in prostate cancer treatment selection. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 2000;27:146-54.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Hollenbeck BK,
    2. Dunn RL,
    3. Wei JT,
    4. Montie JE,
    5. Sanda MG
    . Determinants of long-term sexual health outcome after radical prostatectomy measured by a validated instrument. J Urol 2003;169(4):1453-7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Penson DF,
    2. McLerran D,
    3. Feng Z,
    4. Li L,
    5. Albertsen PC,
    6. Gilliland FD,
    7. et al
    . 5-year urinary and sexual outcomes after radical prostatectomy: results from the prostate cancer outcomes study. J Urol 2005;173(5):1701-5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Stanford JL,
    2. Feng Z,
    3. Hamilton AS,
    4. Gilliland FD,
    5. Stephenson RA,
    6. Eley JW,
    7. et al
    . Urinary and sexual function after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. JAMA 2000;283(3):354-60.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Clark JA,
    2. Inui TS,
    3. Silliman RA,
    4. Bokhour BG,
    5. Krasnow SH,
    6. Robinson RA,
    7. et al
    . Patients’ perceptions of quality of life after treatment for early prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2003;21(20):3777-84.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    1. Bokhour BG,
    2. Clark JA,
    3. Inui TS,
    4. Silliman RA,
    5. Talcott JA
    . Sexuality after treatment for early prostate cancer: exploring the meanings of “erectile dysfunction. J Gen Inter Med 2001;16(10):649-55.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Penson DF,
    2. Latini DM,
    3. Lubeck DP,
    4. Wallace K,
    5. Henning JM,
    6. Lue T
    . Is quality of life different for men with erectile dysfunction and prostate cancer compared to men with erectile dysfunction due to other causes? Results from the ExCEED data base. J Urol 2003;169(4):1458-61.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Shabsigh R
    . Therapy of ED: PDE5 inhibitors. Endocrine 2004;23:135-41.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Padma-Nathan H,
    2. McCullough A,
    3. Forest C
    . Erectile dysfunction secondary to nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy: comparative phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor efficacy for therapy and novel prevention strategies. Curr Urol Rep 2004;5(6):467-71.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Raina R,
    2. Lakin M,
    3. Agarwal A,
    4. Mascha E,
    5. Montague D,
    6. Klein E,
    7. et al
    . Efficacy and factors associated with successful outcome of sildenafil citrate use for erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy. Urology 2004;63:960-6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Zagaja G,
    2. Mhoon D,
    3. Aikens J,
    4. Brendler C
    . Sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction after radical prostatectomy. Urology 2000;56:631-4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Munding M,
    2. Wessells H,
    3. Dalkin B
    . Pilot study of changes in stretched penile lengths 3 months after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 2001;58:567-9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Savoie M,
    2. Kim S,
    3. Soloway M
    . A prospective study measuring penile length in men treated with radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Urol 2003;169:1462-4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Fraimen M,
    2. Lepor H,
    3. McCullough A
    . Changes in penile morphometrics in men with erectile dysfunction after nerve-sparing prostatectomy. Mol Urol 1999;3:109-15.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Mulhall J
    . Penile length changes after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2005;96:472-4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Perugia G,
    2. Liberti M,
    3. Vicini P,
    4. Colistro F,
    5. Gentile V
    . Use of local hyperthermia as prophylaxis of fibrosis and modification in penile length following radical retropubic prostatectomy. Int J Hyperthermia 2005;21:359-65.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Moul JW
    . Variables in predicting survival based on treating “PSA-only” relapse. Urol Oncol 2003;21:292-304.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  41. ↵
    1. Lieberman R
    . Evidence-based medical perspectives: the evolving role of PSA for early detection, monitoring of treatment response, and as a surrogate end point of efficacy for interventions in men with different clinical risk status for the prevention and progression of prostate cancer. Am J Ther 2004;11:501-6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. Carroll P
    . Rising PSA after a radical treatment. Eur Urol 2001;40:9-16.
    OpenUrl
  43. ↵
    1. Patel D,
    2. Presti JC Jr.,
    3. McNeal J,
    4. Gill H,
    5. Brooks J,
    6. King C
    . Preoperative PSA velocity is an independent prognostic factor for relapse after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:6157-62.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. ↵
    1. Merrick GS,
    2. Butler W,
    3. Wallner K,
    4. Allen ZA,
    5. Galbreath RW,
    6. Lief JH
    . Brachytherapy-related dysuria. BJU Int 2005;95:597-602.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  45. ↵
    1. Tsui G,
    2. Gillan C,
    3. Pond G,
    4. Catton C,
    5. Crook J
    . Posttreatment complications of early-stage prostate cancer patients: brachytherapy versus three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. Cancer J 2005;11(2):122-32.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  46. ↵
    1. Monga U,
    2. Kerrigan A,
    3. Thornby J,
    4. Monga T,
    5. Zimmerman K
    . Longitudinal study of quality of life in patients with localized prostate cancer undergoing radiotherapy. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005;42(3):391-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  47. ↵
    1. Giordano S,
    2. Lee A,
    3. Kuo Y,
    4. Freeman J,
    5. Goodwin J
    . Late gastrointestinal toxicity after radiation for prostate cancer. Cancer 2006;107:423-32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. ↵
    1. Baxter N,
    2. Tepper J,
    3. Durham S,
    4. Rothenberger D,
    5. Virnig B
    . Increased risk of rectal cancer after prostate irradiation: A population based study. Gastroenterology 2005;128:819-24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. ↵
    1. Moon K,
    2. Stukenborg G,
    3. Keim J,
    4. Theodorescu D
    . Cancer incidence after localized therapy for prostate cancer. Cancer 2006;107:991-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. ↵
    1. Kedia S,
    2. Zippe CD,
    3. Agarwal A,
    4. Nelson DR,
    5. Lakin MM
    . Treatment of erectile dysfunction with sildenafil citrate (Viagra) after radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Urology 1999;54(2):308-12.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. ↵
    1. Mulhall J,
    2. Ahmed A,
    3. Parker M,
    4. Mohideen N
    . The hemodynamics of erectile dysfunction following external beam radiation for prostate cancer. J Sex Med 2005;2(3):432-7.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  52. ↵
    1. Stone N,
    2. Stock R
    . Long-term urinary, sexual, and rectal morbidity in patients treated with iodine-125 prostate brachytherapy followed up for a minimum of 5 years. Urology 2007;69:338-42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. ↵
    1. Schiff J,
    2. Bar-Chama N,
    3. Cesaretti J,
    4. Stock R
    . Early use of a phosphodiesterase inhibitor after brachytherapy restores and preserves erectile function. BJU Int 2006;98:1255-8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  54. ↵
    1. Grocela J,
    2. Mauceri T,
    3. Zietman A
    . New life after brachytherapy? Considering the fertile female partner of the brachytherapy patient. BJU Int 2005;96:781-2.
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Family Physician: 54 (2)
Canadian Family Physician
Vol. 54, Issue 2
1 Feb 2008
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on The College of Family Physicians of Canada.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The top 13
(Your Name) has sent you a message from The College of Family Physicians of Canada
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the The College of Family Physicians of Canada web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The top 13
Anne Katz, Alan Katz
Canadian Family Physician Feb 2008, 54 (2) 198-203;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
The top 13
Anne Katz, Alan Katz
Canadian Family Physician Feb 2008, 54 (2) 198-203;
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Quality of evidence
    • A) Treatment decision making
    • B) After radical prostatectomy
    • C) After radiation therapy
    • Conclusion
    • Levels of evidence
    • Resources
    • Notes
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • The sounds of silence
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Parkinson disease primer, part 2: management of motor and nonmotor symptoms
  • Parkinson disease primer, part 1: diagnosis
  • Prescribing for common complications of spinal cord injury
Show more Clinical Review

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Collections - English
  • Collections - Française

For Authors

  • Authors and Reviewers
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Permissions
  • Terms of Use

General Information

  • About CFP
  • About the CFPC
  • Advertisers
  • Careers & Locums
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Subscribers

Journal Services

  • Email Alerts
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feeds

Copyright © 2023 by The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Powered by HighWire