Skip to main content

Table 2 Estimated effect of treatment option on HRQOL in a multiple regression analysis

From: The ProCaSP study: quality of life outcomes of prostate cancer patients after radiotherapy or radical prostatectomy in a cohort study

 

Main analysis

Analysis with separation of different RT treatment groups1

 

Radical prostatectomy

Radiotherapy

Wald test

Radiotherapy

Wald test

Ref.

Nerve-sparing

Total

 

Brachytherapy

Combined (External/brachytherapy)

External

 

b

b

95%-CI

b

95%-CI

p-value

b

95%-CI

b

95%-CI

b

95%-CI

p-value

QLQ-C30

 Functioning scales

 Global health status

0

2.9

(−0.6, 6.4)

−2.0

(−5.9, 2.0)

0.098

−1.0

(−6.2, 4.2)

−2.2

(−8.4, 3.9)

−4.4

(−9.9, 1.2)

0.120

 Physical functioning

0

1.7

(−0.6, 4.1)

−0.9

(−4.3, 2.4)

0.198

−0.6

(−5.4, 4.3)

−0.6

(−5.2, 3.9)

−3.5

(−8.9, 2.0)

0.224

 Role functioning

0

1.9

(−1.5, 5.3)

−0.5

(−4.8, 3.8)

0.425

−1.6

(−7.9, 4.7)

2.0

(−4.7, 8.7)

−2.5

(−8.8, 3.8)

0.314

 Emotional functioning

0

3.8

(−0.2, 7.8)

−2.7

(−7.3, 2.0)

0.074

−2.4

(−8.7, 3.9)

1.1

(−6.2, 8.3)

−8.6

(−15.2, −2.0)

0.028

 Cognitive functioning

0

2.5

(−1.1, 6.2)

−1.8

(−5.5, 1.9)

0.170

−0.7

(−6.0, 4.5)

−2.2

(−8.2, 3.8)

−2.7

(−9.5, 4.0)

0.277

 Social functioning

0

1.2

(−3.7, 6.1)

0.1

(−5.4, 5.5)

0.650

−0.7

(−7.9, 6.5)

3.0

(−5.1, 11.1)

−5.7

(−14.3, 3.0)

0.287

Symptom scales

 Fatigue

0

−3.6

(−7.8, 0.5)

0.4

(−4.6, 5.3)

0.173

0.1

(−6.6, 6.8)

−1.6

(−9.1, 5.9)

5.4

(−2.0, 12.9)

0.174

 Nausea and vomiting

0

−0.5

(−1.6, 0.6)

1.1

(−0.5, 2.7)

0.100

2.1

(0.1, 4.1)

−0.5

(−2.2, 1.2)

0.6

(−1.8, 2.9)

0.091

 Pain

0

0.5

(−3.5, 4.5)

2.7

(−2.2, 7.5)

0.477

3.6

(−3.3, 10.5)

0.1

(−7.2, 7.3)

3.4

(−4.8, 11.6)

0.601

 Dyspnoea

0

1.4

(−2.1, 4.8)

3.5

(−0.8, 7.8)

0.177

0.1

(−5.6, 5.8)

6.8

(−0.5, 14.1)

4.8

(−1.5, 11.0

0.122

 Insomnia

0

0.1

(−4.7, 5.0)

3.2

(−2.5, 8.9)

0.451

4.3

(−2.9, 11.5)

4.0

(−4.7, 12.7)

6.4

(−2.8, 15.6)

0.291

 Appetite loss

0

−0.1

(−2.3, 2.1)

1.5

(−1.7, 4.7)

0.317

1.5

(−1.8, 4.8)

1.0

(−3.7, 5.6)

3.1

(−1.5, 7.6)

0.276

 Constipation

0

−1.2

(−5.3, 3.0)

0.4

(−4.1, 4.9)

0.542

1.7

(−4.2, 7.5)

−0.9

(−8.4, 6.5)

3.2

(−5.5, 12.0)

0.362

 Diarrhoea

0

−0.9

(−4.4, 2.6)

7.0

(2.5, 11.6)

0.006

7.8

(1.0, 14.5)

4.1

(−3.3, 11.4)

4.2

(−3.6, 12.0)

0.048

 Financial difficulties

0

−3.1

(−7.0, 0.8)

−0.2

(−4.7, 4.3)

0.257

−2.7

(−9.1, 3.7)

−0.5

(−8.8, 7.7)

4.9

(−4.0, 13.8)

0.216

PORPUS

 PORPUS-P

0

2.3

(0.1, 4.6)

2.2

(−0.6, 5.0)

0.045

2.2

(−1.6, 6.1)

3.3

(−0.6, 7.2)

1.4

(−3.0, 5.7)

0.119

  1. Ref = Non-nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy as reference level.
  2. Bold values indicate significance at the 5%-level.
  3. 1As the regression coefficients of the radical prostatectomy group did not change much, only the regression coefficients of the radiotherapy subgroups with their confidence intervals and the Wald test p-values are reported.
  4. Both analyses are adjusted for baseline HRQOL, age, having a partner (yes/no), highest education level (no graduation, 8–9 years (‘Hauptschulabschluss’), 10–11 years (‘Realschulabschluss’), >= 12 years high school (‘(Fach-)Abitur’)), working (yes/no), residence (rural/urban), tumour stage (T-category of the TNM-classification), pre-therapeutic Gleason score, pre-therapeutic PSA score, and sexual functioning at baseline (IIEF total scale).
Back to article page

BMC Urology

ISSN: 1471-2490

Contact us