Lifestyle interventions to improve the quality of life of men with prostate cancer: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Menichetti, Julia; Villa, Silvia; Magnani, Tiziana; Avuzzi, B.; Bosetti, D.; Marenghi, C.; Morlino, S.; Rancati, T.; Poppel, Hein Van; Salvioni, Roberto; Valdagni, Riccardo; Bellardita, Lara

doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2016.10.007

Cited by 33 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evidence from eight reviews suggested that aerobic and resistance exercise interventions show some benefit in improving health‐related quality of life outcomes, both during and after treatment, particularly with supervised interventions . Other reviews reported an unclear impact of exercise on quality of life or insufficient data for analysis .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interventions for prostate cancer survivorship: A systematic review of reviews

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To systematically review the evidence for interventions addressing key domains of the Oncology (ASCO) Prostate Cancer Survivorship Care Guidelines: health promotion, surveillance, physical side effects, psychosocial management, and care coordination. Methods:We conducted a systematic review of systematic reviews and metaanalyses of interventions targeting ACS/ASCO guideline domains. All titles and abstracts were independently assessed for inclusion based on predetermined criteria. Relevant data were extracted, and assessment of methodological quality was performed.Results: Forty-four systematic reviews of interventions targeting ACS prostate cancer guideline domains were included for review. Exercise and psychosocial interventions were effective for improving men's survivorship outcomes in the domains of health promotion, physical side effects, and psychosocial management. Across the domains, evidence quality varied and there was a limited diversity of participants.No reviews of interventions addressing surveillance and cancer care coordination were identified.Conclusions: There are substantive knowledge gaps in prostate cancer survivorship research that are a barrier to real improvements in men's outcomes across the breadth of the survivorship experience. A targeted research and implementation agenda in prostate cancer survivorship is urgently needed if we are to meet the current and future burden of this disease on individuals, families, and communities.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interventions for prostate cancer survivorship: A systematic review of reviews

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Content included nutrition education and goal setting, maintaining a healthy weight, engaging in regular physical activity, and relaxation. We selected this comparison because lifestyle interventions that include diet and physical activity improve quality of life outcomes among men with prostate cancer (Winters‐Stone et al ., ) (see Menichetti et al ., for a review). In addition, partnered physical activity may enhance relationship intimacy (Lyons, Winters‐Stone, Bennett, & Beer, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our secondary aim was to evaluate the moderating role of pre-intervention characteristics on treatment response to IET, specifically relationship satisfaction, relationship duration, and the patient's endorsement of traditional masculine norms. Based on the prior literature (Halford et al, 2017;Lyons et al, 2016;Manne et al, 2011;Menichetti et al, 2016;Winters-Stone et al, 2016), we predicted that couples reporting lower pre-intervention relationship satisfaction would respond more favourably to IET. Based on marital therapy research suggesting that longer-married couples gain more from treatment, we proposed that IET would have stronger effects on couples in relationships of a longer duration (Atkins et al, 2005;Baucom, Atkins, Rowe, Doss, & Christensen, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Couple‐focused interventions for men with localized prostate cancer and their spouses: A randomized clinical trial

Manne

Kashy

Zaider

et al. 2019

British J Health Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Few couple‐focused interventions have improved psychological and relationship functioning among men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and their spouses. This study compared the impact of intimacy‐enhancing therapy (IET), a general health and wellness intervention (GHW), and usual care (UC) on the psychological and relationship functioning of localized prostate cancer patients and their partners. Relationship length, relationship satisfaction, and patient masculinity were evaluated as moderators. Design This study was a randomized clinical trial with three study arms and four assessment time points. Methods A total of 237 patients and partners were randomly assigned to receive IET, GHW, or UC. Participants completed measures of psychological functioning and relationship satisfaction at baseline, 5 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months post‐baseline. Primary outcomes were psychological adjustment, depression, cancer‐specific distress, cancer concerns, and relationship satisfaction. Results Spouses in IET showed greater increases in relationship satisfaction than spouses in GHW and UC between the baseline and 5‐week follow‐up. Among patients in longer relationships, significant increases in psychological adjustment were found in both treatments compared to UC. Among spouses in longer relationships, psychological adjustment increased in both IET and UC but declined in GHW. Conclusions Intimacy‐enhancing therapy did not show an impact on general or cancer‐specific distress, but did show an early impact on relationship satisfaction among spouses. IET was superior to UC for patients in longer relationships. It will be important for researchers to understand which couple‐focused interventions benefits both patients and spouses and to identify characteristics of patients, partners, and couples who may not benefit from psychological treatments. What is already known on this subject? Men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer report lower health‐related quality of life and both patients and spouses report elevated distress. Relationship communication plays a role in couples’ psychological adaptation to prostate cancer. Couple‐focused interventions have illustrated an impact on relationship communication. There are no studies comparing different couple‐focused interventions. What does this study add? Intimacy‐enhancing therapy was not superior to no treatment or a comparison treatment for the broad range of psychological and relationship outcomes. Intimacy‐enhancing therapy was superior to no treatment for patients in longer‐term relationship. The general health and wellness intervention was not beneficial for men in shorter relationships and for men who did not endorse traditional masculine norms.

show abstract

“…A personalized physical exercise approach during or after treatment of patients has provided a more sustainable impact on the physical activity level in breast cancer patients than the usual care, suggesting that the rehabilitation program should be personalized (Baumann et al, 2016). Personalized self-management program including exercise has been also used to increase active prevention in musculoskeletal disorders (Lanhers et al, 2016), and exercise interventions in clinical trials have raised positive results by 67% on quality of life outcomes of prostate cancer patients (Menichetti et al, 2016). Various ‘omics’ approaches should be also included to identify similarities and differences of the crosstalk among tissues and organs and elucidate the molecular mechanisms implicated in the beneficial outcomes of exercise (Tanaka et al, 2016).…”

Section: Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%