Decision aids for localized prostate cancer in diverse minority men: Primary outcome results from a multicenter cancer care delivery trial (Alliance A191402CD). Issue 6 (10th December 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tilburt, Jon C.; Zahrieh, David; Pacyna, Joel E.; Petereit, Daniel G.; Kaur, Judith S.; Rapkin, Bruce D.; Grubb, Robert L.; Chang, George J.; Morris, Michael J.; Kovac, Evan Z.; Babaian, Kara N.; Sloan, Jeff A.; Basch, Ethan M.; Peil, Elizabeth S.; Dueck, Amylou C.; Novotny, Paul J.; Paskett, Electra D.; Buckner, Jan C.; Joyce, Daniel D.; Montori, Victor M.; Frosch, Dominick L.; Volk, Robert J.; Kim, Simon P.
• Is Part Of: Cancer. Volume 128:Issue 6(2022)
• Page Start: 1242
• Page End: 1251
• Publication Date: 2021-12-10
• Subjects: decision aids -- knowledge -- prostate cancer -- shared decision‐making; Cancer -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Cytopathology -- Periodicals; 616.99405
• DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34062
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0008-543X

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Decision aids (DAs) can improve knowledge for prostate cancer treatment. However, the relative effects of DAs delivered within the clinical encounter and in more diverse patient populations are unknown. A multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial with a 2×2 factorial design was performed to test the effectiveness of within‐visit and previsit DAs for localized prostate cancer, and minority men were oversampled. Methods: The interventions were delivered in urology practices affiliated with the NCI Community Oncology Research Program Alliance Research Base. The primary outcome was prostate cancer knowledge (percent correct on a 12‐item measure) assessed immediately after a urology consultation. Results: Four sites administered the previsit DA (39 patients), 4 sites administered the within‐visit DA (44 patients), 3 sites administered both previsit and within‐visit DAs (25 patients), and 4 sites provided usual care (50 patients). The median percent correct in prostate cancer knowledge, based on the postvisit knowledge assessment after the intervention delivery, was as follows: 75% for the pre+within‐visit DA study arm, 67% for the previsit DA only arm, 58% for the within‐visit DA only arm, and 58% for the usual‐care arm. Neither the previsit DA nor the within‐visit DA had a significant impact on patient knowledge of prostate cancer treatments at the prespecified 2.5% significance level ( P = .132 and P = .977, respectively). Conclusions: DAs for localized prostate cancer treatment provided at 2 different points in the care continuum in a trial that oversampled minority men did not confer measurable gains in prostate cancer knowledge. Abstract : This study oversamples minority men and evaluates the effect of 2 decision aids on prostate cancer patients' knowledge. Decision aids are not shown to affect knowledge about prostate cancer treatment options.