A comparative analysis of fear of cancer recurrence in patients with small renal masses: Active surveillance versus cryoablation.

Autor:	Bak R; Department of Urology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. rasbak@rm.dk., Junker T; Research and Innovation Unit of Radiology - UNIFY, SDU, Odense, Denmark; Radiological Research and Innovation Unit, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Urology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark., Jensen JB; Department of Urology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark., Pelant T; Department of Urology, Regional Hospital Gødstrup, Gødstrup, Denmark., Haase RN; Department of Urology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark., Zachariae R; Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark., Nielsen TK; Department of Urology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Urology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) [Acta Oncol] 2024 Jul 22; Vol. 63, pp. 573-579. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jul 22.
DOI:	10.2340/1651-226X.2024.40418
Abstrakt:	Background and Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) in patients diagnosed with a small renal mass (SRM) and managed with either active surveillance (AS) or minimal invasive renal cryoablation (CA). Patients/material and Methods: A total of 398 patients with SRMs (263 AS and 135 CA patients) were retrospectively identified across three institutions and invited to complete the Fear of Cancer Recurrence-Short Form (FCRI-SF) questionnaire. Results: No statistically significant differences in FCRI-SF score were observed between the AS (mean = 10.9, standard deviation [SD] = 6.9) and CA (mean = 10.2, SD = 7.2) (p = 0.559) patients, with the mean scores of both groups being below the suggested clinically significant cut-off of 16. A total of 25% of AS and 28% of CA patients reported sub-clinical or clinical levels of FCR (FCRI-SF score > 16). Within the AS group, a weak negative association between FCR severity and age was observed (r = -0.23, p = 0.006), and a statistically significant difference in FCRI-SF score between patients aged more or less than 73 years (p = 0.009). Interpretation: FCR levels were comparable between AS and CA patients, suggesting that treatment decisions should prioritise clinical factors. Up to 28% of AS and CA patients report clinically significant FCR, highlighting the importance of considering the possibility of FCR, especially in younger patients.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu