Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Quality of life in partners of patients with localised prostate cancer

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The diagnosis of prostate cancer and the following treatment does not only affect the patient, but also his partner. Partners often suffer even more severely from psychological distress than the patients themselves. This analysis aims to describe the quality of life (QoL) after the cancer diagnosis over time and to identify the effects of possible predictors of partners’ quality of life in a German study population.

Data and methods

Patients with localised prostate cancer and their partners were recruited from a prospective multicenter study in Germany, the Prostate Cancer, Sexuality, and Partnership (ProCaSP) Study. At five observation times during the follow-up period of 2 years after diagnosis, QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30) and personal, social, and cancer-related health factors as well as adaptation and coping factors of 293 couples were observed and analysed with mixed effects analysis.

Results

The men’s prostate cancer diagnosis had a small, but significant impact on their partner’s QoL. However, QoL of partners was most affected by the partners’ own physical health and psychological condition, time, and their relationship quality.

Conclusion

The finding that average QoL increased again 3 months after diagnosis and later should give partners faith and hope for the future. The identified most important predictors of partners’ QoL are potentially susceptible to intervention, and further research on target groups in special need of support and on adequate interventions is needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Robert Koch Institute and the Association of Population-based Cancer Registries in Germany (2012). Cancer in Germany 2007/2008. Incidence and trends, 8 ed. Berlin.

  2. Eton, D. T., Lepore, S. J., & Helgeson, V. S. (2005). Psychological distress in spouses of men treated for early-stage prostate carcinoma. Cancer, 103(11), 2412–2418.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kornblith, A. B., et al. (1994). Quality of life of patients with prostate cancer and their spouses. The value of a data base in clinical care. Cancer, 73(11), 2791–2802.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cliff, A. M., & MacDonagh, R. P. (2000). Psychosocial morbidity in prostate cancer: II. A comparison of patients and partners. BJU Int, 86(7), 834–839.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tanner, T., Galbraith, M., & Hays, L. (2011). From a woman’s perspective: Life as a partner of a prostate cancer survivor. J Midwifery Womens Health, 56(2), 154–160.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kornblith, A. B., et al. (2001). The impact of docetaxel, estramustine, and low dose hydrocortisone on the quality of life of men with hormone refractory prostate cancer and their partners: A feasibility study. Annals of Oncology, 12(5), 633–641.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment. (1995). (WHOQOL): Position paper from the World Health Organization. Social Science and Medicine, 41(10), 1403–1409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kershaw, T. S., et al. (2008). Longitudinal analysis of a model to predict quality of life in prostate cancer patients and their spouses. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 36(2), 117–128.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Campbell, L. C., et al. (2004). Prostate cancer in African Americans: Relationship of patient and partner self-efficacy to quality of life. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 28(5), 433–444.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Song, L., et al. (2011). Assessing longitudinal quality of life in prostate cancer patients and their spouses: A multilevel modeling approach. Quality of Life Research, 20(3), 371–381.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Applebaum, A. J., et al. (2013). Preliminary study of themes of meaning and psychosocial service use among informal cancer caregivers. Palliative & Supportive Care, 1–10. doi:10.1017/S1478951513000084.

  12. Street, A. F., et al. (2010). Psychosocial adaptation in female partners of men with prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl), 19(2), 234–242.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Germino, B. B., et al. (1998). Uncertainty in prostate cancer. Ethnic and family patterns. Cancer Pract, 6(2), 107–113.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Northouse, L. L., Dorris, G., & Charron-Moore, C. (1995). Factors affecting couples’ adjustment to recurrent breast cancer. Social Science and Medicine, 41(1), 69–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mellon, S., Northouse, L. L., & Weiss, L. K. (2006). A population-based study of the quality of life of cancer survivors and their family caregivers. Cancer Nursing, 29(2), 120–131. quiz 132-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wadhwa, D., et al. (2013). Quality of life and mental health in caregivers of outpatients with advanced cancer. Psychooncology, 22(2), 403–410.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lazarus, R. S. (2000). Toward better research on stress and coping. American Psychologist, 55(6), 665–673.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Berlin: Springer Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Northouse, L., et al. (2005). Effects of a family intervention on the quality of life of women with recurrent breast cancer and their family caregivers. Psychooncology, 14(6), 478–491.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Manne, S., et al. (2010). Cancer-related communication, relationship intimacy, and psychological distress among couples coping with localized prostate cancer. Journal of Cancer Survivorship, 4(1), 74–85.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Malcarne, V. L., et al. (2002). Problem-solving skills and emotional distress in spouses of men with prostate cancer. Journal of Cancer Education, 17(3), 150–154.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wittekind, C., Meyer, H.-J., & Bootz, F. (Eds.). (2002). In UICC: TNM Klassifikation maligner Tumoren (6th ed). Berlin: Springer.

  23. Aaronson, N. K., et al. (1993). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85(5), 365–376.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Fayers, P., et al. (2001). The EORTC QLQ-C30 scoring manual (3rd ed.). Brussels: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Osoba, D., et al. (1998). Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 16(1), 139–144.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gandek, B., et al. (1998). Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51(11), 1171–1178.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Krahn, M., et al. (2000). Construction of the Patient-Oriented Prostate Utility Scale (PORPUS): A multiattribute health state classification system for prostate cancer. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53(9), 920–930.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Goldzweig, G., et al. (2009). Gender and psychological distress among middle- and older-aged colorectal cancer patients and their spouses: an unexpected outcome. Critical Reviews in Oncology Hematology, 70(1), 71–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bestmann, B., et al. (2007). Prostate-specific symptoms of prostate cancer in a German general population. Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Disease, 10(1), 52–59.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Rosen, R. C., et al. (1997). The international index of erectile function (IIEF): A multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology, 49(6), 822–830.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Rabin, R. et al. (2011). EQ-5D-3L User Guide. Basic information on how to use the EQ-5D-3L instrument. Version 4.0, EuroQol Group: Rotterdam.

  32. Waldmann, A., Schubert, D., & Katalinic, A. (2013). Normative data of the EORTC qlq-c30 for the german population: A population-based survey. PLoS ONE, 8(9), e74149.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. R Development Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

    Google Scholar 

  34. van Buuren, S., & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. (2011). MICE: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 45(3), 1–67.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D., & R Development Core Team. (2013). nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. R package version 3.1-113.

  36. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2013). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 1.0-5. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4.

  37. Baayen, R. H. (2011). languageR: Data sets and functions withAnalyzing Linguistic Data: A practical introduction to statistics”. R package version 1.4. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=languageR.

  38. Sterne, J. A., et al. (2009). Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: Potential and pitfalls. BMJ, 338, b2393.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Bartlett, J. W., Frost, C., & Carpenter, J. R. (2011). Multiple imputation models should incorporate the outcome in the model of interest. Brain, 134(Pt 11), 189. author reply e190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Schafer, J. (1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  41. Schwarz, R., & Hinz, A. (2001). Reference data for the quality of life questionnaire EORTC QLQ-C30 in the general German population. European Journal of Cancer, 37(11), 1345–1351.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Badger, T. A., et al. (2011). Psychosocial interventions to improve quality of life in prostate cancer survivors and their intimate or family partners. Quality of Life Research, 20(6), 833–844.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the reviewers for their helpful contributions to the revision of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nora Eisemann.

Appendix

Appendix

The self-developed questions were as follows:

Relationship quality: “Overall, how content have you been with your relationship in the last three months?”[Very uncontent/uncontent/content/very content] (Original question: “Wie zufrieden waren Sie insgesamt mit Ihrer Partnerschaft in den letzten drei Monaten?” [Sehr unzufrieden/unzufrieden/zufrieden/sehr zufrieden]).

Problem-solving behaviour if sexual problems occurred: “During the last 3 months: What possible solutions to sexual problems have you tried?” [There were no sexual problems/no active approach to the problem/selection of possible solution, such as other sex techniques, talking to the partner or a physician, or medication] (Während der letzten drei Monate: Welche Lösungsmöglichkeiten haben Sie bei sexuellen Problemen gesucht? [Es gab keine sexuellen Probleme/Kein aktiver Lösungsversuch/Auswahl verschiedener Lösungsmöglichkeiten wie Ausprobieren anderer sexueller Praktiken als vorher, Gespräch darüber mit dem Partner, Aufsuchen eines Facharztes, und andere]).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eisemann, N., Waldmann, A., Rohde, V. et al. Quality of life in partners of patients with localised prostate cancer. Qual Life Res 23, 1557–1568 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0588-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0588-1

Keywords

Navigation