IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0193686.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors associated with the use of complementary and alternative medicines for prostate cancer by long-term survivors

Author

Listed:
  • Sam Egger
  • Suzanne Hughes
  • David P Smith
  • Suzanne Chambers
  • Clare Kahn
  • Annette Moxey
  • Dianne L O’Connell

Abstract

Objective: To assess whether the use of complementary and alternative medicines therapies (CAMs) for prostate cancer and/or its treatment side effects by long-term survivors is associated with selected socio-demographic, clinical, health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) and/or psychological factors. Design, setting and participants: The Prostate Cancer Care and Outcomes Study (PCOS) is a population-based cohort study of men with prostate cancer who were aged less than 70 years at diagnosis in New South Wales, Australia. Included in these analyses were men who returned a 10-year follow-up questionnaire, which included questions about CAM use. Methods: Validated instruments assessed patient’s HRQOL and psychological well-being. Poisson regression with robust variance estimation was used to estimate the adjusted relative risks of current CAM use for prostate cancer according to socio-demographic, clinical, HRQOL and psychological factors. Results: 996 of 1634 (61%) living PCOS participants completed the 10-year questionnaire. Of these 996 men, 168 (17%) were using CAMs for prostate cancer and 525 (53%) were using CAMs for any reason (including prostate cancer). Those using CAM for prostate cancer were more likely to be regular or occasional support group participants (vs. no participation RR = 2.02; 95%CI 1.41–2.88), born in another country (vs. Australian born RR = 1.59; 95%CI 1.17–2.16), have received androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) since diagnosis (RR = 1.60; 95%CI 1.12–2.28) or in the past two years (RR = 2.34; 95%CI 1.56–3.52). CAM use was associated with greater fear of recurrence (RR = 1.29; 95%CI 1.12–1.48), cancer-specific distress (RR = 1.15; 95%CI 1.01–1.30), cancer-specific hyperarousal (RR = 1.17; 95%CI 1.04–1.31), cancer locus of control (RR = 1.16; 95%CI 1.01–1.34) and less satisfaction with medical treatments (RR = 0.86; 95%CI 0.76–0.97), but not with intrusive thinking, cognitive avoidance, depression, anxiety or any HRQOL domains. Conclusions: In this study, about one in six long term prostate cancer survivors used CAMs for their prostate cancer with use centred around ADT, country of birth, distress, cancer control, fear of recurrence and active help seeking.

Suggested Citation

  • Sam Egger & Suzanne Hughes & David P Smith & Suzanne Chambers & Clare Kahn & Annette Moxey & Dianne L O’Connell, 2018. "Factors associated with the use of complementary and alternative medicines for prostate cancer by long-term survivors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-13, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0193686
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193686
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0193686
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0193686&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0193686?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0193686. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.