Wellbeing during Active Surveillance for localised prostate cancer: A systematic review of psychological morbidity and quality of life

• Active Surveillance is recommended for the treatment of localised prostate cancer; however this option may be under-used.
• We found no adverse impact on psychological wellbeing associated with Active Surveillance treatment.
• We found no differences in psychological wellbeing when Active Surveillance was compared to active treatments.
• Patients can be told that Active Surveillance has no increased risk to their psychological wellbeing for consent purposes.
• Clinicians need not limit access to Active Surveillance based on expectation of adverse impacts on psychological wellbeing.

BackgroundActive Surveillance (AS) is recommended for the treatment of localised prostate cancer; however this option may be under-used, at least in part because of expectations of psychological adverse events in those offered or accepting AS.Objective(1) Determine the impact on psychological wellbeing when treated with AS (non-comparative studies). (2) Compare AS with active treatments for the impact on psychological wellbeing (comparative studies).MethodWe used the PRISMA guidelines and searched Medline, PsychInfo, EMBASE, CINHAL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Scopus for articles published January 2000–2014. Eligible studies reported original quantitative data on any measures of psychological wellbeing.ResultsWe identified 34 eligible articles (n = 12,497 individuals); 24 observational, eight RCTs, and two other interventional studies. Studies came from North America (16), Europe (14) Australia (3) and North America/Europe (1). A minority (5/34) were rated as high quality. Most (26/34) used validated instruments, whilst a substantial minority (14/34) used watchful waiting or no active treatment rather than Active Surveillance. There was modest evidence of no adverse impact on psychological wellbeing associated with Active Surveillance; and no differences in psychological wellbeing compared to active treatments.ConclusionPatients can be informed that Active Surveillance involves no greater threat to their psychological wellbeing as part of the informed consent process, and clinicians need not limit access to Active Surveillance based on an expectation of adverse impacts on psychological wellbeing.