Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Sexual function outcomes following interventions for prostate cancer: are contemporary reports on functional outcomes misleading?

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 32, pages 495–502 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Patients with primary localised prostate cancer (PCa) have a wide choice of curative therapeutic interventions, including active surveillance, surgical, focal and radiation therapies. Based on clinical and oncological characteristics, treatment decisions entail consideration of oncological and functional outcomes with important effects on quality of life. We aimed to highlight evidence surrounding present inconsistencies, the problems this presents to clinicians and patients alike and the rationale for using return to baseline as a more realistic and objective functional outcome measure for assessing sexual function in this particularly sensitive group of men. We performed a non-systematic literature review of numerous non-validated, arbitrary thresholds employed in evaluation of sexual function outcomes in men undergoing intervention for primary localised PCa. The literature presents much heterogeneity in measurement methods and outcome measures, which lack context and present difficulties when counselling patients to make informed, autonomous decisions. These include findings from the most widely used internationally validated tools, such as the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), UCLA prostate cancer index and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core-30 (QLQ-C30). There is a need for standardisation of reporting outcomes following PCa treatment to facilitate evaluation of existing and emerging technologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chiang PH, Liu YY. Comparisons of oncological and functional outcomes among radical retropubic prostatectomy, high dose rate brachytherapy, cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound for localized prostate cancer. SpringerPlus. 2016;5:1905–1905.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Patel VR, Sivaraman A, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Orvieto MA, et al. Pentafecta: a new concept for reporting outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2011;59:702–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Capogrosso P, Vertosick EA, Benfante NE, Eastham JA, Scardino PJ, Vickers AJ, et al. Are we improving erectile function recovery after radical prostatectomy? analysis of patients treated over the last decade. Eur Urol. 2019;75:221–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Holding P, et al. 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. N. Engl J Med. 2016;375:1415–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Donovan JL, Hamdy FC, Lane JA, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Walsh E, et al. Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. N. Engl J Med. 2016;375:1425–37.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Salonia A, Adaikan G, Buvat J, Carrier S, El-Meliegy A, Hatzimouratidis K, et al. Sexual rehabilitation after treatment for prostate cancer-part 1: recommendations from the fourth international consultation for sexual medicine (ICSM 2015). J Sex Med. 2017;14:285–96.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Haglind E, Carlsson S, Stranne J, Wallerstedt A, Wilderang U, Thorsteinsdottir T, et al. Urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction after robotic versus open radical prostatectomy: a prospective, controlled, nonrandomised trial. Eur Urol. 2015;68:216–25.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Resnick MJ, Koyama T, Fan KH, Albertsen PC, Goodman M, Hamilton AS, et al. Long-term functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer. N. Engl J Med. 2013;368:436–45.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Yap T, Ahmed HU, Hindley RG, Guillaumier S, McCartan N, Dickinson L, et al. The effects of focal therapy for prostate cancer on sexual function: a combined analysis of three prospective trials. Eur Urol. 2016;69:844–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. van der Poel HG, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Cornford P, Govorov A, Henry AM, et al. Focal therapy in primary localised prostate cancer: the european association of urology position in 2018. Eur Urol. 2018;74:84–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G, Osterloh IH, Kirkpatrick J, Mishra A. The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology. 1997;49:822–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Albersen MJS, Van Poppel H. The use of IIEF-5 for reporting erectile dysfunction following nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Open Prostate Cancer J. 2009;2:1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rynja S, Bosch R, Kok E, Wouters G, de Kort L. IIEF-15: unsuitable for assessing erectile function of young men? J Sex Med. 2010;7:2825–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Penson DF. The effect of erectile dysfunction on quality of life following treatment for localized prostate cancer. Rev Urol. 2001;3:113–9.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE, Costello A, Eastham JA, Graefen M, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;62:418–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Salonia A, Adaikan G, Buvat J, Carrier S, El-Meliegy A, Hatzimouratidis K, et al. Sexual rehabilitation after treatment for prostate cancer-part 2: recommendations from the fourth international consultation for sexual medicine (ICSM 2015). J Sex Med. 2017;14:297–315.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Shikanov SA, Zorn KC, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL. Trifecta outcomes after robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology. 2009;74:619–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Karakiewicz PI, Tanguay S, Kattan MW, Elhilali MM, Aprikian AG. Erectile and urinary dysfunction after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer in Quebec: a population-based study of 2415 men. Eur Urol. 2004;46:188–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sridhar AN, Cathcart PJ, Yap T, Hines J, Nathan S, Briggs TP, et al. Recovery of baseline erectile function in men following radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: a prospective analysis using validated measures. J Sex Med. 2016;13:435–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Blecher G, Almekaty K, Kalejaiye O, Minhas S. Does penile rehabilitation have a role in the treatment of erectile dysfunction following radical prostatectomy? F1000Res. 2017;6:1923.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Tyson MD,2nd, Koyama T, Lee D, Hoffman KE, Resnick MJ, Wu XC, et al. Effect of prostate cancer severity on functional outcomes after localized treatment: comparative effectiveness analysis of surgery and radiation study results. Eur Urol. 2018;74:26–33.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Walsh PC, Lepor H, Eggleston JC. Radical prostatectomy with preservation of sexual function: anatomical and pathological considerations. Prostate. 1983;4:473–85.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Richard PO, Alibhai SM, Panzarella T, Klotz L, Komisarenko M, Fleshner NE, et al. The uptake of active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer: a population-based analysis. Can Urol Assoc J. 2016;10:333–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Gnanapragasam VJ, Thurtle D, Srinivasan A, Volanis D, George A, Lophatananon A, et al. Evolution and oncological outcomes of a contemporary radical prostatectomy practice in a UK regional tertiary referral centre. BJU Int. 2016;118:779–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Srougi V, Tourinho-Barbosa RR, Nunes-Silva I, Baghdadi M, Garcia-Barreras S, Rembeyo G, et al. The role of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in high-risk prostate cancer. J Endourol. 2017;31:229–37.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sathianathen NJ, Lamb AD, Lawrentschuk NL, Goad JR, Peters J, Costello AJ, et al. Changing face of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in Melbourne over 12 years. ANZ J Surg. 2018;88:E200–E203.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rhoden EL, Telöken C, Sogari PR, Vargas Souto CA. The use of the simplified International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) as a diagnostic tool to study the prevalence of erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14:245–50.

  28. Cappelleri JC, Rosen RC, Smith MD, Mishra A, Osterloh IH. Diagnostic evaluation of the erectile function domain of the International Index of erectile function. Urology. 1999;54:346–51.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Faure Walker NA, Norris JM, Shah TT, Yap T, Cathcart P, Moore CM, et al. A comparison of time taken to return to baseline erectile function following focal and whole gland ablative therapies for localized prostate cancer: A systematic review. Urol Oncol. 2018;36:67–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mulhall JP, Bivalacqua TJ, Becher EF. Standard operating procedure for the preservation of erectile function outcomes after radical prostatectomy. J Sex Med. 2013;10:195–203.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Capogrosso P, Ventimiglia E, Boeri L, Pozzi E, Chierigo F, Schifano N et al. Should we tailor the clinical management of erectile dysfunction according to different ages? J Sex Med. 2019;16:999–1004.

  32. Penson DF. Time to raise the bar in localised prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2013;112:278.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Capogrosso P, Ventimiglia E, Cazzaniga W, Stabile A, Pederzoli F, Boeri L, et al. Long-term penile morphometric alterations in patients treated with robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy. Andrology. 2018;6:136–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Boeri L, Capogrosso P, Ventimiglia E, Cazzaniga W, Pederzoli F, Gandaglia G, et al. Depressive symptoms and low sexual desire after radical prostatectomy: early and long-term outcomes in a real-life setting. J Urol. 2018;199:474–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Capogrosso P, Ventimiglia E, Cazzaniga W, Montorsi F, Salonia A. Orgasmic dysfunction after radical prostatectomy. World J Mens Health. 2017;35:1–13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Frey A, Pedersen C, Lindberg H, Bisbjerg R, Sonksen J, Fode M. Prevalence and predicting factors for commonly neglected sexual side effects to external-beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer. J Sex Med. 2017;14:558–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQC30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365–76.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. van Andel G, Bottomley A, Fossa SD, Efficace F, Coens C, Guerif S, et al. An international field study of the EORTC QLQ-PR25: a questionnaire for assessing the health-related quality of life of patients with prostate cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:2418–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, Sarafian B, Linn E, Bonomi A, et al. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:570–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Esper P, Mo F, Chodak G, Sinner M, Cella D, Pienta KJ. Measuring quality of life in men with prostate cancer using the functional assessment of cancer therapy-prostate instrument. Urology. 1997;50:920–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Shrader-Bogen CL, Kjellberg JL, McPherson CP, Murray CL. Quality of life and treatment outcomes: prostate carcinoma patients' perspectives after prostatectomy or radiation therapy. Cancer. 1997;79:1977–86.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Litwin MS, Hays RD, Fink A, Ganz PA, Leake B, Brook RH. The UCLA Prostate Cancer Index: development, reliability, and validity of a healthrelated quality of life measure. Med Care. 1998;36:1002–12.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Wei JT, Dunn RL, Litwin MS, Sandler HM, Sanda MG. Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Urology. 2000;56:899–905.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Giesler RB, Miles BJ, Cowen ME, Kattan MW. Assessing quality of life in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: development of a new instrument for use in multiple settings. Qual Life Res. 2000;9:645–65.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Rosen RC, Cappelleri JC, Smith MD, Lipsky J, Pena BM. Development and evaluation of an abridged, 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) as a diagnostic tool for erectile dysfunction. Int J Impot Res. 1999;11:319–26.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Jayadevappa R, Chhatre S, Wong YN, Wittink MN, Cook R, Morales KH, et al. Comparative effectiveness of prostate cancer treatments for patientcentered outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA Compliant). Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96:e6790.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Koontz BF, Bossi A, Cozzarini C, Wiegel T, D'Amico A. A systematic review of hypofractionation for primary management of prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2015;68:683–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Nguyen LN, Head L, Witiuk K, Punjani N, Mallick R, Cnossen S, et al. The Risks and Benefits of Cavernous Neurovascular Bundle Sparing during Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol. 2017;198:760–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Reeves F, Preece P, Kapoor J, Everaerts W, Murphy DG, Corcoran NM, et al. Preservation of the Neurovascular Bundles Is Associated with Improved Time to Continence After Radical Prostatectomy But Not Long-term Continence Rates: Results of a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. European Urology. 2015;68:692–704.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Tal R, Alphs HH, Krebs P, Nelson CJ, Mulhall JP. Erectile function recovery rate after radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis. J Sex Med. 2009;6:2538–46.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Whiting PF, Moore TH, Jameson CM, Davies P, Rowlands MA, Burke M, et al. Symptomatic and quality-of-life outcomes after treatment for clinically localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2016;118:193–204.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

CEL is supported by an NIHR Academic Foundation Post and acknowledges support from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK

    Catherine E. Lovegrove & Suks Minhas

  2. Department of Urology, University of Messina, Messina, Italy

    Vincenzo Ficarra

  3. University Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy

    Francesco Montorsi & Andrea Salonia

  4. Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI; IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy

    Francesco Montorsi & Andrea Salonia

  5. University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK

    James N’Dow

Authors
  1. Catherine E. Lovegrove
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vincenzo Ficarra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francesco Montorsi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. James N’Dow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andrea Salonia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Suks Minhas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catherine E. Lovegrove.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lovegrove, C.E., Ficarra, V., Montorsi, F. et al. Sexual function outcomes following interventions for prostate cancer: are contemporary reports on functional outcomes misleading?. Int J Impot Res 32, 495–502 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-019-0220-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-019-0220-1

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links