Table 3.
Studies with Prevalence Rates for CSC, Listed Chronologically by Measure Type
| Studies with Prevalence Rates for CSC Derived from Patient-Level Data | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Study | Participants | Communication Type | Percent Reporting CSC | |
| Studies Measuring CSC through Observation/Recording of Clinic Visit | ||||
|
| ||||
| White 2011 (UK)[56] | Gynecologic/colorectal cancer (N = 69; 100% female; mean age NR; 57% stage III/IV disease; race/ethnicity NR) | (1) Non-specific discussions | (1) 25% | |
| (2) Offer treatments for sexual problems | (2) 23% | |||
| (3) Provide referrals | (3) 12%a | |||
|
| ||||
| Forbat 2012 (UK)[45] | Prostate cancer (N = 60, 0% female; mean age = 70.0; advanced disease rate NR; 80% Caucasian) | (1) Non-specific discussions | (1) 53% | |
| (2) Offer treatments for sexual problems | (2) 27%b | |||
|
| ||||
| Kunneman 2015 (Netherlands)[48] | Rectal cancer (N = 81; 30% female; mean age = 65; advanced disease rate NR; race/ethnicity NR) | (1) Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | (1) 85% | |
| (2) Discuss potential treatment effects on fertility | (2) ~2% | |||
|
| ||||
| Studies Measuring CSC through Patient Chart Review | ||||
|
| ||||
| Chorost 2000 (USA)[63] | Rectal cancer (N = 53; 30% female; mean age NR; 8% advanced disease; race/ethnicity NR) | Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | 28%c | |
|
| ||||
| Scheer 2012 (Canada)[41] | Rectal cancer (N = 30; 20% female; median age = 65; 10% advanced disease; race/ethnicity NR) | Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | 100% | |
|
| ||||
| Studies Measuring CSC through Patient Self-Report Survey | ||||
|
| ||||
| Hendren 2005 (Canada)[46] | Rectal cancer (N = 180; 45% female; median age = 68; 0.5% advanced disease; race/ethnicity NR) | Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | 26% | |
|
| ||||
| Boyd 2006 (USA)[42] | Prostate cancer (N = 115; 0% female; mean age = 64.0; 0% advanced disease; race/ethnicity NR) | (1) Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | (1) 100% | |
| (2) Discuss potential treatment effects on fertility | (2) 9% | |||
|
| ||||
| Cox 2006 (UK)[43] | Mixed cancer (N = 394; 49% breast; 34% colorectal; 17% gynecologic; 77% female; median age = 63.0; advanced disease rate NR; race/ethnicity NR) | Non-specific discussions | 37% | |
|
| ||||
| Hendren 2007 (Canada)[37] | Anal/colorectal cancer (N = 54; 100% female; mean age NR; 100% locally advanced disease; race/ethnicity NR) | Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | 20% | |
|
| ||||
| Lindau 2007 (USA)[50] | Vaginal and cervical cancer (N = 162; 100% female; mean age = 49.4 [SD = 6.0]; advanced disease rate NR; 93% Caucasian) | Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | 38% | |
|
| ||||
| Hilarius 2008 (Netherlands)[57] | Mixed cancer (N = 86; 60% breast; 19% colorectal;; for sub- sample with prevalence data, gender and mean age NR, advanced disease rate NR; race/ethnicity NR) | Non-specific discussions | 1% d | |
|
| ||||
| Southard 2009 (USA)[53] | Mixed cancer (N = 52; cancer sites NR; 89% female; mean age = 57; advanced disease rate NR; race/ethnicity NR) | (1) Non-specific discussions | 23% (PHY) 17% (ONU) |
|
| (2) Patient ask about sexual concerns | (2) 2% | |||
|
| ||||
| Errihani 2010 (Morocco)[44] | Mixed cancer (N = 97; 42% breast; 24% gynecologic; 9% gastrointestinal; 84% female; mean age = 45.0; advanced disease rate NR; race/ethnicity NR) | Non-specific discussions | 5% | |
|
| ||||
| Flynn 2012 (USA)[28] | Mixed cancer (N=819; 27% breast; 22% prostate; 15% gynecologic; 52% female; mean age = 58.5 [SD = 11.8]; 16% advanced disease; 84% Caucasian) | (1) Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | (1) 45% | |
| (2) Patient ask about sexual concerns | (2) 29% | |||
|
| ||||
| Scanlon 2012 (USA)[52] | Mixed cancer (N = 104; 36% breast; 25% gynecologic; 100% female; median age = 40.5; 0% advanced disease; race/ethnicity NR) | (1) Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | (1) 40% | |
| (2) Discuss potential treatment effects on fertility | (2) 77% | |||
|
| ||||
| Scheer 2012 (Canada)[41] | Rectal cancer (N = 30; 20% female; median age = 65; 10% advanced disease; race/ethnicity NR) | Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | 53% | |
|
| ||||
| Kedde 2013 (Netherlands)[60] | Breast cancer (N = 332; 100% female; mean age = 38.7 [SD = 5.4]; advanced disease rate NR; race/ethnicity NR) | Non-specific discussions | 52% | |
|
| ||||
| Ussher 2013 (Australia)[54] | Breast cancer (N = 1965; 99.8% female; mean age = 54.1; 25% advanced disease; 89% Caucasian) | Non-specific discussions | 49% (GP) 39% (ONC) 21% (BCN) |
|
|
| ||||
| Gilbert 2014 (Australia)[58] | Mixed cancer (N = 657; 65% breast; 13% prostate; 7% gynecologic; 81% female; female mean age = 50.7 [SD = 10.9]; male mean age = 61.1 [SD = 14.3]; advanced disease rate NR; 95% Caucasian) | Non-specific discussions | 47% | |
|
| ||||
| Vermeer 2015a (Netherlands)[55] | Cervical cancer (N = 343; 100% female; mean age = 48.7 [SD = 8.9]; 0% advanced disease; race/ethnicity NR) | Non-specific discussions | 63%e | |
|
| ||||
| Studies Measuring CSC through Patient Interview | ||||
|
| ||||
| Stead 2003 (UK)[25] | Ovarian cancer (N = 15; 100% female; median age = 56; advanced disease rate NR; race/ethnicity NR) | Non-specific discussions | 13% | |
|
| ||||
| Lemieux 2004 (Canada)[49] | Advanced cancer (N = 10; 20% breast; 20% colon; 20% lung; 40% female; mean age = 58.8 [SD = 12.8]; 100% advanced disease; race/ethnicity NR) | (1) Patient ask about sexual concerns | (1) 10% | |
| (2) Assess sexual concerns | (2) 10% | |||
|
| ||||
| Khoo 2009 (Malaysia)[39] | Gynecologic/breast cancer (N = 50; 100% female; mean age NR; advanced disease rate NR; 0% Caucasian) | Non-specific discussions | 14% | |
|
| ||||
| Lewis 2012 (USA)[38] | Breast cancer (N = 33; 100% female; mean age NR; advanced disease rate NR; 0% Caucasian; 100% African American) | (1) Non-specific discussions | (1) 27%e | |
| (2) Discuss potential treatment effects on fertility | (2) 52% | |||
|
| ||||
| Silva Lara 2012 (Brazil)[62] | Gynecologic cancer (N = 30; 100% female; mean age = 48.3 [SD = 8.2]; 0% advanced disease; race/ethnicity NR) | Non-specific discussions | 0% | |
|
| ||||
| Mohamed 2014 (USA)[51] | Bladder cancer (N = 30; 27% female; mean age = 67; 0% advanced disease; 100% Caucasian) | (1) Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | (1) 20% | |
| (2) Offer treatments for sexual problems | (2) 17% | |||
|
| ||||
| Studies with Prevalence Rates for CSC Derived from Provider-Level Data | ||||
|
| ||||
| CSC Measured through Observation/Recording of Clinic Visit | ||||
|
| ||||
| Kunneman 2015 (Netherlands)[48] | Radiation oncologists (N = 17; cancer sites NR; mean years in practice NR; 71% female; race/ethnicity NR) | Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | 94% | |
|
| ||||
| CSC Measured through Patient Chart Review | ||||
|
| ||||
| Scheer 2012 (Canada)[41] | Surgical oncologists (N = NR; cancer sites NR; mean years in practice NR; gender NR; race/ethnicity NR) | Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | 100% | |
|
| ||||
| CSC Measured through Provider Self-Report Survey | ||||
|
| ||||
| Errihani 2010 (Morocco)[44] | Oncologists and nurses (N=28; 89% oncologists; mean years in practice NR; 64% female; race/ethnicity NR) | Discuss potential treatment effects on fertility | 80% | |
|
| ||||
| Oskay 2012 (Turkey)[61] | Oncology nurses (N = 87; cancer sites NR; median years in practice = 14; 100% female; race/ethnicity NR) | (1) Non-specific discussions | (1) 63% | |
| (2) Assess sexual concerns | (2) 12% | |||
|
| ||||
| Huang 2013 (China)[47] | Pelvic radiation nurses (N = 128; cancer sites NR; mean years in practice NR; 100% female; race/ethnicity NR) | Patient ask about sexual concerns | 5–20%f | |
|
| ||||
| Krouwel 2015 (Netherlands)[59] | Oncology nurses (N = 477; 55% breast; 52% colorectal; 40% gynecological; mean years in practice NR; 91% female; race/ethnicity NR) | (1) Discuss potential treatment effects on sexual function | (1) 71% | |
| (2) Assess sexual concerns | (2) 29% | |||
| (3) Assess sexual concerns | (3) 52% | |||
|
| ||||
| CSC Measured through Provider Interview | ||||
|
| ||||
| Stead 2003 (UK)[25] | Physicians and nurses (N = 43; 37% Physicians; 44% in medical oncology; 26% in gynecologic oncology; 23% in general gynecology; 7% in other department; mean years in practice NR; 70% female; race/ethnicity NR) | (1) Non-specific discussions | (1) 21% | |
| (2) Discuss potential treatment effects on fertility | (2) 7% | |||
| (3) Assess sexual concerns | (3) 16% | |||
|
| ||||
| Vermeer 2015b (Netherlands)[26] | Providers working with gynecologic cancer patients (N=30; 33% gynecologic oncologists; 33% radiation oncologists; 33% gynecologic oncology nurses; mean years in practice NR; 77% female; race/ethnicity NR) | (1) Assess sexual concerns | (1) 17% | |
| (2) Offer treatments for sexual problems | (2) 17% | |||
Note: BCN=Breast cancer nurse; GP=General practitioner; NR=Not reported; ONC=oncologist; ONU=Oncology nurse; PHY=Physician, field not specified. The average of the prevalence rates across the different types of providers in the two studies with prevalence rates across different provider types (Southard; Ussher) was entered into the calculation across studies.
a
The prevalence reported pertains to the overall number of clinic encounters; within the conversations in which a discussion of sexual issues occurred, the prevalence of referrals was 47%.
b
In the study, the item assessed management of erectile dysfunction specifically. Although this study included rates of discussion of other topics, these other topics could not be categorized according to the communication types given here, and are not shown.
c
This study also assessed the prevalence of discussions of potential effects of radiation therapy specifically on sexual function, with similar prevalence rates (overall = 25%; males = 38%; females= 0%).
d
The demographic characteristics were not reported for the sub-sample for which prevalence data are presented (i.e., the control group at Time 1, who were asked about discussions of sexual concerns. For the control group overall, 72% were female and the mean age was 55.0.
e
Rates are reported out of the subgroup of patients who reported sexual concerns [55] or who reported a need for help with sexual concerns [38].
f
A range of prevalence rates is reported for this study because responded to a number of questions pertaining to their patients asking them about a range of topics; the highest prevalence was for asking about whether sex is permissible after pelvic radiation therapy (20%); the lowest prevalence was for whether sex transmits diseases (5%); the highest prevalence item was selected for the overall calculations.