Table 4.

Main findings on HRQoL in RCTs

Comp.:	Study	Key Findings	Potential Limitation(s)
S1a	Donovan, J L/ 2016 [37]	Comparison: AS vs. RP vs. EBRT, follow-up timeb: 5-6 years, mean agec: 62 years - No significant differences were observed among intervention groups in measures of general health-related or cancer-related quality of life
S1	Giberti, C/ 2009 [41]	Comparison: RP vs. BT, follow-up timeb: 5 years, mean agec: 65.3 years - No significant differences were observed among intervention groups in measures of general health-related or cancer-related quality of life	- Sample size <100 in both study arms - No intention to treat analyses
S2	Brundage, M/ 2015 [36]	Comparison: ADT vs. ADT + EBRT, follow-up timeb: 5-8 years, median agec: 69.7 years - No significant between-arm differences in physical or role functioning at any time point 5+ years after diagnosis - Significant (p < 0.001) deterioration in both arms over time for physical and role functioning	- Sample size <100 in both study arms - Only results on physical and role functioning were reported for this follow-up time

Comp. Comparison group

S1: HRQoL by primary intervention in long-term survivors with localized PC; S2: HRQoL by intervention in long-term survivors with locally advanced PC; S3: HRQoL by intervention in long-term survivors with localized or locally advanced PC

Studies were ordered by stage information and within each group alphabetically

As potential limitation following criteria were considered: (1) sample size 100 per study arm for studies using EORTC-C30 and 70 for studies using SF-36 (2) randomization (3) intention to-treat analyses (4) reporting of results appropriate

^aInlcusion of PC survivors with disease progression

^bTime since randomization

^cAge at randomization