Introduction: Effective communication using written and verbal language improves patient understanding and satisfaction when receiving their cancer diagnosis and prognosis. We investigated the benefit of a patient-centered pathology report in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa). Our study evaluated patient understanding of their PCa diagnosis post-RP, upon receiving either a standard pathology report or a personalized PC report.

Methods: Patient satisfaction questionnaires (Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions [PEPPI], Consultation And Relational Empathy [CARE], Communication Assessment Tool [CAT]) and a knowledge test were conducted at baseline, and then again at four weeks. Accurate recollection of Gleason grade group (GG) and extracapsular extension (ECE) were classified as ‘correct.’ Baseline demographic data were tested between groups using the Student t-test, Chi-squared test, or Fisher's exact test depending on whether data was continuous, categorical, or sparse. Comparison of correctly answered knowledge questions was analyzed using the Chi-squared test. A significance level of p<0.05 was used.

Results: Data from 52 patients were analyzed (25 standard vs. 27 PC report). No significant baseline differences were found between groups. Both groups reported high levels of satisfaction with experiences in all domains of patient-physician rapport, empathy, and communication. There was no significant differences in PEPPI (zero weeks p=0.61, four week p=0.75), CAT (‘excellent’ rating scores at zero weeks p=0.30 and four weeks p=0.48), and CARE (zero weeks p=0.78, four weeks p=0.55) scores. The PC report group had significantly more correct answers on GG and ECE, as compared to the standard report group at zero and four weeks (p=0.01 and 0.004, respectively).

Conclusions: Preliminary data demonstrate a PC pathology report improves patient knowledge and understanding of their PCa that is retained for at least four weeks after initial receipt of results.