Loading
Cancer Survivorship and Care / Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment · Journal article
Current Oncology · September 9, 2026
Early or partial results. Treat as a signal, not a conclusion.
This exploratory mixed-methods study reports high perceived value and acceptability of a multicomponent digital prostate cancer survivorship program (PC-PEP) among 14 self-identified Black men, with 85–92% endorsing lifestyle improvement and standard-care recommendation. The work is descriptive and hypothesis-generating, identifying barriers between program availability and meaningful access; it does not measure clinical outcomes or compare treatment arms, and the small uncontrolled sample limits generalizability.
Exploratory mixed-methods embedded substudy of an ongoing Phase 4 implementation trial. Black men with prostate cancer enrolled in the international Phase 4 implementation trial of PC-PEP. Participants had received varied treatment: 9 had surgery ± radiation and/or hormone therapy, 4 had radiation ± hormone therapy, 1 was on active surveillance or untreated.. Intervention: Prostate Cancer Patient Empowerment Program (PC-PEP): a six-month digital survivorship intervention integrating exercise, pelvic floor muscle training, nutrition, stress management, psychosocial support, and peer connection. n = 14. Embedded within an ongoing international Phase 4 implementation trial; specific trial centres and countries not named in this report.
Median likelihood of recommending PC-PEP was 10 (IQR 8–10) Median overall usefulness rating was 9 (IQR 8–10) Among 13 participants with item-level data, 11 (85%) reported lifestyle improvement
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
This descriptive work documents perceived acceptability and value of a digital survivorship program in Black men but does not demonstrate clinical benefit or compare outcomes to standard care or a control group. Clinicians should regard this as identifying a potentially valued resource and highlighting implementation barriers (late awareness, limited outreach) rather than as evidence that PC-PEP changes clinical outcomes.
A small, single-site exploratory mixed-methods study with 14 self-identified Black participants reporting perceived value and acceptability of a digital survivorship intervention, without a control arm or hard clinical outcomes.
As stated by the source record.
Quoted from the source exactly as published.
This descriptive work documents perceived acceptability and value of a digital survivorship program in Black men but does not demonstrate clinical benefit or compare outcomes to standard care or a control group. Clinicians should regard this as identifying a potentially valued resource and highlighting implementation barriers (late awareness, limited outreach) rather than as evidence that PC-PEP changes clinical outcomes.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
Introduction: Black men experience persistent disparities across the prostate cancer continuum, including inequities in access to survivorship support. This study examined the perceived value, acceptability, and experiences of accessing a multicomponent digital survivorship program among Black men with prostate cancer. Methods: This exploratory mixed-methods study was embedded within the ongoing international Phase 4 implementation trial of the Prostate Cancer Patient Empowerment Program (PC-PEP), a six-month digital intervention integrating exercise, pelvic floor muscle training, nutrition, stress management, psychosocial support, and peer connection. Fourteen self-identified Black participants contributed six-month program evaluation and qualitative data collected through open-ended responses and conference-based focus group discussions. Nine participants (64%) had undergone surgery with or without radiation and/or hormone therapy, four (29%) had received radiation with or without hormone therapy, and one (7%) was on active surveillance or had received no treatment. Quantitative data were summarized descriptively, and qualitative data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: PC-PEP was highly valued, with median ratings of 10 (IQR 8–10) for likelihood of recommending the program and 9 (IQR 8–10) for overall usefulness. Among participants with available item-level data, 11/13 (85%) reported lifestyle improvement and 12/13 (92%) endorsed offering PC-PEP as standard care. Qualitative findings identified the value of holistic survivorship support, peer connection, normalization of vulnerability, and support for physical and psychological self-management. Participants also described limited awareness of PC-PEP at diagnosis and reliance on individual clinicians or incidental opportunities to learn about the program. Participants emphasized the need for earlier referral, greater representation, and culturally relevant community outreach. Conclusions: Black men who accessed PC-PEP reported high perceived value and identified benefits across multiple dimensions of survivorship. Their experiences, however, highlighted an important distinction between program availability and meaningful access: participants’ experiences suggest that availability alone may not ensure timely connection to survivorship support. Earlier referral, culturally responsive outreach, and integration of survivorship support into routine prostate cancer care may help close this gap.
Taken from the source record, never inferred. Follow any of these and new work involving them reaches your briefing.