Investigating psychological mechanisms linking pain severity to depression symptoms in women cancer survivors at a cancer center with a rural catchment area.

PURPOSE: Women cancer survivors, especially those in rural areas, with high levels of depression may be acutely susceptible to pain due to the ways they think, feel, and behave. The current study seeks to elucidate the relationship between symptoms of depression and pain severity in women cancer survivors, by examining the putative mediators involved in this relationship, specifically their self-efficacy for managing their health, how overwhelmed they were from life's responsibilities, and relational burden. METHODS: Self-report data were collected from 183 cancer survivors of breast, cervical, ovarian, or endometrial/uterine cancer, who were between 6 months and 3 years post-active therapy. RESULTS: Women cancer survivors with higher (vs. lower) symptoms of depression had more severe pain. Individual mediation analyses revealed that survivors with higher levels of depression felt more overwhelmed by life's responsibilities and had lower self-efficacy about managing their health, which was associated with greater pain severity. When all mediators were simultaneously entered into the same model, feeling overwhelmed by life's responsibilities significantly mediated the link between survivors' symptoms of depression and their pain severity. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between symptoms of depression and pain severity in women cancer survivors may be attributed in part to their self-efficacy and feeling overwhelmed by life's responsibilities. Early and frequent assessment of psychosocial factors involved in pain severity for women cancer survivors may be important for managing their pain throughout the phases of cancer survivorship.

Identifying meaningful change on PROMIS short forms in cancer patients: a comparison of item response theory and classic test theory frameworks.

BACKGROUND: This study compares classical test theory and item response theory frameworks to determine reliable change. Reliable change followed by anchoring to the change in categorically distinct responses on a criterion measure is a useful method to detect meaningful change on a target measure. METHODS: Adult cancer patients were recruited from five cancer centers. Baseline and follow-up assessments at 6 weeks were administered. We investigated short forms derived from PROMIS® item banks on anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain intensity, pain interference, and sleep disturbance. We detected reliable change using reliable change index (RCI). We derived the T-scores corresponding to the RCI calculated under IRT and CTT frameworks using PROMIS® short forms. For changes that were reliable, meaningful change was identified using patient-reported change in PRO-CTCAE by at least one level. For both CTT and IRT approaches, we applied one-sided tests to detect reliable improvement or worsening using RCI. We compared the percentages of patients with reliable change and reliable/meaningful change. RESULTS: The amount of change in T score corresponding to RCICTT of 1.65 ranged from 5.1 to 9.2 depending on domains. The amount of change corresponding to RCIIRT of 1.65 varied across the score range, and the minimum change ranged from 3.0 to 8.2 depending on domains. Across domains, the RCICTT and RCIIRT classified 80% to 98% of the patients consistently. When there was disagreement, the RCIIRT tended to identify more patients as having reliably changed compared to RCICTT if scores at both timepoints were in the range of 43 to 78 in anxiety, 45 to 70 in depression, 38 to 80 in fatigue, 35 to 78 in sleep disturbance, and 48 to 74 in pain interference, due to smaller standard errors in these ranges using the IRT method. The CTT method found more changes compared to IRT for the pain intensity domain that was shorter in length. Using RCICTT, 22% to 66% had reliable change in either direction depending on domains, and among these patients, 62% to 83% had meaningful change. Using RCIIRT, 37% to 68% had reliable change in either direction, and among these patients, 62% to 81% had meaningful change. CONCLUSION: Applying the two-step criteria demonstrated in this study, we determined how much change is needed to declare reliable change at different levels of baseline scores. We offer reference values for percentage of patients who meaningfully change for investigators using the PROMIS instruments in oncology.

Effects of patient-reported outcome assessment order.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials and clinical practice, patient-reported outcomes are almost always assessed using multiple patient-reported outcome measures at the same time. This raises concerns about whether patient responses are affected by the order in which the patient-reported outcome measures are administered. METHODS: This questionnaire-based study of order effects included adult cancer patients from five cancer centers. Patients were randomly assigned to complete questionnaires via paper booklets, interactive voice response system, or tablet web survey. Linear Analogue Self-Assessment, Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System assessment tools were each used to measure general health, physical function, social function, emotional distress/anxiety, emotional distress/depression, fatigue, sleep, and pain. The order in which the three tools, and domains within tools, were presented to patients was randomized. Rates of missing data, scale scores, and Cronbach's alpha coefficients were compared by the order in which they were assessed. Analyses included Cochran-Armitage trend tests and mixed models adjusted for performance score, age, sex, cancer type, and curative intent. RESULTS: A total of 1830 patients provided baseline patient-reported outcome assessments. There were no significant trends in rates of missing values by whether a scale was assessed earlier or later. The largest order effect for scale scores was due to a large mean score at one assessment time point. The largest difference in Cronbach's alpha between the versions for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scales was 0.106. CONCLUSION: The well-being of a cancer patient has many different aspects such as pain, fatigue, depression, and anxiety. These are assessed using a variety of surveys often collected at the same time. This study shows that the order in which the different aspects are collected from the patient is not important.

Score equivalence of paper-, tablet-, and interactive voice response system-based versions of PROMIS, PRO-CTCAE, and numerical rating scales among cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: The study tests the effects of data collection modes on patient responses associated with the multi-item measures such as Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System (PROMIS®), and single-item measures such as Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) measures. METHODS: Adult cancer patients were recruited from five cancer centers and administered measures of anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, pain intensity, pain interference, ability to participate in social roles and activities, global mental and physical health, and physical function. Patients were randomized to complete the measures on paper (595), interactive voice response (IVR, 596) system, or tablet computer (589). We evaluated differential item functioning (DIF) by method of data collection using the R software package, lordif. For constructs that showed no DIF, we concluded equivalence across modes if the equivalence margin, defined as ± 0.20 × pooled SD, completely surrounds 95% confidence intervals (CI's) for difference in mean score. If the 95% CI fell totally outside the equivalence margin, we concluded systematic score difference by modes. If the 95% CI partly overlaps the equivalence margin, we concluded neither equivalence nor difference. RESULTS: For all constructs, no DIF of any kind was found for the three modes. The scores on paper and tablet were more comparable than between IVR and other modes but none of the 95% CI's were completely outside the equivalence margins, in which we established neither equivalence nor difference. Percentages of missing values were comparable for paper and tablet modes. Percentages of missing values were higher for IVR (2.3% to 6.5% depending on measures) compared to paper and tablet modes (0.7% to 3.3% depending on measures and modes), which was attributed to random technical difficulties experienced in some centers. CONCLUSION: Across all mode comparisons, there were some measures with CI's not completely contained within the margin of small effect. Two visual modes agreed more than visual-auditory pairs. IVR may induce differences in scores unrelated to constructs being measured in comparison with paper and tablet. The users of the surveys should consider using IVR only when paper and computer administration is not feasible.

Functional Outcomes and Health-Related Quality of Life Before and After Primary Total Knee Replacement for Patients From Diverse Geographic Regions.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether patient-reported knee function and health status before and after primary total knee replacement (TKR) at an academic medical center differs among patients from diverse geographic regions. METHODS: We assessed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as measured by the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) in 2855 TKR patients at preprimary and one year postprimary TKR procedure between January 1, 2012 and June 30, 2014. We compared the demographic characteristics, response rates, and changes in OKS, EQ-5D, and EQ visual analog scale among local, regional, and national patient groups. Patient- or hospital-related predictors of the postoperative scores were identified after controlling for preoperative scores on the PRO measures. RESULTS: Local patients had more comorbid conditions. Groups were similar in clinical outcomes such as length of stay at hospital, complication, and reoperation rates. Local, regional, and national patients had similar response rates and reported a similar level of knee function and health-related quality of life before and after TKR. Eighty nine percent had clinically important improvement on OKS, 69% on EQ-5D index, and 28% EQ visual analog scale, and there were no differences among groups in the proportions of clinically meaningful change. Better postoperative PRO scores were associated with older age, shorter hospital stay, fewer comorbidities, nonsmoking status, fewer complications, and private health insurance. CONCLUSION: Some patient characteristics such as comorbidities were greater in the local patient cohort versus the national cohort. Nevertheless, clinical outcomes and PROs were comparable across all geographic tiers.

Risk factors for poor health-related quality of life in cancer survivors with multiple chronic conditions: exploring the role of treatment burden as a mediator.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for poor health-related quality of life (HRQL) in multi-morbid adult cancer survivors and explore whether perceived treatment and self-management burden mediate any of these relationships. METHODS: Ninety-one multi-morbid cancer survivors (median age: 65 years) completed surveys at baseline and 6 months. Demographic, psychosocial, and health care-related factors were assessed as were perceived treatment burden and general HRQL (physical and mental health). Data on medical diagnoses and cancer treatment were extracted from the medical record. Bivariate correlations screened for associations between predictors and outcomes, with significant predictors entered into multivariable linear regressions to identify unique risk factors for greater treatment burden and poorer HRQL. Follow-up regressions examined whether treatment burden mediated any of the risk factor-outcome relationships. RESULTS: Factors that correlated with higher baseline treatment burden included: having more diagnoses, less formal education, having seen more physicians in the past 6 months, having a mental health diagnosis, not having a set routine for one's self-management, low health literacy, low self-efficacy for self-management, and low social support (Ps <0.05). Among these, factors that also correlated with worse 6-month HRQL outcome included: having more diagnoses, having seen more physicians in the past 6 months, having a mental health diagnosis, not having a set routine for one's self-management, low health literacy, low self-efficacy, and low social support (Ps <0.05). Multivariable regressions showed that some of these factors independently predicted higher treatment burden and/or worse HRQL. Low self-efficacy was the most robust independent risk factor for poor HRQL (bs: 0.34-0.49, Ps <0.005), with evidence supporting that the relationships were partially mediated by treatment burden. CONCLUSION: Monitoring of psychosocial and health care-related risk factors for high treatment burden and poor HRQL can identify multi-morbid cancer survivors in need of extra support and could inform a more personalized treatment approach.

Development and validation of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS): a patient-reported measure of treatment burden.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a new comprehensive patient-reported measure of treatment burden-the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS). METHODS: A conceptual framework was used to derive the PETS with items reviewed and cognitively tested with patients. A survey battery, including a pilot version of the PETS, was mailed to 838 multi-morbid patients from two healthcare institutions for validation. RESULTS: A total of 332 multi-morbid patients returned completed surveys. Diagnostics supported deletion and consolidation of some items and domains. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a domain model for scaling comprised of 9 factors: medical information, medications, medical appointments, monitoring health, interpersonal challenges, medical/healthcare expenses, difficulty with healthcare services, role/social activity limitations, and physical/mental exhaustion. Scales showed good internal consistency (α range 0.79-0.95). Higher PETS scores, indicative of greater treatment burden, were correlated with more distress, less satisfaction with medications, lower self-efficacy, worse physical and mental health, and lower convenience of healthcare (Ps < 0.001). Patients with lower health literacy, less adherence to medications, and more financial difficulties reported higher PETS scores (Ps < 0.01). CONCLUSION: A comprehensive patient-reported measure of treatment burden can help to better characterize the impact of treatment and self-management burden on patient well-being and guide care toward minimally disruptive medicine.

Responsiveness of 8 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures in a large, community-based cancer study cohort.

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was a National Institutes of Health-funded initiative to develop measures of symptoms and function. Responsiveness is the degree to which a measure can detect underlying changes over time. The objective of the current study was to document the responsiveness of 8 PROMIS measures in a large, population-based cancer cohort. METHODS: The Measuring Your Health study recruited 2968 patients who were diagnosed with 1 of 7 cancers between 2010 and 2012 through 4 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. Participants completed a baseline survey (6-13 months after diagnosis) and a 6-month follow-up survey. Changes in 8 PROMIS scores were compared with global ratings of transition, changes in performance status, and clinical events. RESULTS: Measures were responsive to 6-month declines and improvements in performance status with small to large effect sizes (ES) (Cohen d = 0.34-0.71; P < .01). Mean changes and effect sizes were larger for participants who reported declines compared with those who reported improvements. Small-to-medium ES were observed in patients who reported being "a little" worse (d = 0.31-0.56), and medium-to-large ES were observed in those who reported being "a lot" worse (d = 0.53-0.72). Hospitalized participants reported significant score increases, resulting in worsening of pain (d = 0.51), fatigue (d = 0.35), and depression (d = 0.57; all P < .01). Cancer recurrence and progression were associated with smaller increases in pain, fatigue, and sleep disturbance (d = 0.22-0.27). CONCLUSIONS: The current results indicated that all 8 PROMIS measures were sensitive to patient-perceived worsening and improvement and to major clinical events. These findings will be able to inform the design and interpretation of future research studies and clinical initiatives administering PROMIS measures. Cancer 2017;123:327-335. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Coping with colorectal cancer: a qualitative exploration with patients and their family members.

BACKGROUND: Extensive family coping research has been conducted among breast cancer, prostate cancer and melanoma with lesser emphasis on the coping experiences of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and their family members. OBJECTIVE: To examine ways in which patients and their family members cope with the diagnosis of CRC. METHODS: A total of 73 participants (21 patients, 52 family members) from 23 families described their experiences during and after a CRC diagnosis, including their coping experiences with the diagnosis. Data from semi-structured interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. The data were analyzed utilizing content analysis with inductive coding methods. RESULTS: Eight major themes were identified: positive reframing, holding on to a sense of normalcy, religion and spirituality, joining a group, creating awareness of CRC, lifestyle change, seeking information and alternative treatments. Maintaining an emotional sense of normalcy through positive thinking, engaging in activities to take one's mind off the diagnosis and believing that there is a higher authority which has control over the diagnosis and life were vital for the patients and their family members. Patients and family members used similar coping strategies. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study have implications for understanding how families blend emotion-based and problem-focused coping strategies in the face of a CRC diagnosis. Further developing evidence-based interventions that target coping and well-being in cancer patients and extending them to family members is necessary and holds great promise for providers who care for patients with familial cancers.

Ensuring comprehensive assessment of urinary problems in prostate cancer through patient-physician concordance.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the concordance between clinicians and men diagnosed with prostate cancer on a clinician-derived pathophysiological classification of the following self-reported urinary complications: storage (irritative), voiding (obstructive), and leakage/incontinence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen urology experts classified 37 urinary function questionnaire items into 3 primary conceptual dimensions (e.g., storage [irritative], voiding [obstructive] and urinary leakage/incontinence) that would best reflect each item's content. In addition, 218 patient participants provided responses to the 37 items. Using classifications by experts to develop the conceptual framework, the structure was tested using confirmatory factor analyses with patient data. RESULTS: Expert consensus was achieved in the classification of 31 out of 37 items. Using the 3-factor conceptual framework and patient data, the fit indices for the overall correlated factor model suggested an acceptable overall model fit. The analyses of the separate domains showed acceptable fit for the storage/irritative domain and the leaking/incontinence domain. The dimensionality of the voiding/obstructive domain was too difficult to estimate. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis found items that conceptually and psychometrically support 2 constructs (leaking/incontinence and storage/irritative). The consistency of this support between the groups suggests a clinical relevance that is useful in treating patients. We have conceptual support for a third hypothesis (voiding/obstructive), although there were too few items to assess this psychometrically. Relative motivating factors of bother and urinary complaints were not addressed and remain an unmet need in this field.

The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) is valid for monitoring quality of life in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Quality of life (QoL) is an important outcome in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). We assessed the validity of administering the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) at 12-month intervals over 3 years in a longitudinal study of 611 prospectively enrolled, newly diagnosed patients with NHL. We evaluated corrected item-total correlation and percent missing to identify items that may be less useful in certain NHL patient subgroups. The FACT-G subscales and total score demonstrated good internal consistency reliability, convergent validity and known-groups validity. Most scores also demonstrated good responsiveness to change. Questions that could be problematic included GE3 (losing hope) and GP2 (nausea) for patients in remission, and GP5 (bothered by side effects) for patients being observed. Overall, the FACT-G was a valid measure for monitoring QoL over time in patients with NHL. However, sensitivity analyses based on subscale scoring that excludes potentially problematic items may be warranted.

Building a measurement framework of burden of treatment in complex patients with chronic conditions: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Burden of treatment refers to the workload of health care as well as its impact on patient functioning and well-being. We set out to build a conceptual framework of issues descriptive of burden of treatment from the perspective of the complex patient, as a first step in the development of a new patient-reported measure. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with patients seeking medication therapy management services at a large, academic medical center. All patients had a complex regimen of self-care (including polypharmacy), and were coping with one or more chronic health conditions. We used framework analysis to identify and code themes and subthemes. A conceptual framework of burden of treatment was outlined from emergent themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients (20 female, 12 male, age 26-85 years) were interviewed. Three broad themes of burden of treatment emerged including: the work patients must do to care for their health; problem-focused strategies and tools to facilitate the work of self-care; and factors that exacerbate the burden felt. The latter theme encompasses six subthemes including challenges with taking medication, emotional problems with others, role and activity limitations, financial challenges, confusion about medical information, and health care delivery obstacles. CONCLUSION: We identified several key domains and issues of burden of treatment amenable to future measurement and organized them into a conceptual framework. Further development work on this conceptual framework will inform the derivation of a patient-reported measure of burden of treatment.

Quality of life after early mitral valve repair using conventional and robotic approaches.

BACKGROUND: Early mitral valve (MV) repair of degenerative mitral regurgitation is associated with superior clinical outcomes compared with prosthetic replacement and restores normal life expectancy, even in those without symptoms. Although current guidelines recommend prompt referral for effective MV repair in those with severe mitral regurgitation, some are reluctant to pursue early correction due to the perception that short-term quality of life (QOL) may be adversely affected by the operation. METHODS: Between January 2008 and November 2009, 202 patients underwent conventional transsternotomy or minimally invasive port-access robot-assisted MV repair, with or without patent foramen ovale closure or left Maze, and were mailed a postsurgical QOL survey. RESULTS: Unadjusted QOL scores for patients undergoing MV repair were excellent early after the operation using both approaches. Robotic repair was associated with slightly improved scores on the Duke Activity Status Index, the Short Form-12 Item Health Survey Physical domain, and the Linear Analogue Self-Assessment frequency of chest pain and fatigue indices during the first postoperative year; however, differences between treatment groups became indistinguishable after 1 year. Robotic repair patients returned to work slightly quicker (median, 33 vs 54 days, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Functional QOL outcomes within the first 2 years after early MV repair are excellent using open and robotic platforms. A robotic approach may be associated with slightly improved early QOL and return to employment-based activities. These results may have implications regarding future evolution of clinical guidelines and economic health care policy.

Factors influencing cancer risk perception in high risk populations: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patients at higher than average risk of heritable cancer may process risk information differently than the general population. However, little is known about clinical, demographic, or psychosocial predictors that may impact risk perception in these groups. The objective of this study was to characterize factors associated with perceived risk of developing cancer in groups at high risk for cancer based on genetics or family history. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid PsycInfo, and Scopus from inception through April 2009 for English-language, original investigations in humans using core concepts of "risk" and "cancer." We abstracted key information and then further restricted articles dealing with perceived risk of developing cancer due to inherited risk. RESULTS: Of 1028 titles identified, 53 articles met our criteria. Most (92%) used an observational design and focused on women (70%) with a family history of or contemplating genetic testing for breast cancer. Of the 53 studies, 36 focused on patients who had not had genetic testing for cancer risk, 17 included studies of patients who had undergone genetic testing for cancer risk. Family history of cancer, previous prophylactic tests and treatments, and younger age were associated with cancer risk perception. In addition, beliefs about the preventability and severity of cancer, personality factors such as "monitoring" personality, the ability to process numerical information, as well as distress/worry also were associated with cancer risk perception. Few studies addressed non-breast cancer or risk perception in specific demographic groups (e.g. elderly or minority groups) and few employed theory-driven analytic strategies to decipher interrelationships of factors. CONCLUSIONS: Several factors influence cancer risk perception in patients at elevated risk for cancer. The science of characterizing and improving risk perception in cancer for high risk groups, although evolving, is still relatively undeveloped in several key topic areas including cancers other than breast and in specific populations. Future rigorous risk perception research using experimental designs and focused on cancers other than breast would advance the field.

Minimally important differences were estimated for six Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: We combined anchor- and distribution-based methods to establish minimally important differences (MIDs) for six Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-Cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Participants completed 6 PROMIS-Cancer scales and 23 anchor measures at an initial (n=101) assessment and a follow-up (n=88) assessment 6-12 weeks later. Three a priori criteria were used to identify usable cross-sectional and longitudinal anchor-based MID estimates. The mean standard error of measurement was also computed for each scale. The focus of the analysis was on item response theory-based MIDs estimated on a T-score scale. Raw score MIDs were estimated for comparison purposes. RESULTS: Many cross-sectional (64%) and longitudinal (73%) T-score anchor-based MID estimates were excluded because they did not meet a priori criteria. The following are the recommended T-score MID ranges: 17-item Fatigue (2.5-4.5), 7-item Fatigue (3.0-5.0), 10-item Pain Interference (4.0-6.0), 10-item Physical Functioning (4.0-6.0), 9-item Emotional Distress-Anxiety (3.0-4.5), and 10-item Emotional Distress-Depression (3.0-4.5). Effect sizes corresponding to these MIDs averaged between 0.40 and 0.63. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to address MIDs for PROMIS measures. Studies are currently being conducted to confirm these MIDs in other patient populations and to determine whether these MIDs vary by patients' level of functioning.

Do erythropoietic-stimulating agents relieve fatigue? A review of reviews.

Interest in the efficacy and potential deleterious consequences of treatment with erythropoietic-stimulating agents (ESAs) is very high. Recently, the ESAs have come under intense scrutiny as several clinical trials have shown their use to be associated with an increased risk of thrombosis, and a concern for increased mortality risk in oncology. In this context, attention to the effect of ESAs upon fatigue and other aspects of quality of life has tended to be lost. To aid inclusion of this endpoint in the important consideration of risks and benefits of ESA therapy, we summarize the many reviews that have been conducted on this topic. The ten selected reviews were all conducted systematically or were otherwise comprehensive. While these reviews acknowledge an overall positive fatigue or quality-of-life effect, some were equivocal about the meaningfulness or magnitude of the benefit. The overall evidence from these reviews supports a fatigue and overall quality-of-life benefit from treatment with ESAs that is unlikely to be due to chance. This information should be included in the risk/benefit consideration of these controversial agents.

Constructing a conceptual framework of patient-reported outcomes for metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: A conceptual framework for patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is a structured representation of outcome concepts and issues. Our aim was to develop a conceptual framework of PROs for hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) to support measurement clarity. METHODS: Relevant outcome issues were identified from review of recent clinical trials. This provided content for an interview with 15 metastatic HRPC patients and a survey of 10 practitioners. All participants were asked about the relevance and importance of 26 outcomes and were allowed to nominate new outcomes. Practitioners were also asked to determine which outcomes endorsed by patients were attributable to the disease (symptoms) versus treatment (side effects). Analyses of archived clinical trial data were used to verify and augment the interview and survey results. RESULTS: Patients endorsed 11 concerns as relevant and important to HRPC including general pain, bone pain, urinary problems, fatigue, appetite loss, constipation, erectile dysfunction, peripheral neuropathy, diarrhea, PSA anxiety, and changes in self image. Practitioner judgments helped classify each concern into one of four categories, disease symptom, treatment side effect, both symptom and side effect, or psychological concern. Additionally, patients endorsed (and practitioners confirmed) the relevance and importance of several general domains of quality of life. Analyses of archived data confirmed the importance of these issues and suggested two additional concerns. CONCLUSION: Findings were used to propose a conceptual framework of PROs for metastatic HRPC. Such frameworks can be used to help specify targets for assessment in clinical studies such as treatment trials.

A brief assessment of physical functioning for prostate cancer patients.

We aimed to validate a more rapid, yet reliable means of assessing physical function (PF) for patients with prostate cancer. The sample included 128 prostate cancer patients recruited from urology and general oncology clinics at two Chicago-area hospitals. The main outcome measures were: A 36-item PF item bank that included a 5-item short form (BriefPF) and the 10-item PF subscale (PF-10) from the Medical Outcomes Study SF-36. Validity, information function, and relative precision (calculated using Rasch analysis and raw scores) of the BriefPF were compared to the PF-10 and the full PF item bank. We found that the BriefPF and PF-10 were strongly correlated (r = 0.85) with the PF bank, and all three scales differentiated patients according to performance status (F(PF bank)(2,124) = 32.51 P < 0.001, F(PF-10)(2,121) = 27.35 P < 0.001, F(BriefPF) (2,123) = 38.40 P < 0.001). BriefPF has excellent precision relative to the PF-10 in measuring patients with different performance status levels. The Rasch-based information function indicated that the BriefPF was more informative than PF-10 in measuring moderate to higher functioning patients. Hence, the BriefPF offers a parsimonious and precise measure of PF for use among men with prostate cancer, and may aid in the timely inclusion of patient-reported outcomes in treatment decision-making.

Meta-analysis provides evidence-based interpretation guidelines for the clinical significance of mean differences for the FACT-G, a cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire.

Our aim was to develop evidence-based interpretation guidelines for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G), a cancer-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instrument, from a range of clinically relevant anchors, incorporating expert judgment about clinical significance. Three clinicians with many years' experience managing cancer patients and using HRQOL outcomes in clinical research reviewed 71 papers. Blinded to the FACT-G results, they considered the clinical anchors associated with each FACT-G mean difference, predicted which dimensions of HRQOL would be affected, and whether the effects would be trivial, small, moderate, or large. These size classes were defined in terms of clinical relevance. The experts' judgments were then linked with FACT-G mean differences, and inverse-variance weighted mean differences were calculated for each size class. Small, medium, and large differences (95% confidence interval) from 1,118 cross-sectional comparisons were as follows: physical well-being 1.9 (0.6-3.2), 4.1 (2.7-5.5), 8.7 (5.2-12); functional well-being 2.0 (0.5-3.5), 3.8 (2.0-5.5), 8.8 (4.3-13); emotional well-being 1.0 (0.1-2.6), 1.9 (0.3-3.5), no large differences; social well-being 0.7 (-0.7 to 2.1), 0.8 (-2.9 to 4.5), no large differences. Results from 436 longitudinal comparisons tended to be smaller than the corresponding cross-sectional results. These results augment other interpretation guidelines for FACT-G with information on sample size, power calculations, and interpretation of cancer clinical trials that use FACT-G.

Meta-analysis provides evidence-based effect sizes for a cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire, the FACT-G.

OBJECTIVE: To compare Cohen's guidelines for small (0.2), medium (0.5), and large (0.8) effect sizes with empirical estimates for a cancer-specific health-related quality-of-life questionnaire (HRQOL), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G). METHODS: Seventy-one papers satisfied inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. Blinded to the HRQOL results, three "experts" (with expertise in interpreting the FACT-G questionnaire and managing cancer patients), predicted the relative magnitude of HRQOL mean differences. Size classes (small, medium, large) were defined in terms of relevance to clinical decision making. The experts worked independently and based their predictions on patient characteristics and clinical circumstances. Their judgments were linked with FACT-G results and inverse-variance-weighted mean effect sizes calculated for each size class. RESULTS: At least two experts were perfectly concordant and up to one was discordant by at most one size category for 833 of the mean differences; for these, weighted kappas were generally in the "substantial" range (0.60-0.79). Of these mean differences, 617 were cross-sectional; small, medium, and large mean effect sizes were physical well-being 0.42, 0.87, 1.6; functional well-being 0.37, 0.71, 1.6; emotional well-being 0.32, 0.40, no large differences; and social well-being 0.14, 0.23, no large differences. Two hundred and sixteen longitudinal mean differences yielded small and medium effect sizes: physical well-being 0.26, 0.34; functional well-being 0.14, 0.28; emotional well-being 0.27, 0.23; and social well-being 0.08, 0.01. There was virtually no evidence for large longitudinal effects. CONCLUSION: These results provide specific, evidence-based alternatives to Cohen's generic guidelines, for use in sample-size calculations for the FACT-G and interpretation of the clinical significance of effects measured with FACT-G.