Measuring psychosocial outcomes of men living with prostate cancer: feasibility of regular assessment of patient-reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To trial collecting patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess psychosocial outcomes in men with prostate cancer (PC). METHODS: A cross-sectional postal survey was sent to three groups of 160 men with PC (6, 12 and 24 months post-initial treatment; ntotal  = 480), through the South Australian Prostate Cancer Clinical Outcomes Collaborative (SAPCCOC) registry (2017). Outcomes were as follows: response rate, completeness, general and disease-specific quality of life, distress, insomnia, fear of recurrence, decisional difficulties and unmet need. RESULTS: A response rate of 57-61% (n = 284) was achieved across groups. Data completeness was over 90% for 88% of survey items, with lower response (76-78%) for EPIC-26 urinary and sexual functioning subscales, sexual aid use (78%) and physical activity (68%). In general, higher socio-economic indicators were associated with higher completion of these measures (absolute difference 12-26%, p < 0.05). Lower unmet need on the sexuality domain (SCNS-SF34) was associated with lower completion of the EPIC-26 sexual functioning subscale [M (SD) = 12.4 (21.6); M (SD) = 26.3 (27.3), p < .001]. Worse leaking urine was associated with lower completion of urinary pad/diaper use question (EPIC-26) [M (SD) = 65.9 (26.5), M (SD) = 77.3 (23.9), p < .01]. CONCLUSION: Assessment of psychosocial PROMs through a PC registry is feasible and offers insight beyond global quality of life assessment, to facilitate targeting and improvements in services and treatments.

Australian validation of the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Post-Surgical score to predict biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: The Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment Post-Surgical (CAPRA-S) score is a simple post-operative risk assessment tool predicting disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy, which is easily calculated using available clinical data. To be widely useful, risk tools require multiple external validations. We aimed to validate the CAPRA-S score in an Australian multi-institutional population, including private and public settings and reflecting community practice. METHODS: The study population were all men on the South Australian Prostate Cancer Clinical Outcomes Collaborative Database with localized prostate cancer diagnosed during 1998-2013, who underwent radical prostatectomy without adjuvant therapy (n = 1664). Predictive performance was assessed via Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional regression analyses, Harrell's Concordance index, calibration plots and decision curve analysis. RESULTS: Biochemical recurrence occurred in 342 (21%) cases. Five-year recurrence-free probabilities for CAPRA-S scores indicating low (0-2), intermediate (3-5) and high risk were 95, 79 and 46%, respectively. The hazard ratio for CAPRA-S score increments was 1.56 (95% confidence interval 1.49-1.64). The Concordance index for 5-year recurrence-free survival was 0.77. The calibration plot showed good correlation between predicted and observed recurrence-free survival across scores. Limitations include the retrospective nature and small numbers with higher CAPRA-S scores. CONCLUSIONS: The CAPRA-S score is an accurate predictor of recurrence after radical prostatectomy in our cohort, supporting its utility in the Australian setting. This simple tool can assist in post-surgical selection of patients who would benefit from adjuvant therapy while avoiding morbidity among those less likely to benefit.

Comorbidity assessment in localized prostate cancer: a systematic review protocol.

REVIEW OBJECTIVE/QUESTIONS: The objective of this study is to review and summarize the methods and tools used to measure comorbidity in localized prostate cancer (PCa) and in particular to assess whether these tools are adequately validated and reliable for determining the impact of comorbidity on survival and treatment decisions for this disease.Specifically, the review questions are.

Defining a standard set of patient-centered outcomes for men with localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Value-based health care has been proposed as a unifying force to drive improved outcomes and cost containment. OBJECTIVE: To develop a standard set of multidimensional patient-centered health outcomes for tracking, comparing, and improving localized prostate cancer (PCa) treatment value. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We convened an international working group of patients, registry experts, urologists, and radiation oncologists to review existing data and practices. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The group defined a recommended standard set representing who should be tracked, what should be measured and at what time points, and what data are necessary to make meaningful comparisons. Using a modified Delphi method over a series of teleconferences, the group reached consensus for the Standard Set. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We recommend that the Standard Set apply to men with newly diagnosed localized PCa treated with active surveillance, surgery, radiation, or other methods. The Standard Set includes acute toxicities occurring within 6 mo of treatment as well as patient-reported outcomes tracked regularly out to 10 yr. Patient-reported domains of urinary incontinence and irritation, bowel symptoms, sexual symptoms, and hormonal symptoms are included, and the recommended measurement tool is the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Short Form. Disease control outcomes include overall, cause-specific, metastasis-free, and biochemical relapse-free survival. Baseline clinical, pathologic, and comorbidity information is included to improve the interpretability of comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: We have defined a simple, easily implemented set of outcomes that we believe should be measured in all men with localized PCa as a crucial first step in improving the value of care. PATIENT SUMMARY: Measuring, reporting, and comparing identical outcomes across treatments and treatment centers will provide patients and providers with information to make informed treatment decisions. We defined a set of outcomes that we recommend being tracked for every man being treated for localized prostate cancer.