Psychometric validation of the German version of the EPIC-26 questionnaire for patients with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer

Sibert, Nora Tabea; Dieng, Sebastian; Oesterle, Alisa; Feick, Günter; Carl, Günther; Steiner, Thomas; Minner, Jörg; Roghmann, Florian; Kaftan, Björn Theodor; Zengerling, Friedemann; Hinkel, Andreas; Becher, Burkhard; Heidenreich, Axel; Harke, Nina; Brehmer, Bernhard; Pfitzenmaier, Jesco; Fichtner, Jan; Neisius, Andreas; Hammerer, Peter; Wesselmann, Simone; Kowalski, Christoph

doi:10.1007/s00345-019-02949-7

Cited by 29 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the PCO‐study, participating PCCs invite patients to give written informed consent for the collection of data. Patient‐reported outcome data and sociodemographic information are collected through a paper‐and‐pencil or online questionnaire 20 and are linked to data collected routinely during the certification process – including disease and treatment information such as utilization of POS.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of psycho‐oncological services by prostate cancer patients: A multilevel analysis

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Cancer patients often suffer from psychological distress. Psycho‐oncological services (POS) have been established in some health care systems in order to address such issues. This study aims to identify patient and center characteristics that elucidate the use of POS by patients in prostate cancer centers (PCCs). Methods Center‐reported certification and patient survey data from 3094 patients in 44 certified PCCs in Germany were gathered in the observational study (Prostate Cancer Outcomes). A multilevel analysis was conducted. Results Model 1 showed that utilization of POS in PCCs is associated with patients’ age (OR = 0.98; 95%‐CI = 0.96‐0.99; P < .001), number of comorbidities (1‐2 vs 0, OR = 1.27; 95%‐CI = 1.00‐1.60; P=.048), disease staging (localized high‐risk vs localized intermediate risk, OR = 1.41; 95%‐CI = 1.14‐1.74; P < .001), receiving androgen deprivation therapy before study inclusion (OR = 0.19; 95%‐CI = 0.10‐0.34; P < .001), and hospital teaching status (university vs academic, OR = 0.09; 95%‐CI = 0.02‐0.55; P = .009). Model 2 additionally includes information on treatment after study inclusion and shows that after inclusion, patients who receive primary radiotherapy (OR = 0.05; 95%‐CI = 0.03‐0.10; P < .001) or undergo active surveillance/watchful waiting (OR = 0.06; 95%‐CI = 0.02‐0.15; P < .001) are less likely to utilize POS than patients who undergo radical prostatectomy. Disease staging (localized high‐risk vs localized intermediate risk, OR = 1.31; 95%‐CI = 1.05‐1.62; P = .02) and teaching status (university vs academic, OR = 0.08; 95%‐CI = 0.01‐0.65; P = .02) are also significant predictors for POS use. The second model did not identify any other significant patient characteristics. Conclusions Future research should explore the role of institutional teaching status and whether associations with therapy after study inclusion are due to treatment effects – for example, less need following radiotherapy – or because access to POS is more difficult for those receiving radiotherapy.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of psycho‐oncological services by prostate cancer patients: A multilevel analysis

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…26 We observed lower urinary and bowel functional domain scores in men reporting higher problems with feeling depressed and lack of energy. While we are uncertain of causality, it is known that poor urinary symptoms following treatment are associated with poorer patient reported outcomes in terms of overall quality of life, 27,28 depression, 29 regret over treatment decisions, 30 sexual functioning, 31,32 34 Further, the use of a single question within a larger tool has been shown to be clinically useful in patients with cancer. 35 A single question of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (where the patient answers on a one to 10 ordinal scale from not depressed to worst possible depression) demonstrated acceptable performance in screening of depression detected by the HADS 36 or the depression subscale of the PHQ-9.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self‐reported lack of energy or feeling depressed 12 months after treatment in men diagnosed with prostate cancer within a population‐based registry

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Feeling depressed and lethargic are common side effects of prostate cancer (PCa) and its treatments. We examined the incidence and severity of feeling depressed and lack of energy in patients in a population based PCa registry. Methods:We included men diagnosed with PCa between 2015 and 2019 in Victoria, Australia, and enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry. The primary outcome measures were responses to two questions on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) patient reported instrument: problems with feeling depressed and problems with lack of energy 12 months following treatment. We evaluated associations between these and age, cancer risk category, treatment type, and urinary, bowel, and sexual function.

show abstract

“…The questionnaire includes the five Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite 26-item version (EPIC-26) domain scores on sr-FS calculated in accordance with the scoring instructions [17,18]. The domains for "urinary incontinence" and "urinary irritative/obstructive" consist of four items, for "hormonal" of five items, and for "bowel" and "sexual" of six items [17]. Lower scores (on a range of 0-100) indicate poorer function.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of self-reported functional status (EPIC-26) in prostate cancer patients prior to treatment

Rothschild

Dieng²,

Oesterle³

et al. 2020

World J Urol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The self-reported functional status (sr-FS) of prostate cancer (PCa) patients varies substantially between patients and health-care providers before treatment. Information about this issue is important for evaluating comparisons between health-care providers and to assist in treatment decision-making. There have been few reports on correlates of pretherapeutic sr-FS. The objective of the article, therefore, is to describe clinical and sociodemographic correlates of pretherapeutic sr-FS, based on a subset of the TrueNTH Global Registry, a prospective cohort study. Methods A total of 3094 PCa patients receiving local treatment in 44 PCa centers in Germany were recruited between July 2016 and April 2018. Multilevel regression models were applied to predict five pretherapeutic sr-FS (EPIC-26) scores based on clinical characteristics (standard set suggested by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement), sociodemographic characteristics, and center characteristics. Results Impaired pretherapeutic sr-FS tended to be associated with lower educational level and poorer disease characteristics-except for "urinary incontinence" which was only associated with age. Notably, age was a risk factor ("urinary incontinence," "urinary irritative/obstructive," "sexual") as well as a protective factor ("hormonal") for pretherapeutic sr-FS. Pretherapeutic sr-FS varies little across centers. Conclusions Pretherapeutic sr-FS varies by clinical patient characteristics and age as well as by socioeconomic status. The findings point out the benefit of collecting and considering socioeconomic information in addition to clinical and demographic patient characteristics for treatment decision-making and fair comparisons between health-care providers.

show abstract

Psychometric validation of the German version of the EPIC-26 questionnaire for patients with localized and locally advanced prostate cancer

Cited by 29 publications

References 16 publications

Use of psycho‐oncological services by prostate cancer patients: A multilevel analysis

Use of psycho‐oncological services by prostate cancer patients: A multilevel analysis

Self‐reported lack of energy or feeling depressed 12 months after treatment in men diagnosed with prostate cancer within a population‐based registry

Determinants of self-reported functional status (EPIC-26) in prostate cancer patients prior to treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About