Christian J Nelson1, Tatiana D Starr2, Richard J Macchia3,4,5, Llewellyn Hyacinthe4, Steven Friedman6, Andrew J Roth2. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Ave., 7th Floor, New York, NY, 10022, USA. nelsonc@mskcc.org. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Ave., 7th Floor, New York, NY, 10022, USA. 3. Department of Urology, Cleveland Clinic, Weston, FL, USA. 4. Department of Urology, Kings County Hospital Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA. 5. Department of Urology, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA. 6. Department of Psychiatry, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The National Cancer Institute has highlighted the need for psychosocial research to focus on Black cancer patients. This applies to Black men with prostate cancer, as there is little systematic research concerning psychological distress in these men. This study was designed to validate the Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer (MAX-PC) in Black men with prostate cancer to help facilitate research within this group. METHODS: At three institutions, Black men with prostate cancer (n = 101) completed the MAX-PC, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Quality of Life Questionnaire, and the Distress Thermometer. RESULTS: The average age of the 101 men was 66 (SD = 10) and 58 % had early-stage disease. The MAX-PC and its subscales (Prostate Cancer Anxiety, PSA Anxiety, and Fear of Recurrence) produced strong coefficient alphas (0.89, 0.88, 0.71, and 0.77, respectively). Factor analysis supported the three-factor structure of the scale established in earlier findings. The MAX-PC also demonstrated strong validity. MAX-PC total scores correlated highly with the Anxiety subscale of the HADS (r = 0.59, p < 0.01) and the FACT Emotional Well-Being subscale (r = -0.55, p < 0.01). Demonstrating discriminant validity, the correlation with the HADS Depression subscale (r = 0.40, p < 0.01) and the CES-D (r = 0.42, p < 0.01) was lower compared to that with the HADS Anxiety subscale. CONCLUSIONS: The MAX-PC is valid and reliable in Black men with prostate cancer. We hope the validation of this scale in Black men will help facilitate psychosocial research in this group that is disproportionately adversely affected by this cancer.
PURPOSE: The National Cancer Institute has highlighted the need for psychosocial research to focus on Black cancerpatients. This applies to Black men with prostate cancer, as there is little systematic research concerning psychological distress in these men. This study was designed to validate the Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer (MAX-PC) in Black men with prostate cancer to help facilitate research within this group. METHODS: At three institutions, Black men with prostate cancer (n = 101) completed the MAX-PC, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Quality of Life Questionnaire, and the Distress Thermometer. RESULTS: The average age of the 101 men was 66 (SD = 10) and 58 % had early-stage disease. The MAX-PC and its subscales (Prostate Cancer Anxiety, PSAAnxiety, and Fear of Recurrence) produced strong coefficient alphas (0.89, 0.88, 0.71, and 0.77, respectively). Factor analysis supported the three-factor structure of the scale established in earlier findings. The MAX-PC also demonstrated strong validity. MAX-PC total scores correlated highly with the Anxiety subscale of the HADS (r = 0.59, p < 0.01) and the FACT Emotional Well-Being subscale (r = -0.55, p < 0.01). Demonstrating discriminant validity, the correlation with the HADS Depression subscale (r = 0.40, p < 0.01) and the CES-D (r = 0.42, p < 0.01) was lower compared to that with the HADS Anxiety subscale. CONCLUSIONS: The MAX-PC is valid and reliable in Black men with prostate cancer. We hope the validation of this scale in Black men will help facilitate psychosocial research in this group that is disproportionately adversely affected by this cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
Anxiety; Black men; Disparities; Prostate cancer; Psychosocial research; Validation
Authors: Praful Ravi; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Florian Roghmann; Giorgio Gandaglia; Toni K Choueiri; Mani Menon; Rana R McKay; Paul L Nguyen; Jesse D Sammon; Shyam Sukumar; Briony Varda; Steven L Chang; Adam S Kibel; Maxine Sun; Quoc-Dien Trinh Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Stephen J Lepore; Randi L Wolf; Charles E Basch; Melissa Godfrey; Emma McGinty; Celia Shmukler; Ralph Ullman; Nigel Thomas; Sally Weinrich Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2012-12
Authors: Andrew Roth; Christian J Nelson; Barry Rosenfeld; Adam Warshowski; Noelle O'Shea; Howard Scher; Jimmie C Holland; Susan Slovin; Tracy Curley-Smart; Thomas Reynolds; William Breitbart Journal: Psychosomatics Date: 2006 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.386
Authors: Andrew J Roth; Barry Rosenfeld; Alice B Kornblith; Christopher Gibson; Howard I Scher; Tracy Curley-Smart; Jimmie C Holland; William Breitbart Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-06-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Daniel O Erim; Antonia V Bennett; Bradley N Gaynes; Ram Sankar Basak; Deborah Usinger; Ronald C Chen Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-05-16 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Qingmei Huang; Ping Jiang; Zijun Zhang; Jie Luo; Yun Dai; Li Zheng; Wei Wang Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-06-22 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Laura C Bouchard; Betina Yanez; Jason R Dahn; Sarah C Flury; Kent T Perry; David C Mohr; Frank J Penedo Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2019-07-16 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Daniel O Erim; Antonia V Bennett; Bradley N Gaynes; Ram S Basak; Deborah Usinger; Ronald C Chen Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2020-04-23 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Ernesto Sánchez Sánchez; Antonio Carlos González Baena; Carlos González Cáliz; Fernando Caballero Paredes; José Luis Moyano Calvo; Jesús Castiñeiras Fernández Journal: Prostate Cancer Date: 2020-01-29