Nora Tabea Sibert1, Sebastian Dieng2, Alisa Oesterle2, Günter Feick3, Günther Carl4, Thomas Steiner5, Jörg Minner6, Florian Roghmann7, Björn Kaftan8, Friedemann Zengerling9, Andreas Hinkel10, Burkhard Beyer11, Axel Heidenreich12, Nina Harke13, Bernhard Brehmer14, Jesco Pfitzenmaier15, Jan Fichtner16, Andreas Neisius17, Peter Hammerer18, Simone Wesselmann19, Christoph Kowalski19. 1. German Cancer Society, Kuno-Fischer-Strasse 8, Berlin, 14057, Germany. sibert@krebsgesellschaft.de. 2. OnkoZert, Neu-Ulm, Germany. 3. Federal Association of German Prostate Cancer Patient Support Groups, Bonn, Germany. 4. Help for Prostate Cancer Patients (Förderverein Hilfe bei Prostatakrebs e.V.-FHbP), Tornesch, Germany. 5. Helios Klinikum Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany. 6. Hegau-Bodensee-Klinikum Singen, Singen, Germany. 7. Marien Hospital, Ruhr-University Bochum, Herne, Germany. 8. Städtisches Klinikum Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany. 9. Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Germany. 10. Franziskus Hospital, Bielefeld, Germany. 11. Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. 12. Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany. 13. University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany. 14. Diaconal Hospital of Schwäbisch Hall, Schwäbisch Hall, Germany. 15. Evangelisches Klinikum Bethel Johannesstift, Bielefeld, Germany. 16. Johanniter Krankenhaus Oberhausen, Oberhausen, Germany. 17. Barmherzige Brüder Trier, Trier, Germany. 18. Städtisches Klinikum Braunschweig, Brunswick, Germany. 19. German Cancer Society, Kuno-Fischer-Strasse 8, Berlin, 14057, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: For patients with prostate cancer, validated and reliable instruments are essential for measuring patient-reported outcomes. The aim of this study was to validate the German version of the widely established Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite with 26 items (EPIC-26). METHODS: A German translation of the original questionnaire was tested in 3094 patients with localized or locally advanced (any T, any N and M0) prostate cancer with treatment intent (including radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy, active surveillance, watchful waiting). They completed the EPIC-26 questionnaire before treatment. A total of 521 of them also completed a questionnaire 12 months afterward. Internal consistency, sensitivity to change, and construct validity were assessed. RESULTS: The internal consistency of all domains was sufficient (Cronbach's alpha between 0.64 and 0.93). Item-to-scale correlation coefficients showed acceptable associations between items and their domain score (all > 0.30), with the lowest scores for "bloody stools" (r = 0.37) and "breast problems" (r = 0.32). Confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis confirmed the five-dimension structure of the EPIC-26 (comparative fit index 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric evaluation suggests that the German version of the EPIC-26 is a well-constructed instrument for measuring patient-reported health-related symptoms in patients with prostate cancer.
PURPOSE: For patients with prostate cancer, validated and reliable instruments are essential for measuring patient-reported outcomes. The aim of this study was to validate the German version of the widely established Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite with 26 items (EPIC-26). METHODS: A German translation of the original questionnaire was tested in 3094 patients with localized or locally advanced (any T, any N and M0) prostate cancer with treatment intent (including radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy, active surveillance, watchful waiting). They completed the EPIC-26 questionnaire before treatment. A total of 521 of them also completed a questionnaire 12 months afterward. Internal consistency, sensitivity to change, and construct validity were assessed. RESULTS: The internal consistency of all domains was sufficient (Cronbach's alpha between 0.64 and 0.93). Item-to-scale correlation coefficients showed acceptable associations between items and their domain score (all > 0.30), with the lowest scores for "bloody stools" (r = 0.37) and "breast problems" (r = 0.32). Confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis confirmed the five-dimension structure of the EPIC-26 (comparative fit index 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric evaluation suggests that the German version of the EPIC-26 is a well-constructed instrument for measuring patient-reported health-related symptoms in patients with prostate cancer.
Authors: Mohannad A Awad; Luke Hallgarth; Ghassan A Barayan; Mohammed Shahait; Ramiz Abu-Hijlih; Ala'a Farkouh; Raed A Azhar; Musab M Alghamdi; Ahmad Bugis; Said Yaiesh; Saad Aldousari; Alaeddin Barham; Mohamed Saed; Ayman Moussa; Waleed Hassen; Shelly Naud; Mark K Plante; Richard Grunert Journal: Arab J Urol Date: 2021-11-28
Authors: Clara Breidenbach; Rebecca Roth; Lena Ansmann; Simone Wesselmann; Sebastian Dieng; Ernst-Günther Carl; Günter Feick; Alisa Oesterle; Peter Bach; Burkhard Beyer; Rainer Borowitz; Jörg Erdmann; Frank Kunath; Simba-Joshua Oostdam; Igor Tsaur; Friedemann Zengerling; Christoph Kowalski Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2020-03-31 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Rebecca Roth; Sebastian Dieng; Alisa Oesterle; Günter Feick; Günther Carl; Andreas Hinkel; Thomas Steiner; Björn Theodor Kaftan; Frank Kunath; Boris Hadaschik; Simba-Joshua Oostdam; Rein Jüri Palisaar; Mateusz Koralewski; Burkhard Beyer; Björn Haben; Igor Tsaur; Simone Wesselmann; Christoph Kowalski Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-02-10 Impact factor: 4.226