Literature DB >> 32098731

Development and Internal Validation of a Web-based Tool to Predict Sexual, Urinary, and Bowel Function Longitudinally After Radiation Therapy, Surgery, or Observation.

Aaron A Laviana1, Zhiguo Zhao2, Li-Ching Huang2, Tatsuki Koyama2, Ralph Conwill3, Karen Hoffman4, Michael Goodman5, Ann S Hamilton6, Xiao-Cheng Wu7, Lisa E Paddock8, Antoinette Stroup8, Matthew R Cooperberg9, Mia Hashibe10, Brock B O'Neil11, Sherrie H Kaplan12, Sheldon Greenfield12, David F Penson13, Daniel A Barocas13.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making to guide treatment of localized prostate cancer requires delivery of the anticipated quality of life (QOL) outcomes of contemporary treatment options (including radical prostatectomy [RP], intensity-modulated radiation therapy [RT], and active surveillance [AS]). Predicting these QOL outcomes based on personalized features is necessary.
OBJECTIVE: To create an easy-to-use tool to predict personalized sexual, urinary, bowel, and hormonal function outcomes after RP, RT, and AS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective, population-based cohort study was conducted utilizing US cancer registries of 2563 men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer in 2011-2012. INTERVENTION: Patient-reported urinary, sexual, and bowel function up to 5 yr after treatment. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Patient-reported urinary, sexual, bowel, and hormonal function through 5 yr after treatment were collected using the 26-item Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC-26) questionnaire. Comprehensive models to predict domain scores were fit, which included age, race, D'Amico classification, body mass index, EPIC-26 baseline function, treatment, and standardized scores measuring comorbidity, general QOL, and psychosocial health. We reduced these models by removing the instrument scores and replacing D'Amico classification with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and Gleason score. For the final model, we performed bootstrap internal validation to assess model calibration from which an easy-to-use web-based tool was developed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The prediction models achieved bias-corrected R-squared values of 0.386, 0.232, 0.183, 0.214, and 0.309 for sexual function, urinary incontinence, urinary irritative, bowel, and hormonal domains, respectively. Differences in R-squared values between the comprehensive and parsimonious models were small in magnitude. Calibration was excellent. The web-based tool is available at https://statez.shinyapps.io/PCDSPred/.
CONCLUSIONS: Functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer can be predicted at the time of diagnosis based on age, race, PSA, biopsy grade, baseline function, and a general question regarding overall health. Providers and patients can use this prediction tool to inform shared decision making. PATIENT
SUMMARY: In this report, we studied patient-reported sexual, urinary, hormonal, and bowel function through 5 yr after treatment with radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, or active surveillance for localized prostate cancer. We developed a web-based predictive tool that can be used to predict one's outcomes after treatment based on age, race, prostate-specific antigen, biopsy grade, pretreatment baseline function, and a general question regarding overall health. We hope both patients and providers can use this tool to better understand expected outcomes after treatment, further enhancing shared decision making between providers and patients.
Copyright © 2020 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Comparative effectiveness; Disease risk; Nomogram; Patient-reported function; Prostate cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32098731      PMCID: PMC7384934          DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.02.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  25 in total

1.  Development and validation of an abbreviated version of the expanded prostate cancer index composite instrument for measuring health-related quality of life among prostate cancer survivors.

Authors:  Konrad M Szymanski; John T Wei; Rodney L Dunn; Martin G Sanda
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2010-03-28       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Pretreatment nomogram for prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy or external-beam radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  A V D'Amico; R Whittington; S B Malkowicz; J Fondurulia; M H Chen; I Kaplan; C J Beard; J E Tomaszewski; A A Renshaw; A Wein; C N Coleman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.

Authors:  J E Ware; C D Sherbourne
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  Follow-up of Prostatectomy versus Observation for Early Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Timothy J Wilt; Karen M Jones; Michael J Barry; Gerald L Andriole; Daniel Culkin; Thomas Wheeler; William J Aronson; Michael K Brawer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-07-13       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Association Between Radiation Therapy, Surgery, or Observation for Localized Prostate Cancer and Patient-Reported Outcomes After 3 Years.

Authors:  Daniel A Barocas; JoAnn Alvarez; Matthew J Resnick; Tatsuki Koyama; Karen E Hoffman; Mark D Tyson; Ralph Conwill; Dan McCollum; Matthew R Cooperberg; Michael Goodman; Sheldon Greenfield; Ann S Hamilton; Mia Hashibe; Sherrie H Kaplan; Lisa E Paddock; Antoinette M Stroup; Xiao-Cheng Wu; David F Penson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Interpretation of Domain Scores on the EPIC-How Does the Domain Score Translate into Functional Outcomes?

Authors:  Aaron A Laviana; Agustin Hernandez; Li-Ching Huang; Zhiguo Zhao; Tatsuki Koyama; Ralph Conwill; Karen Hoffman; Irene D Feurer; Michael Goodman; Ann S Hamilton; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Lisa E Paddock; Antoinette Stroup; Matthew R Cooperberg; Mia Hashibe; Brock B O'Neil; Sherrie H Kaplan; Sheldon Greenfield; David F Penson; Daniel A Barocas
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2019-06-19       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Impact of age on quality-of-life outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Lindsay A Hampson; Janet E Cowan; Shoujun Zhao; Peter R Carroll; Matthew R Cooperberg
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-02-02       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Multiple imputation using chained equations: Issues and guidance for practice.

Authors:  Ian R White; Patrick Royston; Angela M Wood
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-11-30       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs.

Authors:  C A McHorney; J E Ware; A E Raczek
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement.

Authors:  Gary S Collins; Johannes B Reitsma; Douglas G Altman; Karel G M Moons
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Pelvic Radiation Disease.

Authors:  Tarik Sammour; Arman A Kahokehr
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2022-02-12

2.  Development and Validation of Dynamic Multivariate Prediction Models of Sexual Function Recovery in Patients with Prostate Cancer Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy: Results from the MUSIC Statewide Collaborative.

Authors:  Nnenaya Agochukwu-Mmonu; Adharsh Murali; Daniela Wittmann; Brian Denton; Rodney L Dunn; James Montie; James Peabody; David Miller; Karandeep Singh
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2022-04-18

3.  A novel mHealth App (RyPros) for prostate cancer management: an accessibility and acceptability study.

Authors:  Gang Wang; Bing Wu; Jing Chen; Gang Yu; Danni Lin; Guoren Wang; Zhiming Bai
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-10
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.