Search

Objective. Due to various long‐term consequences of the disease, cancer survivors (CS) can experience incompatibilities between areas of life (work, family, household, leisure time, and disease) that can be associated with reduced satisfaction with these areas of life. To be able to assess such incompatibilities quantitatively, a six‐item instrument (INCOMPAT‐CS) was developed and psychometrically evaluated. Methods. Based on relevant theories, a multidisciplinary team developed the items of the INCOMPAT‐CS. Descriptive analyses, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, as well as validity and reliability assessments were conducted using survey data from n = 293 CS collected as part of the CARES study. Incompatibilities between areas of life were measured with the newly developed INCOMPAT‐CS instrument. Results. A one component solution with satisfactory model fit (normed χ2 = 1.90, RMSEA = 0.06, CFI = 0.99, and TLI = 0.97) was identified in exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The INCOMPAT‐CS demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.790) and high test‐retest reliability ρ = 0.569 (p < 0.001). Convergent validity could be demonstrated (CR = 0.858 and AVE = 0.506). Hypothesis‐consistent correlations with role and social functioning measures further indicate convergent validity. Conclusions. The INCOMPAT‐CS is useful to assess incompatibilities among areas of life in CS quantitatively. Moreover, it helps to reveal the areas negatively affected due to incompatibilities. This short instrument can be useful in aftercare or psychosocial support interventions to detect incompatibilities and work towards reducing them as a consequence to increase CS' wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Incontinence and sexual dysfunction are long-lasting side effects after surgical treatment (radical prostatectomy, RP) of prostate cancer (PC). For an informed treatment decision, physicians and patients should discuss expected impairments. Therefore, this paper firstly aims to develop and validate prognostic models that predict incontinence and sexual function of PC patients one year after RP and secondly to provide an online decision making tool. Methods: Observational cohorts of PC patients treated between July 2016 and March 2021 in Germany were used. Models to predict functional outcomes one year after RP measured by the EPIC-26 questionnaire were developed using lasso regression, 80–20 splitting of the data set and 10-fold cross validation. To assess performance, R2, RMSE, analysis of residuals and calibration-in-the-large were applied. Final models were externally temporally validated. Additionally, percentages of functional impairment (pad use for incontinence and firmness of erection for sexual score) per score decile were calculated to be used together with the prediction models. Results: For model development and internal as well as external validation, samples of 11 355 and 8 809 patients were analysed. Results from the internal validation (incontinence: R2 = 0.12, RMSE = 25.40, sexual function: R2 = 0.23, RMSE = 21.44) were comparable with those of the external validation. Residual analysis and calibration-in-the-large showed good results. The prediction tool is freely accessible: https://nora-tabea.shinyapps.io/EPIC-26-Prediction/. Conclusion: The final models showed appropriate predictive properties and can be used together with the calculated risks for specific functional impairments. Main strengths are the large study sample (> 20 000) and the inclusion of an external validation. The models incorporate meaningful and clinically available predictors ensuring an easy implementation. All predictions are displayed together with risks of frequent impairments such as pad use or erectile dysfunction such that the developed online tool provides a detailed and informative overview for clinicians as well as patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In this observational study, patient-reported outcomes and short-term clinical outcome parameters in patients with colorectal cancer were studied 12 months after the start of treatment. Outcomes were also compared across German Certified Colorectal Cancer Centers. Methods: Data were collected from 4239 patients with colorectal cancer who had undergone elective tumor resection in one of 102 colorectal cancer centers and had responded to a quality-of-life questionnaire before treatment (EORTC QLQ-C30 and -CR29). 3142 (74.1%) of these patients completed a post-treatment questionnaire 12 months later. Correlation analyses were calculated and case-mix adjusted comparisons across centers were made for selected patient-reported outcomes, anastomotic insufficiency, and 30-day mortality. Results: At 12 months, mild improvements were seen in mean quality-of-life scores (66 vs. 62 points), constipation (16 vs. 19), and abdominal pain (15 vs. 17). Worsening was seen in physical function (75 vs. 82) and pain (22 vs. 19). Better patient-reported outcomes at 12 months were associated with better scores before treatment. Better results in at least three of the five scores were associated with male sex, higher educational level, higher age, and private health insurance. Major worsening of fecal incontinence was seen among patients with rectal cancer without a stoma. The largest differences across centers were found with respect to physical function. Anastomotic insufficiency was found in 4.3% of colon cancer patients and 8.2% of rectal cancer patients. 1.9% of patients died within 30 days after their resection. Conclusion: Clinicians can use these findings to identify patients at higher risk for poorer patient-reported outcomes. The differences among cancer centers that were found imply that measures for quality improvement would be desirable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]