Search

Background: Understanding stakeholders' perception of cure in prostate cancer (PC) is essential to preparing for effective communication about emerging treatments with curative intent. This study used artificial intelligence (AI) for landscape review and linguistic analysis of definition, context and value of cure among stakeholders in PC., Materials and Methods: Subject-matter experts (SMEs) selected cure-related key words using Elicit, a semantic literature search engine, and extracted hits containing the key words from Medline, Sermo and Overton, representing academic researchers, health care providers (HCPs) and policymakers, respectively. NetBase Quid, a social media analytics and natural language processing tool, was used to carry out key word searches in social media (representing the general public). NetBase Quid analysed linguistics of key word-specific hit sets for key word count, geolocation and sentiments. SMEs qualitatively summarised key word-specific insights. Contextual terms frequently occurring with key words were identified and quantified., Results: SMEs identified seven key words applicable to PC (number of acquired hits) across four platforms: Cure (12429), Survivor (6063), Remission (1904), Survivorship (1179), Curative intent (432), No evidence of disease (381) and Complete remission (83). Most commonly used key words were Cure by the general public and HCPs (11815 and 224 hits), Survivorship by academic researchers and Survivor by policymakers (378 hits each). All stakeholders discussed Cure and cure-related key words primarily in early-stage PC and associated them with positive sentiments. All stakeholders defined cure differently but communicated about it in relation to disease measurements (e.g. prostate-specific antigen) or surgery. Stakeholders preferred different terms when discussing cure in PC: Cure (academic researchers), Cure rates (HCPs), Potential cure and Survivor/Survivorship (policymakers) and Cure and Survivor (general public)., Conclusion: This human-led, AI-assisted large-scale qualitative language-based research revealed that cure was commonly discussed by academic researchers, HCPs, policymakers and the general public, especially in early-stage PC. Stakeholders defined and contextualised cure in their communications differently and associated it with positive value., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: Background and purpose: Providing information to patients can improve their medical and psychological outcomes. We sought to identify core information needs common to most early-stage prostate cancer patients in participating countries. Material and methods: Convenience samples of patients treated 3–24months earlier were surveyed in Canada, England, Italy, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Netherlands, Spain, and Turkey. Each participant rated the importance of addressing each of 92 questions in the diagnosis-to-treatment decision interval (essential/desired/no opinion/avoid). Multivariate modelling determined the extent of variance accounted by covariates, and produced an unbiased prediction of the proportion of essential responses for each question. Results: Six hundred and fifty-nine patients responded (response rates 45–77%). On average, 35–53 questions were essential within each country; similar questions were essential to most patients in most countries. Beyond cross-country similarities, each country showed wide variability in the number and which questions were essential. Multivariate modelling showed an adjusted R-squared with predictors country, age, education, and treatment group of only 6% of the variance. A core of 20 questions were predicted to be essential to >2/3 of patients. Conclusions: Core information can be identified across countries. However, providing the core should only be a first step; each country should then provide information tailored to the needs of the individual patient. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The German prostate cancer study PREFERE (www.prefere.de) started in January 2014. It is the first randomised controlled and preference-based trial to investigate all four options available for the treatment of organ-confined prostate cancer. According to the "Interdisciplinary evidence-based S3 guideline for the early detection, diagnosis and treatment of the different stages of prostate cancer" [1], these options include: radical prostatectomy, external radiotherapy, brachytherapy and active surveillance. In the context of PREFERE preference-based means that potential study participants who do not agree to being randomised into all four treatment arms can maximally refuse two treatment arms. This poses a big challenge to the patient education strategy employed and the information material it requires. In order to inform patients in the context of the PREFERE trial patient education materials (patient leaflet and video) had to be designed that provide patients with balanced and guideline-based information about the disease and the treatment options available, about the need for randomisation and, in particular, about the PREFERE trial and support their individual preference finding and shared decision making for participating in the trial. An iterative structured approach was used to develop the information materials on the basis of a previous literature search. Six focus groups with a total of 40 participants from three different self-help groups, affected men that do not belong to a self-help group, healthy men as well as experts, the members of the steering committee of the PREFERE trial and a focus group consisting of 18 male and female urologists were involved in the development and testing of both the patient information leaflet and the patient video. Both the patient information leaflet and the video supporting preference finding and decision making for participating in the PREFERE trial were tested for understandability and suitability by using a questionnaire and conducting a comprehensive discussion. The results of these lay evaluations have been included in the final revision. Also, a communication resource for physicians has been created comprising all the essential aspects of the PREFERE patient education materials. A short course conducted all over Germany will focus on the process of patient teaching as well as patient education materials. Whether and to what extent the decision for participating in the PREFERE trial has actually been influenced 1) by what the treating physicians communicated to the patient and 2) by the patient education materials used is one of the subjects of a quality of life survey that will be conducted following treatment or - in the case of the active surveillance option - after randomisation during the PREFERE trial., (Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)