PD16-05 A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW TO EVALUATE PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES MEASURES (PROMS) FOR METASTATIC PROSTATE CANCER ACCORDING TO THE COSMIN METHODOLOGY: A PIONEER WP2 PROJECT

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023PD16-05 A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW TO EVALUATE PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES MEASURES (PROMS) FOR METASTATIC PROSTATE CANCER ACCORDING TO THE COSMIN METHODOLOGY: A PIONEER WP2 PROJECT Maria Monica Ratti, Giorgio Gandaglia, Elena Silvia Sisca, Alexandra Derevianko, Eugenia Alleva, Katharina Beyer, Charlotte Moss, Francesco Barletta, Simone Scuderi, Armando Stabile, Elio Mazzone, Muhammad Imran Omar, Steven Maclennan, Paula R. Williamson, Jihong Zong, Sara J. Maclennan, Nicolas Mottet, Philip Cornford, Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi, Mieke Van Hemelrijck, James N’Dow, Francesco Montorsi, and Alberto Briganti Maria Monica RattiMaria Monica Ratti More articles by this author , Giorgio GandagliaGiorgio Gandaglia More articles by this author , Elena Silvia SiscaElena Silvia Sisca More articles by this author , Alexandra DereviankoAlexandra Derevianko More articles by this author , Eugenia AllevaEugenia Alleva More articles by this author , Katharina BeyerKatharina Beyer More articles by this author , Charlotte MossCharlotte Moss More articles by this author , Francesco BarlettaFrancesco Barletta More articles by this author , Simone ScuderiSimone Scuderi More articles by this author , Armando StabileArmando Stabile More articles by this author , Elio MazzoneElio Mazzone More articles by this author , Muhammad Imran OmarMuhammad Imran Omar More articles by this author , Steven MaclennanSteven Maclennan More articles by this author , Paula R. WilliamsonPaula R. Williamson More articles by this author , Jihong ZongJihong Zong More articles by this author , Sara J. MaclennanSara J. Maclennan More articles by this author , Nicolas MottetNicolas Mottet More articles by this author , Philip CornfordPhilip Cornford More articles by this author , Olalekan Lee AiyegbusiOlalekan Lee Aiyegbusi More articles by this author , Mieke Van HemelrijckMieke Van Hemelrijck More articles by this author , James N’DowJames N’Dow More articles by this author , Francesco MontorsiFrancesco Montorsi More articles by this author , and Alberto BrigantiAlberto Briganti More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003271.05AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) represent important endpoints in metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) and in the assessment of Quality of Life (QoL). However, the accurate measurement of health-related quality of life depends on the psychometric properties of the PROMs considered. We aimed to appraise, compare, and summarize the properties of PROMs used in mPCa. METHODS: Within the framework of the work package 2 of PIONEER an IMI2 European network of excellence for big data in PCa, we assessed the psychometric properties of PROMs used in Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) including patients with mPCa. All available PROMs were identified through a systematic review of the literature performed on Medline in September 2021. All identified PROMs were systematically evaluated according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria by two independent Reviewers. RESULTS: Our systematic review identified only seven PROMs utilized in RCTs which focused on patients with mPCa. The most frequently used PROMs in RCTs of patients with mPCa were Functional Assessment for Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) (n=18), Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) (n=8) and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) (n=6). A total of 283 abstracts were screened and 12 full-text studies were evaluated. A total of 2, 1, and 2 studies reported the psychometric proprieties of FACT-P, Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and BPI-SF. FACT-P and BPI showed a high Content Validity, while BPI-SF showed a moderate Content Validity. FACT-P and BPI showed a high Internal Consistency (summarized Cronbach’s α 0.70-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: The use of BPI and FACT-P in mPCa patients is supported by their high content validity and internal consistency. Since BPI is focused on pain assessment, we recommend FACT-P, which provides a broader assessment of QoL and wellbeing, for the clinical evaluation of mPCa patients. However, these considerations have been elaborated on a very limited number of studies. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e491 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Maria Monica Ratti More articles by this author Giorgio Gandaglia More articles by this author Elena Silvia Sisca More articles by this author Alexandra Derevianko More articles by this author Eugenia Alleva More articles by this author Katharina Beyer More articles by this author Charlotte Moss More articles by this author Francesco Barletta More articles by this author Simone Scuderi More articles by this author Armando Stabile More articles by this author Elio Mazzone More articles by this author Muhammad Imran Omar More articles by this author Steven Maclennan More articles by this author Paula R. Williamson More articles by this author Jihong Zong More articles by this author Sara J. Maclennan More articles by this author Nicolas Mottet More articles by this author Philip Cornford More articles by this author Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi More articles by this author Mieke Van Hemelrijck More articles by this author James N’Dow More articles by this author Francesco Montorsi More articles by this author Alberto Briganti More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...