Pain questionnaire performance in advanced prostate cancer: comparative results from two international clinical trials

The psychometric assessment of the older adult in pain: A systematic review of assessment instruments

We conducted a systematic review of pain assessment tools suitable for community-dwelling older adults. For this work, we conceptualized existing psychometric tools as falling under the following domains: a) pain intensity/characteristics; b) pain-related interference/disability; c) coping strategies; d) pain beliefs/attitudes/cognitions; e) pain-related fear and anxiety; and f) pain-specific emotional distress. Multi-dimensional and condition-specific tools were also considered. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures guided the evaluation of measurement properties, quality of evidence ratings, and recommendations for each measure. A search of Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, yielded a total of 21,755 records. Of these, 120 studies, focusing on 57 psychometric tools, were included in this review and categorized into the aforementioned pain assessment domains. The availability of psychometric studies with older adult populations was insufficient for most tools and the quality of evidence ranged from very low to high. Only a small number of tools met the criteria for a strong or tentative recommendation favoring their use. We identified gaps that should be addressed in future research.

Pain and Its Association with Survival for Black and White Individuals with Advanced Prostate Cancer in the United States

Bone pain is a well-known quality-of-life detriment for individuals with prostate cancer and is associated with survival. This study expands previous work into racial differences in multiple patient-reported dimensions of pain and the association between baseline and longitudinal pain and mortality. This is a prospective cohort study of individuals with newly diagnosed advanced prostate cancer enrolled in the International Registry for Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer (IRONMAN) from 2017 to 2023 at U.S. sites. Differences in four pain scores at study enrollment by race were investigated. Cox proportional hazards models and joint longitudinal survival models were fit for each of the scale scores to estimate HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association with all-cause mortality. The cohort included 879 individuals (20% self-identifying as Black) enrolled at 38 U.S. sites. Black participants had worse pain at baseline compared with White participants, most notably a higher average pain rating (mean 3.1 vs. 2.2 on a 10-point scale). For each pain scale, higher pain was associated with higher mortality after adjusting for measures of disease burden, particularly for severe bone pain compared with no pain (HR, 2.47; 95% CI: 1.44-4.22). The association between pain and all-cause mortality was stronger for participants with castration-resistant prostate cancer compared with those with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and was similar among Black and White participants. Overall, Black participants reported worse pain than White participants, and more severe pain was associated with higher mortality independent of clinical covariates for all pain scales.

SIGNIFICANCE

Black participants with advanced prostate cancer reported worse pain than White participants, and more pain was associated with worse survival. More holistic clinical assessments of pain in this population are needed to determine the factors upon which to intervene to improve quality of life and survivorship, particularly for Black individuals.

Comparison of the Novel Digital Multi-dimension Botong Score with the Brief Pain Inventory for Evaluating Cancer-Related Pain: A Randomized Crossover Trial

INTRODUCTION

Pain is a common symptom in patients with cancer, and comprehensive assessments of pain are crucial for decision-making of treatment regimens. This study aimed to compare the practicality of the novel digital multi-dimension Botong score (BTS) and the brief pain inventory (BPI) for evaluating cancer-related pain.

METHODS

This randomized crossover trial enrolled patients with cancer-related pain at the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Shandong First Medical University between July and December 2022. The participants were randomized 1:1 to BTS evaluation followed by BPI or vice versa. The consistency of BTS and BPI was analyzed, including pain score and the impact of pain on emotions and sleep. The convenience, patient preference, and the filling time of the two tools were compared. The accuracy of BTS in detecting breakthrough pain and neuropathic pain was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 308 patients with cancer-related pain were screened and 233 were finally included in the analysis. The Pearson correlation coefficients of pain score for BTS and BPI (4 relevant questions) were 0.583 for the worst pain score within 24 h, 0.394 for the mildest pain score within 24 h, 0.551 for the average pain score within 24 h, and 0.511 for the current pain score, respectively (all P < 0.01), indicating a positive correlation between the BTS and BPI pain scores. BTS was superior to BPI for filling time, convenience, and patient preference (191.03 vs. 256.76, 7.70 vs. 6.78, 7.58 vs. 6.70; all P < 0.01). The accuracy of BTS in detecting breakthrough pain and neuropathic pain was 98.28% and 97.42%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Pain scores evaluated by BTS have a positive correlation with those evaluated by BPI. BTS reduces the filling time, is more convenient to use, and is more favored by patients. In addition, BTS could help identify breakthrough pain and neuropathic pain.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chictr.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR220062624.

A Systematic Review to Evaluate Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for Metastatic Prostate Cancer According to the COnsensus-Based Standard for the Selection of Health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Methodology

Simple Summary

Metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) is one of the most common solid tumors in men and both the disease and the treatments affect patients’ quality of life (QoL). Patient-reported Outcome Measurements (PROMs) are important to assess the patient’s subjective experience with disease and treatment. Our aim is to appraise, compare, and summarize the psychometric properties of Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Our findings can improve patients’ care and their quality of life during treatment and the disease path.

Abstract

Introduction: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) represent important endpoints in metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa). However, the clinically valid and accurate measurement of health-related quality of life depends on the psychometric properties of the PROMs considered. Objective: To appraise, compare, and summarize the properties of PROMs in mPCa. Evidence acquisition: We performed a review of PROMs used in RCTs, including patients with mPCa, using Medline in September 2021, according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria. This systematic review is part of PIONEER (an IMI2 European network of excellence for big data in PCa). Results: The most frequently used PROMs in RCTs of patients with mPCa were the Functional Assessment for Cancer Therapy—Prostate (FACT-P) (n = 18), the Brief Pain Inventory—Short Form (BPI-SF) (n = 8), and the 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 two, one, and two studies reported the psychometric proprieties of FACT-P, Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), and BPI-SF, respectively. 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 by 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 in a very limited number of studies. Patient summary: In this paper, we review the psychometric properties of PROMs used with patients with mPCa to find the questionnaires that best assess patients’ QoL, in order to help professionals in their intervention and improve patients’ QoL. We recommend the use of BPI and FACT-P for their high content validity and internal consistency despite the limited number of studies considered.

A randomized controlled trial for acupuncture combined with conventional therapy in the treatment of pain caused by prostate cancer: Study protocol clinical trial (SPIRIT compliant)

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer refers to an epithelial malignant tumor that occurs in the prostate area. In recent years, with the improvement of people's living standards, the incidence of prostate cancer has gradually increased, which has greatly affected people's life and health and quality of life. Acupuncture has its unique advantages in treating cancer pain. We will evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture and moxibustion in the treatment of pain caused by prostate cancer using a clinical randomized parallel control method.

METHODS/DESIGN

This pragmatic randomized controlled trial will recruit 120 patients who are diagnosed with prostate cancer. Simple randomization to conventional drug treatment with a 1:1 allocation ratio will be used. Based on the patient's pain location and the primary lesion, the acupuncture needle insertion position was determined according to the principle of local selection of acupoints. All participants will continue to receive conventional drug treatment.

DISCUSSION

This trial may provide evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of acupuncture for pain caused by prostate cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, ChiCTR2000029801, Registered on 14 February 2020.

Assessment of the efficacy of Chinese patent medicine on treating pain caused by prostate cancer: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis

INTRODUCTION

With the development of economy and the acceleration of population aging, Prostate cancer (PCa) has presented a situation of high morbidity and mortality worldwide. The recent studies have shown that Chinese patent medicine combined with endocrine therapy in the treatment of prostate cancer not only plays a synergistic role in enhancing the efficacy. This review hopes to adopt meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Chinese patent medicine in the treatment of pain caused by prostate cancer and provides evidence for its application in clinical practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search for PubMed, Cochrane Library, AMED, EMbase, WorldSciNet; Nature, Science online and China Journal Full-text Database (CNKI), China Biomedical Literature CD-ROM Database (CBM), and related randomized controlled trials included in the China Resources Database. The time is limited from the construction of the library to June 2019. We will use the criteria provided by Cochrane 5.1.0 for quality assessment and risk assessment of the included studies, and use the Revman 5.3 and Stata13.0 software for meta-analysis of the effectiveness, recurrence rate, and symptom scores of pain caused by prostate cancer.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This systematic review will evaluate the efficacy and safety of Chinese patent medicine for pain caused by prostate cancer. Because all of the data used in this systematic review and meta-analysis has been published, this review does not require ethical approval. Furthermore, all data will be analyzed anonymously during the review process Trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42019131544.

Traditional Chinese medicine on treating pain caused by prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Prostate cancer is a male malignant tumor disease with high prevalence in recent years. Patients with advanced prostate cancer are more likely to have bone metastasis and have strong bone pain, and even lead to pathological fracture, which has a serious impact on the quality of life of patients. Traditional Chinese medicine has good clinical efficacy in treating pain caused by prostate cancer .This review hopes to adopt meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TCM in the treatment of pain caused by prostate cancer and provide evidence for its application in clinical practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search for PubMed, Cochrane Library, AMED, EMbase, WorldSciNet; Nature, Science online and China Journal Full-text Database (CNKI), China Biomedical Literature CD-ROM Database (CBM), and related randomized controlled trials included in the China Resources Database. The time is limited from the construction of the library to June 2019.We will use the criteria provided by Cochrane 5.1.0 for quality assessment and risk assessment of the included studies, and use the Revman 5.3 and Stata13.0 software for meta-analysis of the effectiveness, recurrence rate, and symptom scores of pain caused by prostate cancer.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This systematic review will evaluate the efficacy and safety of TCM for pain caused by prostate cancer. Because all of the data used in this systematic review and meta-analysis has been published, this review does not require ethical approval. Furthermore, all data will be analyzed anonymously during the review process Trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42019131544.

Acupuncture for pain caused by prostate cancer: Protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is a male malignant tumor disease with high prevalence in recent years. Patients with advanced prostate cancer are more likely to have bone metastasis and strong bone pain, and even lead to pathological fracture, which has a serious impact on the quality of life of patients. Acupuncture has good clinical efficacy in treating pain caused by prostate cancer. This review hopes to adopt meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture in the treatment of pain caused by prostate cancer and provides evidence for its application in clinical practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search for PubMed, Cochrane Library, AMED, EMbase, WorldSciNet, Nature, Science online and China Journal Full-text Database (CNKI), China Biomedical Literature CD-ROM Database (CBM), and related randomized controlled trials included in the China Resources Database. The time is limited from the construction of the library to November 2018. We will use the criteria provided by Cochrane 5.1.0 for quality assessment and risk assessment of the included studies, and use the Revman 5.3 and Stata 13.0 software for meta-analysis of the effectiveness, recurrence rate, and symptom scores of epididymitis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This systematic review will evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for pain caused by prostate cancer. Owing to the fact that all of the data used in this systematic review and meta-analysis have been published, this review does not require ethical approval. Furthermore, all data will be anonymously analyzed during the review process trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42018111550.

Improving and extending the McNemar test using the Bayesian method

The well-known McNemar test assesses the difference between two correlated proportions in binary matched-pairs data. To improve the power of the McNemar test and extend it to related problems, we reinterpret the test in a Bayesian framework. Replacing the prior density by a more realistic one realizes a powerful test. We numerically investigate different choices of the prior density, which strongly affects the performance of the derived test. Furthermore, we compare the maximum actual levels of the proposed test with those of existing tests. The proposed test is advantageous for its wide extendibility. We combine the evidence from multiple strata by an approach that largely differs from existing methods. The test statistic is the product of the posterior probabilities of the alternative models in the multiple strata. The proposed test is validated in practical examples. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Patient-reported outcome labeling claims and measurement approach for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treatments in the United States and European Union

Background

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and its treatment significantly affect health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Our objectives were to evaluate and compare patient-reported outcome (PRO) claims granted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) for 5 recently approved mCRPC treatments and to examine key characteristics, development, and measurement properties of the PRO measures supporting these claims against current regulatory standards.

Methods

Five products approved for treatment of mCRPC by the FDA and the EMA (2010–2013) were examined: enzalutamide, abiraterone, sipuleucel-T, cabazitaxel, and radium Ra 223 dichloride. United States (US) drug approval packages and European Public Assessment Reports were reviewed. PRO claims in the US labels and European Summaries of Product Characteristics and supporting measures were identified. For PRO measures supporting claims, a targeted literature review was conducted to identify information on key characteristics and measurement properties; this information was compared against FDA PRO guidance criteria.

Results

Nine PRO “claims” were granted across 4 of 5 products reviewed. The EMA granted more claims (7 claims—4 for pain, 3 for HRQOL) than the FDA (2 claims, both for pain). The Brief Pain Inventory–Short Form (BPI-SF) worst pain item supported most pain claims and was the only measure supporting US claims. EMA pain claims were supported by BPI-SF worst pain (n = 2) and average pain (n = 1) items and the McGill Pain Questionnaire Present Pain Intensity component (n = 1). EMA HRQOL claims were supported by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate Module (n = 2) and the EuroQol 5 Dimensions with visual analogue scale (n = 1). Pain and prostate cancer–specific HRQOL measures supporting claims met US regulatory standards for construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness; these properties were strongest for the BPI-SF worst pain item. Only the BPI-SF worst pain item has documented content validity in mCRPC.

Conclusions

PRO label claims were commonly granted across the mCRPC products reviewed. Among the measures reviewed, only the BPI-SF worst pain item supported US label claims. The BPI-SF worst pain item is recommended for pain assessment for the evaluation of new mCRPC treatments.