Quality of life in urologic cancer patients: importance of and satisfaction with specific quality of life domains

Physical Activity, Alcohol, and Cigarette Use in Urological Cancer Patients over Time since Diagnosis

Urological cancers represent a substantial global public health concern, exerting far-reaching effects on both individuals and their families. There is an urgent need to comprehensively understand the transformations in patients' lifestyles and behaviors, given their critical role in the treatment process and overall well-being. This study, involving 128 urological cancer patients, aims to investigate changes in physical activity levels, problematic drinking behaviors assessed through the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), and smoking habits assessed using the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) over four distinct time intervals over the subsequent three years from the time of diagnosis and among individuals diagnosed more than three years ago. The results reveal a significant decrease in physical activity levels between study intervals (p < 0.0001), declining from 69% to 45% between the first and second post-diagnosis assessments. Furthermore, the highest levels of problematic substance use, indicated by mean scores, were noted in the first year following diagnosis (AUDIT: 4.20, p = 0.01; FTND: 4.83, p = 0.08). Given the significant impact of physical activity on the prospects of recovery, it is imperative to delve more deeply into the factors contributing to this decline and devise targeted interventions for its improvement. In the context of substance use, it is essential to ascertain whether the initially high levels are a result of coping with the cancer diagnosis or represent a turning point at which patients modify their behaviors and cease their addiction. A more thorough understanding of this phenomenon would enhance the effectiveness of precisely focused interventions.

Loneliness, spiritual well-being, and death perception, as well as their risk factors in urological cancer patients

Cancer patients commonly suffer from loneliness, poor spiritual status, and fear of death; however, these evaluations are rarely revealed in urological cancer patients. Thus, this study aimed to assess the loneliness, spiritual well-being, and death perception, as well as their risk factors in urological cancer patients. A total of 324 urological (including renal, bladder, and prostate) cancer patients and 100 healthy controls were included. The University of California and Los Angeles loneliness scale (UCLA-LS), functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-spiritual well-being (FACIT-Sp), and death attitude profile-revised (DAP-R) scores were evaluated. The results showed that the UCLA-LS score was higher, but the FACIT-Sp score was lower in urological cancer patients than in healthy controls. According to the DAP-R score, fear of death, death avoidance, and approaching death acceptance were elevated, but neutral acceptance was lower in urological cancer patients than in healthy controls. Among urological cancer patients, the UCLA-LS score was highest but the FACIT-Sp score was lowest in bladder cancer patients; regarding the DAP-R score, fear of death and death avoidance were highest, but approaching death acceptance was lowest in bladder cancer patients. Interestingly, single/divorced/widowed status, bladder cancer diagnosis, higher pathological grade, surgery, systemic treatment, and local treatment were independent factors for higher UCLA-LS score or lower FACIT-Sp score. In conclusion, urological cancer (especially bladder cancer) patients bear increased loneliness and reduced spiritual well-being; they also carry higher fear of death, death avoidance, and approaching death acceptance but lower neutral acceptance of death.

The Relationship between Supportive Care Needs and Health-Related Quality of Life in Cancer Patients

The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between quality of life (QoL) and supportive care needs (SCNs) in cancer patients. It is difficult to relate SCNs to detriments in QoL since SCNs and QoL assessment tools generally comprise different dimensions that cannot be directly related to each other. Therefore, we developed a short questionnaire with eight dimensions for uniformly measuring SCNs, QoL, and the subjective importance of these dimensions. A total of 1108 cancer patients with mixed diagnoses assessed eight dimensions of health-related QoL concerning SCNs, satisfaction, and importance. Among the eight dimensions of QoL, physical functioning received the highest SCN assessments (M = 3.4), while autonomy (M = 20.7) and social relationships (M = 1.88) were the dimensions with the lowest SCN mean scores on the 1-5 scale. For each of the eight dimensions, high levels of SCNs were reported by those patients who had low levels of satisfaction with that dimension (r between -0.32 and -0.66). The subjective importance of the dimensions was not consistently correlated with SCNs (r between -0.19 and 0.20). Females reported higher SCNs than males in six of the eight specific dimensions. Patients with prostate and male genital cancers reported the lowest SCNs. These results suggest gender-specific SCN patterns that warrant further exploration. This study highlights the value of a unified assessment instrument for SCNs and QoL, providing a robust basis for future cancer care strategies.

Measuring the Wellbeing of Cancer Patients with Generic and Disease-Specific Instruments

Different wellbeing measures have been used among cancer patients. This study aimed to first investigate the sensitivity of health state utility (HSU), capability, and subjective wellbeing (SWB) instruments in cancer. A cancer-specific instrument (QLQ-C30) was included and transferred onto the cancer-specific HSU scores. Furthermore, it examined the relative importance of key life domains explaining overall life satisfaction. Data were drawn from the Multi-instrument Comparison survey. Linear regression was used to explore the extent to which the QLQ-C30 sub-scales explain HSU and SWB. Kernel-based Regularized Least Squares (KRLS), a machine learning method, was used to explore the life domain importance of cancer patients. As expected, the QLQ-C30 sub-scales explained the vast majority of the variance in its derived cancer-specific HSU (R² = 0.96), followed by generic HSU instruments (R² of 0.65-0.73) and SWB and capability instruments (R² of 0.33-0.48). The cancer-specific measure was more closely correlated with generic HSU than SWB measures, owing to the construction of these instruments. In addition to health, life achievements, relationships, the standard of living, and future security all play an important role in explaining the overall life satisfaction of cancer patients.

Importance of and Satisfaction with Domains of Health-Related Quality of Life in Cancer Rehabilitation

Instruments for measuring health-related quality of life (HRQoL) generally do not consider the subjective importance of the dimensions they comprise. The aims of this study were to analyze the subjectively perceived importance of the dimension of HRQoL and to investigate their relationship to the satisfaction ratings with these dimensions. A total of 1108 participants enrolled in a cancer rehabilitation program were surveyed. Patients rated eight dimensions of HRQoL (physical functioning, autonomy, emotional stability, cognitive functioning, social relationships, vitality, absence of pain, and sleep quality), as well as global health in terms of how important those dimensions are to them, and how satisfied they are with them. The dimensions with the highest importance ratings were autonomy and social relationships. There were only small sex differences in the importance ratings, but younger patients rated health as being more important than older patients did. The correlations between the importance ratings and the satisfaction ratings of the specific HRQoL dimensions ranged from −0.06 to 0.40, and the correlation between importance and satisfaction for global health was 0.01. Importance ratings provide relevant information for health care professionals in addition to the HRQoL assessments in the context of cancer rehabilitation.