Individualized center-based analysis of urinary and sexual functional outcome after radical prostatectomy based on the prostate cancer outcome study: a post hoc pathway to patient outcome measurement analysis for quality improvement

PURPOSE

We evaluate differences of patient-reported outcome measurements (PROM) based urinary continence and sexual function 12 months after radical prostatectomy (RPE) based on perioperative, surgical, and patient-specific characteristics in a large European academic urology center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All men enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Outcome Study (PCO) study who were treated with RPE between 2017 and 2021 completed EPIC-26 information surveys before and 12 months after RPE. Survey data were linked to clinical data of our institution. Logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the correlation between individual surgeons, patient characteristics, patient clinical data, and their urinary continence and sexual function.

RESULTS

In total, data of 429 men were analyzed: unstratified mean (SD) EPIC-26 domain score for urinary function decreased from 93.3 (0.7) to 60.4 (1.5) one year after RPE, respectively for sexual function from 64.95 (1.6) to 23.24 (1.1). Patients with preoperative adequate urinary function (EPIC-26 score > 80) reported significantly different mean urinary function scores between 53.35 (28.88) and 66.25 (25.15), p= 0.001, stratified by surgeons experience. On binary logistic regression analyses, only nerve sparing techniques (OR: 1,83, 95% CI: 1.01;3.21; p = 0.045) and low body mass index (OR: 0.91, CI: 0.85;0.99, p= 0.032) predicted adequate postoperative urinary function.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show how using provider-specific data from a larger cohort study enables to develop institution-specific analysis for functional outcomes after RPE. These models can be used for internal quality improvement as well as enhanced and provider-specific patient communication and shared decision making.

Prediction models of incontinence and sexual function one year after radical prostatectomy based on data from 20 164 prostate cancer patients

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.

Variation across operating sites in urinary and sexual outcomes after radical prostatectomy in localized and locally advanced prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The extent of variation in urinary and sexual functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RPE) between prostate cancer (PC) operating sites remains unknown. Therefore, this analysis aims to compare casemix-adjusted functional outcomes (EPIC-26 scores incontinence, irritative/obstructive function and sexual function) between operating sites 12 months after RPE.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analysis of a cohort of 7065 men treated with RPE at 88 operating sites (prostate cancer centers, "PCCs") between 2016 and 2019. Patients completed EPIC-26 and sociodemographic information surveys at baseline and 12 months after RPE. Survey data were linked to clinical data. EPIC-26 domain scores at 12 months after RPE were adjusted for relevant confounders (including baseline domain score, clinical and sociodemographic information) using regression analysis. Differences between sites were described using minimal important differences (MIDs) and interquartile ranges (IQR). The effects of casemix adjustment on the score results were described using Cohen's d and MIDs.

RESULTS

Adjusted domain scores at 12 months varied between sites, with IQRs of 66-78 (incontinence), 89-92 (irritative/obstructive function), and 20-29 (sexual function). Changes in domain scores after casemix adjustment for sites ≥ 1 MID were noted for the incontinence domain (six sites). Cohen's d ranged between - 0.07 (incontinence) and - 0.2 (sexual function), indicating a small to medium effect of casemix adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

Variation between sites was greatest in the incontinence and sexual function domains for RPE patients. Future research will need to identify the factors contributing to this variation.

TRIAL REGISTRY

The study is registered at the German Clinical Trial Registry ( https://www.drks.de/drks_web/ ) with the following ID: DRKS00010774.

Comparing quality of care using patient-reported outcomes in patients with localized prostate cancer

Introduction

The Prostate Cancer Outcomes (PCO) study, funded by the Movember Foundation, has been recruiting patients in prostate cancer centers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland certified by the German Cancer Society (DKG) since July 2016. It is a joint project of the Federal Prostate Cancer Self-Help Association (BPS), DKG, OnkoZert and meanwhile over 100 participating centers. The aim of the study is to compare the outcome quality between the centers for mutual learning and to use patient-specific evaluations for treatment planning.

Materials and Methods

The protocol was set up according to the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) Standard Data Set with patients filling out the EPIC-26 before and at least once (after 12 months) after treatment. The EPIC-26 includes the functional outcome domains 'incontinence', 'irritative / obstructive', 'gastrointestinal', 'sexuality', and 'hormonal “. Questionnaire data are linked to disease and treatment data in the centers. The EPIC-26 domain scores are then analyzed centrally to provide case mix adjusted center comparisons stratified by treatment.

Results

As of May 2019, 11,303 patients were recruited the PCO study. For 3,953 of them, results of the follow-up survey after 12 months were available for analysis. The results show changes in the scores similar (e.g. an adjusted decrease in the incontinence domain by 15 points for patients receiving radical prostatectomy) to what was known from the international literature 12 months after primary therapy. Results vary significantly between the centers, suggesting differences between providers that warrant improvement interventions.

Conclusions

The results are used to develop strategies for improvement together with providers and patients and to implement patient-specific evaluations for treatment planning in everyday treatment.

Key messages

A patient-reported outcome routine was successfully implemented in over 100 prostate cancer units in central Europe adopting the same data infrastructure. Benchmarking results demonstrate meaningfully differences across units that warrant improvement interventions.

Prostate Cancer Unit Initiative in Europe: A position paper by the European School of Oncology

The Prostate Cancer Programme of the European School of Oncology developed the concept of specialised interdisciplinary and multiprofessional prostate cancer care to be formalized in Prostate Cancer Units (PCU). After the publication in 2011 of the collaborative article "The Requirements of a Specialist Prostate Cancer Unit: A Discussion Paper from the European School of Oncology", in 2012 the PCU Initiative in Europe was launched. A multiprofessional Task Force of internationally recognized opinion leaders, among whom representatives of scientific societies, and patient advocates gathered to set standards for quality comprehensive prostate cancer care and designate care pathways in PCUs. The result was a consensus on 40 mandatory and recommended standards and items, covering several macro-areas, from general requirements to personnel to organization and case management. This position paper describes the relevant, feasible and applicable core criteria for defining PCUs in most European countries delivered by PCU Initiative in Europe Task Force.