Abstract
Background
In the field of uro-oncology, the assessment of quality of life (QoL) is considered
an integral part of clinical research. Because of the rarity of penile cancer, there
is currently no cancer-specific questionnaire module available to assess the tumor-specific
loss of function and symptoms in terms of influencing QoL. The aim of the study was
to apply a validated questionnaire (European Organization for Research and Treatment
of Cancer [EORTC] QLQ-C30) in a population of patients diagnosed with penile cancer
and to compare these results to reference data of the general population. We also
developed a new unvalidated questionnaire (Quality of Life Questionnaire–Penile Cancer–Rostock,
HRO-PE29) in this population to promote QoL research in the field of uro-oncology.
Patients and Methods
Cross-sectional evaluation of patients with penile cancer after local surgical treatment
(n = 76) was performed using EORTC QLQ-C30 and HRO-PE29. The QLQ-C30 provides information
on QoL, functional scales, symptom scales, and 6 individual items (inappetence, insomnia,
dyspnea, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). Cancer-specific functional
and symptom scales (HRO-PE29) were then established for use in different disease states
and forms of treatment. These provide information on QoL as well as on cancer-specific
function and symptom scores.
Results
The global QoL score was 54, which corresponds to an average QoL (score 0-100) and
was well below the age-standardized average for German patients. For the general function
scores, the following mean values were determined: physical ( = 73), social ( = 61), emotional ( = 60), cognitive functioning ( = 69), and role function ( = 63). With regard to the general symptom scores and the individual items, the following
values were found: fatigue ( = 35), nausea ( = 6), pain ( = 27), dyspnea ( = 23), insomnia ( = 41), loss of appetite ( = 25), constipation ( = 19), diarrhea ( = 10), and financial difficulties ( = 25). The following mean values were found for the cancer-specific functional scores:
voiding ( = 77), sexuality ( = 69, function and pleasure), body image ( = 64), lymphedema ( = 75), future prospects ( = 72), and adverse effects of systemic treatment ( = 73).
Conclusion
Defects of the external genitalia have implications for identity, personality, and
interpersonal relationships. The mental stress of these patients results from the
diagnosis of cancer as well as the partly mutilating treatment. Reconstructive surgery
in penile cancer patients promises to maintain sexual and micturition function and
thus improve QoL. Cancer-specific functional losses can be sufficiently named and
their influence on QoL determined.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Clinical Genitourinary CancerAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Zentrum für Krebsregisterdaten.(Available at:)http://www.krebsdaten.de/Krebs/SiteGlobals/Forms/Datenbankabfrage/datenbankabfrage_stufe1_form.htmlDate accessed: August 21, 2018
- Cancer incidence in five continents. IARC Scientific Publication 155.International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon2002
- Urological neoplasia: penile cancer—clinical management.in: Reynar L. Brewster S. Biers S. Oxford handbook of urology. Oxford University Press, Oxford2013: 374-376
- EAU guidelines on penile cancer: 2014 update.Eur Urol. 2014; 67: 142-150
- EORTC QLQ-C30 [questionnaire].(Available at:)http://groups.eortc.be/qol/eortc-qlq-c30Date accessed: August 21, 2018
- Psychoonkologische Diagnostik, Beratung und Behandlung von erwachsenen Krebspatienten. Leitlinienreport 1.0, 2014. Registernummer 032/051OL.(Available at:)http://leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/Leitlinien.7.0.htmlDate accessed: August 21, 2018
- Reference data for the quality of life questionnaire EORTC QLQ-C30 in the general German population.Eur J Cancer. 2001; 37: 1345-1351
- Identifying the needs of penile cancer sufferers: a systematic review of the quality of life, psychosexual and psychosocial literature in penile cancer.BMC Urol. 2009; 9: 8
- Identifying psychosocial distress and stressors using distress-screening instruments in patients with localized and advanced penile cancer.Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2017; 15: 605-609
- Predictive factors for local recurrence after glansectomy and neoglans reconstruction for penile squamous cell carcinoma.Urol Oncol. 2018; 36: 141-146
- Local treatment of penile cancer.Urologe A. 2018; 57: 423-427
- Reconstructive surgery in penile cancer.Urologe A. 2018; 57: 428-434
- Psychosocial effects in patients with penile cancer: a systematic review.Urologe A. 2018; 57: 444-452
- Quality of life in penile carcinoma patients—post-total penectomy.Cent Eur J Urol. 2016; 69: 204-211
- General state of health and psychological well being in patients after surgery for urological malignant neoplasms.Urol Int. 2000; 65: 130-134
- Sexual outcomes after partial penectomy for penile cancer: results from a multi-institutional study.Asian J Androl. 2017; 19: 57-61
- Sexual function after partial penectomy for penile cancer.Urology. 2005; 66: 1292-1295
- Quality of life after partial penectomy for penile carcinoma.Urology. 1997; 50: 593-596
- Quality of life for patients treated for penile cancer.J Urol. 2014; 192: 1105-1110
- Distal urethral reconstruction of the glans for penile carcinoma: results of a novel technique at 1-year of follow-up.J Urol. 2007; 178: 941-944
- Sexual outcomes after organ potency-sparing surgery and glans reconstruction in patients with penile carcinoma.Indian J Urol. 2013; 29: 119-123
- Patient perspectives on quality of life after penile cancer.Dan Med J. 2013; 60: A4655
Article info
Publication history
Published online: August 10, 2018
Accepted:
July 31,
2018
Received in revised form:
July 31,
2018
Received:
May 16,
2018
Identification
Copyright
© 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
