ArticleUrologic oncology2022
Patient reported outcomes in advanced penile cancer.
Article in Urologic oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePatient reports of their symptom burden (i.e., patient-reported outcomes or PROs) have been shown to direct clinicians' ability to personalize care and improve outcomes. A disciplined assessment of PRO in the population of patients with advanced penile cancer (PeCa) has not previously been undertaken. Our center leveraged a significant cadre of patients with PeCa and a significant experience with a well-established PRO: the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS).
methodsAfter IRB approval, we screened ESAS surveys of 14,781 patients completed between February 2017 and February 2021; these were collected in the Supportive Care and Radiation Oncology clinics. Of these, those with PeCa were divided into 3 cohorts: (A) Those after any partial penectomy procedure without lymph node dissection (LND); (B) Those after partial penectomy procedure with LND; and (C) Those after total penectomy and LND. Patients with recurrent disease were analyzed separately (D). ESAS scores were collated and compared both by individual symptom and cumulatively.
resultsTwenty-two PeCa patients completed 122 ESAS surveys in this time and are included in this analysis: a median of 4 ESAS surveys (mean = 5, range = 1-19) were completed by each patient. The symptom with the highest median ESAS score was Tiredness (3.00). Patients with recurrent disease had the highest cumulative symptom score (median score = 30). Patients after total penectomy with LND had a higher cumulative symptom score (14.4) than those with partial penectomy and LND (7.9). Patients with partial penectomy without LND had a cumulative score of 22.
conclusionsPROs provide an insight into the morbidity of therapies for advanced PeCa, and the most symptoms are reported by patients with recurrent disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.