ReviewCancer medicine2023
Conceptual assessment of HRQOL among Japanese non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) patients.
Review in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Symptom cluster profiles and their impact on quality of life in Chinese patients with prostate cancer undergoing ADT: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Conceptual assessment of HRQOL among Japanese non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) patients.Cancer medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe study objectives were to understand how patients view the quality of life in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), including unmet needs and what patients consider most important in treatment outcomes. A gap analysis was conducted on existing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) measures versus what is missing from the patient perspective, to guide future development of PRO-based real-world evidence for nmCRPC in Japan. A conceptual model for nmCRPC Japanese patients' HRQOL was also created.
methodsThis non-interventional, qualitative study consisted of a targeted literature review, PRO instrument review, and interviews with 20 nmCRPC patients and five treating physicians. Triangulation of the gap analysis, evidence from the targeted review of the literature, and qualitative interview findings were employed to assess the comprehensiveness of current nmCRPC and HRQOL measures.
resultsSymptoms most reported by patients were frequent urination (70%), nocturia (65%), and general pain (65%). Others reported included lack of strength (30%). HRQOL impacts most reported were anxiety (45%) and worry (50%) about their diagnosis. Additional impacts mentioned were weight changes, loss of sleep, difficulty walking, loss of appetite, and difficulty traveling and seeking toilets in public. The gap analysis revealed 31 symptoms and 33 impacts not covered in existing prostate cancer-specific PRO instruments. Patients mentioned musculoskeletal symptoms such as fractures, leg pain, cramps, numbness, and loss of leg bone strength. Impacts not previously discussed in the literature or in outcome measures were feelings of self-consciousness around diagnosis, stigma around illness, and the impact on mobility including traveling.
conclusionKey results reveal pain and urinary symptoms are the most experienced by Japanese nmCRPC patients. The diagnosis and treatment of disease leads to significant impacts in patient lives. Analysis revealed that symptoms and life impacts are missing in the current literature and outcome measures. Testing and debriefing of specific items could further substantiate these dimensions.
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.