Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Quality-of-life assessment tools for men with prostate cancer

  • Review Article
  • Published:

From Nature Reviews Urology

View current issue Sign up to alerts

Key Points

  • Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) addresses the entire spectrum of human experience, including daily necessities, interpersonal relationships, physical and mental health, illness, and professional and personal happiness

  • Instruments can be used for clinical purposes—for example, to track the quality of an individual patient's life before and after prostate surgery—or in research, to understand overall trends for populations

  • General HRQOL domains assess overall well-being, typically with instruments that address general health perceptions and social, emotional, and physical function

  • Instruments should ideally be administered by a neutral third party, to avoid bias of patients wanting to 'please' their physicians by masking underlying problems

  • Several instruments specific to prostate cancer have been used on their own or in conjunction with more generic tools to assess HRQOL in men with prostate cancer

  • Armed with psychometrically validated, clinically useful instruments, urologists can seek truthful answers to the questions every man with prostate cancer asks—“How long will I live, and how good will my life be?”

Abstract

Quality-of-life assessment tools for men with prostate cancer have given patients and health-care providers a nuanced understanding not only of how long patients will survive, but also how well they will live. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) addresses the entire spectrum of human experience, including daily necessities, interpersonal relationships, physical and mental health, illness, and professional and personal happiness. Developing an HRQOL instrument is a methodologically rigorous process that requires fastidious attention to detail if the product is to be useful for patients and populations, and responsive to change over time. HRQOL instruments must be psychometrically sound, but also readily used by the target population. Instruments should ideally be administered by a neutral third party, to avoid bias of patients wanting to 'please' their physicians by masking underlying problems. The instruments used in HRQOL assessment can be general or specific to a particular disease process. General HRQOL domains assess overall well-being, typically with instruments that address general health perceptions, and social, emotional, and physical function. Disease-specific instruments might focus on how dysfunction in a particular organ or disease affects overall HRQOL. Several instruments specific to prostate cancer have been used on their own or in conjunction with more generic tools to assess HRQOL in men with prostate cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Garber, G. Concussions still Carson's concern ESPN [online], (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Litwin, M. S. et al. Quality-of-life outcomes in men treated for localized prostate cancer. JAMA 273, 129–135 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. WHO. Constitution of the World Health Organization, basic documents (WHO, 1948).

  4. Patrick, D. L. & Erickson, P. in Quality of life assessment: key issues in the 1990s (eds Walker, S. R. & Rosser, R. M.) 11–64 (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Fossa, S. D. Quality of life after palliative radiotherapy in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer: single institution experience. Br. J. Urol. 74, 345–351 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Litwin, M. S. Measuring health related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. J. Urol. 152, 1882–1887 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Meyer, K. B. & Clayton, K. A. Measurement and analysis of patient-reported outcomes. Methods Mol. Biol. 473, 155–169 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Resnick, M. J. & Penson, D. F. Functional outcomes after treatment for prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 368, 1654 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tulsky, D. S. An introduction to test theory. Oncology 4, 43–48 (1990).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Testa, M. A. & Simonson, D. C. Assesment of quality-of-life outcomes. N. Engl. J. Med. 334, 835–840 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Guyatt, G. H. et al. Users' guides to the medical literature. XII. How to use articles about health-related quality of life. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 277, 1232–1237 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McSweeny, A. J. & Creer, T. L. Health-related quality-of-life assessment in medical care. Dis. Mon. 41, 1–71 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Aaronson, N. K. Methodologic issues in assessing the quality of life of cancer patients. Cancer 67, 844–850 (1991).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Deyo, R. A., Diehr, P. & Patrick, D. L. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin. Trials 12, 142S–158S (1991).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Chipman, J. J. et al. Measuring and predicting prostate cancer related quality of life changes using EPIC for clinical practice. J. Urol. 191, 638–645 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Adler, N. E., Epel, E. S., Castellazzo, G. & Ickovics, J. R. Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: preliminary data in healthy white women. Health Psychol. 19, 586–592 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nelson, E. C., Landgraf, J. M., Hays, R. D., Wasson, J. H. & Kirk, J. W. The functional status of patients. How can it be measured in physicians' offices? Med. Care 28, 1111–1126 (1990).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Finlay, W. M. & Lyons, E. Methodological issues in interviewing and using self-report questionnaires with people with mental retardation. Psychol. Assess. 13, 319–335 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Moul, J. W. & Dawson, N. Quality of life associated with treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer: a review of the literature. Cancer Invest. 30, 1–12 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fossa, S. D. et al. Quality of life and treatment of hormone resistant metastatic prostatic cancer. The EORTC Genito-Urinary Group. Eur. J. Cancer 26, 1133–1136 (1990).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Litwin, M. S., Lubeck, D. P., Henning, J. M. & Carroll, P. R. Differences in urologist and patient assessments of health related quality of life in men with prostate cancer: results of the CaPSURE database. J. Urol. 159, 1988–1992 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Slevin, M. L., Plant, H., Lynch, D., Drinkwater, J. & Gregory, W. M. Who should measure quality of life, the doctor or the patient? Br. J. Cancer 57, 109–112 (1988).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Fossa, S. D., Moynihan, C. & Serbouti, S. Patients' and doctors' perception of long-term morbidity in patients with testicular cancer clinical stage I. A descriptive pilot study. Support. Care Cancer 4, 118–128 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lampic, C., von Essen, L., Peterson, V. W., Larsson, G. & Sjoden, P. O. Anxiety and depression in hospitalized patients with cancer: agreement in patient-staff dyads. Cancer Nurs. 19, 419–428 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sneeuw, K. C. et al. Value of caregiver ratings in evaluating the quality of life of patients with cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 15, 1206–1217 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Testa, M. A. Parallel perspectives on quality of life during antihypertensive therapy: impact of responder, survey environment, and questionnaire structure. J. Cardiovasc. Pharmacol. 21 (Suppl. 2), S18–S25 (1993).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sprangers, M. A. & Aaronson, N. K. The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease: a review. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 45, 743–760 (1992).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kornblith, A. B., Herr, H. W., Ofman, U. S., Scher, H. I. & Holland, J. C. Quality of life of patients with prostate cancer and their spouses: the value of a data base in clinical care. Cancer 73, 2791–2802 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gazmararian, J. A. et al. Health literacy among Medicare enrollees in a managed care organization. JAMA 281, 545–551 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Patient-Reported Outcome and Quality of Life Instruments Database [online], (2014).

  31. Lohr, K. N. et al. Evaluating quality-of-life and health status instruments: development of scientific review criteria. Clin. Ther. 18, 979–992 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Litwin, M. S. How to measure survey reliability and validity (Sage Publications, 1995).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  33. Tulsky, D. S. An introduction to test theory. Oncology 4, 43–48 (1990).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychol. Bull. 52, 281–302 (1955).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Guyatt, G., Walter, S. & Norman, G. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J. Chronic Dis. 40, 171–178 (1987).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Wiebe, S., Guyatt, G., Weaver, B., Matijevic, S. & Sidwell, C. Comparative responsiveness of generic and specific quality-of-life instruments. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 56, 52–60 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Murawski, M. M. & Miederhoff, P. A. On the generalizability of statistical expressions of health related quality of life instrument responsiveness: a data synthesis. Qual. Life Res. 7, 11–22 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Bergman, J., Saigal, C. S., Kwan, L. & Litwin, M. S. Responsiveness of the University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index. Urology 75, 1418–1423 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Guyatt, G. H., Berman, L. B., Townsend, M., Pugsley, S. O. & Chambers, L. W. A measure of quality of life for clinical trials in chronic lung disease. Thorax 42, 773–778 (1987).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Mahler, D. A. & Mackowiak, J. I. Evaluation of the short-form 36-item questionnaire to measure health-related quality of life in patients with COPD. Chest 107, 1585–1589 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Marks, G. B., Dunn, S. M. & Woolcock, A. J. An evaluation of an asthma quality of life questionnaire as a measure of change in adults with asthma. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 46, 1103–1111 (1993).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Buchbinder, R., Bombardier, C., Yeung, M. & Tugwell, P. Which outcome measures should be used in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials? Clinical and quality-of-life measures' responsiveness to treatment in a randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum. 38, 1568–1580 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kantz, M. E., Harris, W. J., Levitsky, K., Ware, J. E. Jr & Davies, A. R. Methods for assessing condition-specific and generic functional status outcomes after total knee replacement. Med. Care 30, MS240–MS252 (1992).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Sprangers, M. A. et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaire module: first results from a three-country field study. J. Clin. Oncol. 14, 2756–2768 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Clark, J. A., Rieker, P., Propert, K. J. & Talcott, J. A. Changes in quality of life following treatment for early prostate cancer. Urology 53, 161–168 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Talcott, J. A. et al. Patient-reported symptoms after primary therapy for early prostate cancer: results of a prospective cohort study. J. Clin. Oncol. 16, 275–283 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Herrmann, D. Reporting current, past, and changed health status. What we know about distortion. Med. Care 33, AS89–94 (1995).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Herdman, M., Fox-Rushby, J. & Badia, X. 'Equivalence' and the translation and adaptation of health-related quality of life questionnaires. Qual. Life Res. 6, 237–247 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Saigal, C. et al. Impact of a novel method of patient preference elicitation on decision quality in men with prostate cancer: pilot data. J. Urol. 187, e266–e267 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Patrick, D. L. & Deyo, R. A. Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life. Med. Care 27, S217–S232 (1989).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Fossa, S. D. et al. Influence of urological morbidity on quality of life in patients with prostate cancer. Eur. Urol. 31 (Suppl. 3), 3–8 (1997).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Moinpour, C. M., Hayden, K. A., Thompson, I. M., Feigl, P. & Metch, B. Quality of life assessment in Southwest Oncology Group trials. Oncology 4, 79–84 (1990).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Sprangers, M. A. et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer approach to developing questionnaire modules: an update and overview. EORTC Quality of Life Study Group. Qual. Life Res. 7, 291–300 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. McDowell, I. & Newell, C. Measuring health: a guide to rating scales and questionnaires (Oxford University Press, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Penson, D. F., Litwin, M. S. & Aaronson, N. K. Health related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. J. Urol. 169, 1653–1661 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Eton, D. T. & Lepore, S. J. Prostate cancer and health-related quality of life: a review of the literature. Psychooncology 11, 307–326 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Matza, L. S., Zyczynski, T. M. & Bavendam, T. A review of quality-of-life questionnaires for urinary incontinence and overactive bladder: which ones to use and why? Curr. Urol. Rep. 5, 336–342 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Blaivas, J. G. Outcome measures for urinary incontinence. Urology 51, 11–19 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Edgell, E. T. et al. A review of health-related quality-of-life measures used in end-stage renal disease. Clin. Ther. 18, 887–938 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Botteman, M. F., Pashos, C. L., Hauser, R. S., Laskin, B. L. & Redaelli, A. Quality of life aspects of bladder cancer: a review of the literature. Qual. Life Res. 12, 675–688 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Applied Research cancer control and population sciences. National Cancer Institute [online], (2014).

  62. Ferrer, M. et al. Quality of life impact of treatments for localized prostate cancer: cohort study with a 5 year follow-up. Radiother. Oncol. 108, 306–313 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Pardo, Y. et al. Quality-of-life impact of primary treatments for localized prostate cancer in patients without hormonal treatment. J. Clin. Oncol. 28, 4687–4696 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Guedea, F. et al. Quality of life two years after radical prostatectomy, prostate brachytherapy or external beam radiotherapy for clinically localised prostate cancer: the Catalan Institute of Oncology/Bellvitge Hospital experience. Clin. Transl. Oncol. 11, 470–478 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Resnick, B. & Nahm, E. S. Reliability and validity testing of the revised 12-item Short-Form Health Survey in older adults. J. Nurs. Meas. 9, 151–161 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Jenkinson, C., Chandola, T., Coulter, A. & Bruster, S. An assessment of the construct validity of the SF-12 summary scores across ethnic groups. J. Public Health Med. 23, 187–194 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Gandhi, S. K. et al. Psychometric evaluation of the 12-item short-form health survey (SF-12) in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Clin. Ther. 23, 1080–1098 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Salyers, M. P., Bosworth, H. B., Swanson, J. W., Lamb-Pagone, J. & Osher, F. C. Reliability and validity of the SF-12 health survey among people with severe mental illness. Med. Care 38, 1141–1150 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Lim, L. L. & Fisher, J. D. Use of the 12-item short-form (SF-12) Health Survey in an Australian heart and stroke population. Qual. Life Res. 8, 1–8 (1999).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Jacobson, A. F., Weiss, B. L., Steinbook, R. M., Brauzer, B. & Goldstein, B. J. The measurement of psychological states by use of factors derived from a combination of items from mood and symptom checklists. J. Clin. Psychol. 34, 677–685 (1978).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Baker, F., Denniston, M., Zabora, J., Polland, A. & Dudley, W. N. A POMS short form for cancer patients: psychometric and structural evaluation. Psychooncology 11, 273–281 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Weissman, M. M., Sholomskas, D., Pottenger, M., Prusoff, B. A. & Locke, B. Z. Assessing depressive symptoms in five psychiatric populations: a validation study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 106, 203–214 (1977).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Becker, M., Diamond, R. & Sainfort, F. A new patient focused index for measuring quality of life in persons with severe and persistent mental illness. Qual. Life Res. 2, 239–251 (1993).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Luo, N., Johnson, J. & Coons, S. J. Using instrument-defined health state transitions to estimate minimally important differences for four preference-based health-related quality of life instruments. Med. Care 48, 365–371 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Shaw, J. W., Johnson, J. A. & Coons, S. J. US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the D1 valuation model. Med. Care 43, 203–220 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Johnson, J. A., Coons, S. J., Ergo, A. & Szava-Kovats, G. Valuation of EuroQOL (EQ-5D) health states in an adult US sample. Pharmacoeconomics 13, 421–433 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Vachalec, S., Bottomley, A., Aaronson, N., Van Andel, G. & Blazeby, J. Confusion about European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Prostate module (EORTC QLQ-PR25): a response. Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res. 2, 6 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Groenvold, M. et al. Breast cancer patients on adjuvant chemotherapy report a wide range of problems not identified by health-care staff. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 103, 185–195 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Bergman, B. & Aaronson, N. K. Quality-of-life and cost-effectiveness assessment in lung cancer. Curr. Opin. Oncol. 7, 138–143 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Bergman, B., Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Kaasa, S. & Sullivan, M. The EORTC QLQ-LC13: a modular supplement to the EORTC Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) for use in lung cancer clinical trials. EORTC Study Group on Quality of Life. Eur. J. Cancer 30A, 635–642 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Bjordal, K. et al. Development of a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaire module to be used in quality of life assessments in head and neck cancer patients. EORTC Quality of Life Study Group. Acta Oncol. 33, 879–885 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Gacci, M. et al. Quality of life after radical treatment of prostate cancer: validation of the Italian version of the University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index. Urology 66, 338–343 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Curtis, J. R. et al. Effect of a quality-improvement intervention on end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: a randomized trial. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 183, 348–355 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Wei, J. T., Dunn, R. L., Litwin, M. S., Sandler, H. M. & Sanda, M. G. Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Urology 56, 899–905 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Szymanski, K. M., Wei, J. T., Dunn, R. L. & Sanda, M. G. Development and validation of an abbreviated version of the expanded prostate cancer index composite instrument for measuring health-related quality of life among prostate cancer survivors. Urology 76, 1245–1250 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Esper, P. et al. Measuring quality of life in men with prostate cancer using the functional assessment of cancer therapy-prostate instrument. Urology 50, 920–928 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Segal, R. J. et al. Resistance exercise in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 1653–1659 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Aaronson, N. K. et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 85, 365–376 (1993).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Borghede, G., Karlsson, J. & Sullivan, M. Quality of life in patients with prostatic cancer: results from a Swedish population study. J. Urol. 158, 1477–1485 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Holzner, B. et al. Equating EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scores and its use in oncological research. Eur. J. Cancer 42, 3169–3177 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. van Andel, G. et al. An international field study of the EORTC QLQ-PR25: a questionnaire for assessing the health-related quality of life of patients with prostate cancer. Eur. J. Cancer 44, 2418–2424 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Daskivich, T., Sadetsky, N., Kaplan, S. H., Greenfield, S. & Litwin, M. S. Severity of comorbidity and non-prostate cancer mortality in men with early-stage prostate cancer. Arch. Intern. Med. 170, 1396–1397 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Litwin, M. S. et al. Assessment of prognosis with the total illness burden index for prostate cancer: aiding clinicians in treatment choice. Cancer 109, 1777–1783 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Osoba, D., Tannock, I. F., Ernst, D. S. & Neville, A. J. Health-related quality of life in men with metastatic prostate cancer treated with prednisone alone or mitoxantrone and prednisone. J. Clin. Oncol. 17, 1654–1663 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Clark, J. A. & Talcott, J. A. Symptom indexes to assess outcomes of treatment for early prostate cancer. Med. Care 39, 1118–1130 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Clark, J. A., Bokhour, B. G., Inui, T. S., Silliman, R. A. & Talcott, J. A. Measuring patients' perceptions of the outcomes of treatment for early prostate cancer. Med. Care 41, 923–936 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Dale, W. et al. Self-assessed health-related quality of life in men being treated for prostate cancer with radiotherapy: instrument validation and its relation to patient-assessed bother of symptoms. Urology 53, 359–366 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Giesler, R. B. Assessing the quality of life in patients with cancer. Curr. Probl. Cancer 24, 58–92 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, Box 951738, Los Angeles, 90095-1738, CA, USA

    Jonathan Bergman & Aaron Laviana

Authors
  1. Jonathan Bergman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aaron Laviana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

J.B. and A.L. researched the data for the article, provided substantial contributions to discussions of the content and contributed equally to writing the article. J.B. reviewed and edited the manuscript before submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Bergman.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bergman, J., Laviana, A. Quality-of-life assessment tools for men with prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol 11, 352–359 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2014.101

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2014.101

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation