The Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Cancer Patients with Penile Cancer: A Scoping Review

Abstract

Introduction. Penile cancer has an incidence of approximately 1–2 cases per 100,000 men and is associated with substantial clinical and psychosocial consequences, including alterations in body image, sexual function, emotional well-being, intimate relationships, and quality of life. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) provide a fundamental approach to monitoring patient well-being and personalizing care pathways. However, evidence regarding their specific application in penile cancer remains fragmented. The aim of this scoping review was to map the available evidence on the use of PROMs in patients with penile cancer, with particular attention to their contribution to quality-of-life assessment, symptom monitoring and management, and patient–clinician communication.

Methods. A scoping review was conducted according to the Arksey and O’Malley framework and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. CINAHL, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched. Primary studies published between 2014 and 2025 in Italian or English and involving validated PROMs in adult patients were included. Study selection was performed through independent double screening, and the findings were synthesized narratively.

Results. A total of 29 studies were included from 1,238 records identified. Fifteen PROMs were identified: 10 generic measures, including the EORTC QLQ-C30, SF-36, EQ-5D, and HADS, and five instruments addressing sexual or urinary function, including the IIEF-5, IIEF-15, and IPSS. Only one study used the HRO-PE29, a measure specifically developed for penile cancer. The systematic use of PROMs supported the early identification of sexual dysfunction, anxiety, and body image alterations. PROMs also facilitated communication about sensitive issues, particularly sexuality, by reducing patient embarrassment.

Discussion. Generic PROMs may not fully capture the complexity of the experiences of patients with penile cancer. Although the development of the disease-specific HRO-PE29 represents an important advancement, its clinical implementation remains limited. PROMs represent valuable tools for supporting personalized care and strengthening communication between patients and healthcare professionals. Further implementation and validation of disease-specific measures may improve the assessment of outcomes that are particularly relevant to this population.