OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the health-related quality of life (QOL) of disease-free patients after therapy for gynecologic malignancies at follow-up in an outpatient clinic. METHODS: Eighty-five patients (P) completed the general Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G) QOL questionnaire at least 6 months after treatment for a gynecologic malignancy. Responses were compared to 42 unmatched healthy women (H) who were seen for standard gynecologic screening exams. Statistical evaluation was done using t tests, chi(2),and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, Spearman rank correlations, and linear regression. RESULTS: The demographic data for the groups were as follows: median age P, 59 years; H, 56 years; Caucasian P, 51%; H, 56%, African American P, 49%; H, 44%, cervix cancer (n = 51, 60%), uterine cancer (n = 24, 28%), ovarian cancer (n = 10, 12%). The median time since therapy was 39 months (range 6-149 months). There were no overall differences in FACT-G scores of patients and healthy women. Cancer survivors scored slightly higher on the emotional well-being subscale (mean 20.4 vs 19.2). Among cancer patients, all scores were lowest in patients with ovarian cancer. Longer treatment time was associated with a lower physical well-being. Older patients scored higher on emotional well-being, but lower on social/family well-being. Poor education and no help at home were associated with lower functional well-being and total FACT scores. Linear regression analysis revealed significantly lower total QOL scores in patients with the following characteristics: ovarian cancer diagnosis, treatment with radiation therapy or multi-modality therapy, less than high school education, and lack of help at home. CONCLUSION: Overall the recovery from treatment for gynecological cancer is good. Patients with ovarian cancer, prolonged therapy, poor education, and little social support have the most significant impairments in health-related quality of life and need additional support resources.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the health-related quality of life (QOL) of disease-free patients after therapy for gynecologic malignancies at follow-up in an outpatient clinic. METHODS: Eighty-five patients (P) completed the general Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G) QOL questionnaire at least 6 months after treatment for a gynecologic malignancy. Responses were compared to 42 unmatched healthy women (H) who were seen for standard gynecologic screening exams. Statistical evaluation was done using t tests, chi(2),and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, Spearman rank correlations, and linear regression. RESULTS: The demographic data for the groups were as follows: median age P, 59 years; H, 56 years; Caucasian P, 51%; H, 56%, African American P, 49%; H, 44%, cervix cancer (n = 51, 60%), uterine cancer (n = 24, 28%), ovarian cancer (n = 10, 12%). The median time since therapy was 39 months (range 6-149 months). There were no overall differences in FACT-G scores of patients and healthy women. Cancer survivors scored slightly higher on the emotional well-being subscale (mean 20.4 vs 19.2). Among cancerpatients, all scores were lowest in patients with ovarian cancer. Longer treatment time was associated with a lower physical well-being. Older patients scored higher on emotional well-being, but lower on social/family well-being. Poor education and no help at home were associated with lower functional well-being and total FACT scores. Linear regression analysis revealed significantly lower total QOL scores in patients with the following characteristics: ovarian cancer diagnosis, treatment with radiation therapy or multi-modality therapy, less than high school education, and lack of help at home. CONCLUSION: Overall the recovery from treatment for gynecological cancer is good. Patients with ovarian cancer, prolonged therapy, poor education, and little social support have the most significant impairments in health-related quality of life and need additional support resources.
Authors: Jody M Jackson; Sharon J Rolnick; Steve S Coughlin; Christine Neslund-Dudas; Mark C Hornbrook; Jeanne Darbinian; Donald J Bachman; Lisa J Herrinton Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2006-12-20 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Sharon L Manne; Shannon Myers-Virtue; Deborah Kashy; Melissa Ozga; David Kissane; Carolyn Heckman; Stephen C Rubin; Norman Rosenblum Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2015 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Deborah Watkins Bruner; Andrea Barsevick; Chunqiao Tian; Marcus Randall; Robert Mannel; David E Cohn; Joel Sorosky; Nick M Spirtos Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2006-10-11 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Linda M Frazier; Virginia A Miller; Douglas V Horbelt; James E Delmore; Brigitte E Miller; Ellen P Averett Journal: Cancer Control Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 3.302