GOALS OF WORK: The aim of this study was to (1) assess the quality of life (QoL) of testicular cancer survivors (TCSs) by comparing them to a reference group; (2) investigate the relationship between the QoL of TCSs and sociodemographics, cancer-related variables, and life events; and (3) identify TCSs at risk for an impaired QoL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of the TCSs approached, 50% (n=354) participated and completed a generic QoL questionnaire (RAND-36) once. Time since completion of treatment varied from 3 months to 24 years. MAIN RESULTS: (1) TCSs had significantly higher mean scores on the subscales physical functioning (p=0.02) and pain (p=0.001), but lower mean scores on mental health (p=0.04) and vitality (p<0.001) than a reference group of men. The effect sizes of these differences were small to insignificant. (2) Employment status and chronic disease were the main correlates of the QoL of TCSs. Age, negative life events, type of treatment, and the experience of a second cancer event were moderately associated with some subscales as well. (3) The joint burden of unemployment and a chronic disease was the strongest predictor for an impaired functioning. CONCLUSIONS: On a group level, TCSs experience a good QoL, but a small group appeared to be at risk for an impaired functioning, namely, those who were unemployed and had a chronic disease. The variance explained by the variables studied was low, indicating that more important predictors remain to be identified.
GOALS OF WORK: The aim of this study was to (1) assess the quality of life (QoL) of testicular cancer survivors (TCSs) by comparing them to a reference group; (2) investigate the relationship between the QoL of TCSs and sociodemographics, cancer-related variables, and life events; and (3) identify TCSs at risk for an impaired QoL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of the TCSs approached, 50% (n=354) participated and completed a generic QoL questionnaire (RAND-36) once. Time since completion of treatment varied from 3 months to 24 years. MAIN RESULTS: (1) TCSs had significantly higher mean scores on the subscales physical functioning (p=0.02) and pain (p=0.001), but lower mean scores on mental health (p=0.04) and vitality (p<0.001) than a reference group of men. The effect sizes of these differences were small to insignificant. (2) Employment status and chronic disease were the main correlates of the QoL of TCSs. Age, negative life events, type of treatment, and the experience of a second cancer event were moderately associated with some subscales as well. (3) The joint burden of unemployment and a chronic disease was the strongest predictor for an impaired functioning. CONCLUSIONS: On a group level, TCSs experience a good QoL, but a small group appeared to be at risk for an impaired functioning, namely, those who were unemployed and had a chronic disease. The variance explained by the variables studied was low, indicating that more important predictors remain to be identified.
Authors: L B Travis; R E Curtis; H Storm; P Hall; E Holowaty; F E Van Leeuwen; B A Kohler; E Pukkala; C F Lynch; M Andersson; K Bergfeldt; E A Clarke; T Wiklund; G Stoter; M Gospodarowicz; J Sturgeon; J F Fraumeni; J D Boice Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1997-10-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: C Archea; I H Yen; H Chen; M D Eisner; P P Katz; U Masharani; E H Yelin; G Earnest; P D Blanc Journal: Thorax Date: 2006-08-23 Impact factor: 9.139
Authors: Allan Ben Smith; Phyllis Butow; Ian Olver; Tim Luckett; Peter Grimison; Guy C Toner; Martin R Stockler; Elizabeth Hovey; John Stubbs; Sandra Turner; George Hruby; Howard Gurney; Mahmood Alam; Keith Cox; Madeleine T King Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2015-07-16 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Chunkit Fung; Howard D Sesso; Annalynn M Williams; Sarah L Kerns; Patrick Monahan; Mohammad Abu Zaid; Darren R Feldman; Robert J Hamilton; David J Vaughn; Clair J Beard; Christian K Kollmannsberger; Ryan Cook; Sandra Althouse; Shirin Ardeshir-Rouhani-Fard; Steve E Lipshultz; Lawrence H Einhorn; Sophie D Fossa; Lois B Travis Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-02-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Uros Bumbasirevic; Nebojsa Bojanic; Tatjana Pekmezovic; Aleksandar Janjic; Aleksandar Janicic; Bogomir Milojevic; Cane Tulic Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-08-30 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Lois B Travis; Clair Beard; James M Allan; Alv A Dahl; Darren R Feldman; Jan Oldenburg; Gedske Daugaard; Jennifer L Kelly; M Eileen Dolan; Robyn Hannigan; Louis S Constine; Kevin C Oeffinger; Paul Okunieff; Greg Armstrong; David Wiljer; Robert C Miller; Jourik A Gietema; Flora E van Leeuwen; Jacqueline P Williams; Craig R Nichols; Lawrence H Einhorn; Sophie D Fossa Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2010-06-28 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jennifer A Soon; Angelyn Anton; Javier Torres; Ruth Lawrence; Phillip Parente; Joseph McKendrick; Ian D Davis; Carmel Pezaro Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Sumanta K Pal; Jonathan Yamzon; Virginia Sun; Courtney Carmichael; Junmi Saikia; Betty Ferrell; Paul Frankel; Joann Hsu; Przemyslaw Twardowski; Cy A Stein; Kim Margolin Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2012-10-11 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Lauren Matheson; Mary Boulton; Verna Lavender; Andrew Protheroe; Sue Brand; Marta Wanat; Eila Watson Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2015-07-10 Impact factor: 4.442