Tracey DiSipio1, Sandi Hayes, Beth Newman, Monika Janda. 1. School of Public Health,Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, 4059, Australia. t.disipio@qut.edu.au
Abstract
GOALS OF WORK: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was compared between urban breast cancer survivors (BCS) and the general female population in urban Queensland, and correlates were identified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: HRQoL data were collected at 6, 12, and 18 months post-diagnosis from a population-based sample of 287 women, aged 74 years or younger, diagnosed with breast cancer in 2002. The urban comparison group was drawn from a population-based survey conducted in 2004 and included 675 women aged 30-74 years with no prior history of breast cancer. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General questionnaire was used to measure HRQoL in both groups. MAIN RESULTS: Younger (<50 years) BCS reported lower HRQoL at 6 months (mean, 80.2 vs 86.8) but were comparable to the general population by 12 months post-diagnosis (mean = 87.3). In contrast, HRQoL of older (50+ years) BCS at 6 months (mean = 87.1) was comparable to their general population peers (mean = 86.0) and was clinically better 18 months post-diagnosis (mean = 91.0). Compared with the general population, physical and emotional well-being among younger BCS was impaired at 6 months post-diagnosis (mean, 24.9 vs 21.0 and 21.0 vs 18.0, respectively) and did not improve over time for emotional well-being (mean = 18.8). These results persisted after adjustment for treatment-related factors, although receiving chemotherapy was an important correlate of HRQoL among younger BCS at 6 months post-diagnosis (-14.9). CONCLUSIONS: This study not only shows that the HRQoL of BCS improves between 6 and 18 months post-diagnosis but also suggests that emotional well-being among younger BCS may benefit from targeted intervention.
GOALS OF WORK: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was compared between urban breast cancer survivors (BCS) and the general female population in urban Queensland, and correlates were identified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: HRQoL data were collected at 6, 12, and 18 months post-diagnosis from a population-based sample of 287 women, aged 74 years or younger, diagnosed with breast cancer in 2002. The urban comparison group was drawn from a population-based survey conducted in 2004 and included 675 women aged 30-74 years with no prior history of breast cancer. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General questionnaire was used to measure HRQoL in both groups. MAIN RESULTS: Younger (<50 years) BCS reported lower HRQoL at 6 months (mean, 80.2 vs 86.8) but were comparable to the general population by 12 months post-diagnosis (mean = 87.3). In contrast, HRQoL of older (50+ years) BCS at 6 months (mean = 87.1) was comparable to their general population peers (mean = 86.0) and was clinically better 18 months post-diagnosis (mean = 91.0). Compared with the general population, physical and emotional well-being among younger BCS was impaired at 6 months post-diagnosis (mean, 24.9 vs 21.0 and 21.0 vs 18.0, respectively) and did not improve over time for emotional well-being (mean = 18.8). These results persisted after adjustment for treatment-related factors, although receiving chemotherapy was an important correlate of HRQoL among younger BCS at 6 months post-diagnosis (-14.9). CONCLUSIONS: This study not only shows that the HRQoL of BCS improves between 6 and 18 months post-diagnosis but also suggests that emotional well-being among younger BCS may benefit from targeted intervention.
Authors: Alice B Kornblith; Mark Powell; Meredith M Regan; Samantha Bennett; Carolyn Krasner; Beverly Moy; Jerry Younger; Annekathyrn Goodman; Ross Berkowitz; Eric Winer Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Pamela M Vacek; Patricia Winstead-Fry; Roger H Secker-Walker; Gloria J Hooper; Dennis A Plante Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Heather-Jane Au; Wolfgang Eiermann; Nicholas J Robert; Tadeusz Pienkowski; John Crown; Miguel Martin; Marek Pawlicki; Arlene Chan; John Mackey; John Glaspy; Tamás Pintér; Mei-Ching Liu; Tommy Fornander; Sandeep Sehdev; Jean-Marc Ferrero; Valerie Bée; Maria J Santana; Dave P Miller; Deepa Lalla; Dennis J Slamon Journal: Oncologist Date: 2013-06-28
Authors: Yuan-Yuan Lei; Suzanne C Ho; Thomas K H Lau; Carol Kwok; Ashley Cheng; Ka Li Cheung; Roselle Lee; Winnie Yeo Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-01-14 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: M-L Lindbohm; T Taskila; E Kuosma; P Hietanen; K Carlsen; S Gudbergsson; H Gunnarsdottir Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Sine Rossen; Karen Trier; Berit Christensen; Martina A Eriksen; Ann-Dorthe Zwisler; Jette Vibe-Petersen Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-08-02 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Helena Granstam Björneklett; Christina Lindemalm; Marja-Leena Ojutkangas; Anders Berglund; Henry Letocha; Peter Strang; Leif Bergkvist Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-05-11 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Louisa G Gordon; Brigid M Lynch; Vanessa L Beesley; Nicholas Graves; Catherine McGrath; Peter O'Rourke; Penelope M Webb Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2011-07-29 Impact factor: 3.295