Anne C Kirchhoff1, Wendy Leisenring, Karen L Syrjala. 1. Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N. D5-220, Seattle, WA 98109, USA. akirchh@u.washington.edu
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Work return is an indicator of recovery and functional status for cancer survivors. We investigated whether demographic, medical and functional factors predicted full-time work return following hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). METHODS: Adults (N = 197), most with hematologic malignancy, completed assessments before their HCT and at intervals over 5 years. Assessments included treatment and demographic factors, and date of return to full-time work. We created binary variables, indicative of major impairment, from the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) mental (MCS) and physical (PCS) function component scores, dichotomized at 1 SD below population norms ( <or= 40 vs. >40). PCS and MCS were imputed for 16% of the sample. Predictors of work return were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Of the 130 patients working full-time at pre-HCT, 88 (68%) were alive and relapse-free at 5 years. Of these, 53 (60%) had returned to full-time and 28 (32%) to part-time work. For the primary analyses at 6 month post-HCT, 14 patients had already died or relapsed and 10 had returned to work. Among the remaining 106 patients, those with PCS >40 returned to work faster (Hazard Ratio (HR) 2.38, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.26-4.49). Female survivors were less likely to return to work than males (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.29-0.99). CONCLUSION: Return to work is a lengthy process for many survivors. Predictors of slower return include physical dysfunction and female gender. Implications for cancer survivors Realistic preparation for time off work is essential to long-term health and finances of cancer survivors.
INTRODUCTION: Work return is an indicator of recovery and functional status for cancer survivors. We investigated whether demographic, medical and functional factors predicted full-time work return following hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). METHODS: Adults (N = 197), most with hematologic malignancy, completed assessments before their HCT and at intervals over 5 years. Assessments included treatment and demographic factors, and date of return to full-time work. We created binary variables, indicative of major impairment, from the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) mental (MCS) and physical (PCS) function component scores, dichotomized at 1 SD below population norms ( <or= 40 vs. >40). PCS and MCS were imputed for 16% of the sample. Predictors of work return were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Of the 130 patients working full-time at pre-HCT, 88 (68%) were alive and relapse-free at 5 years. Of these, 53 (60%) had returned to full-time and 28 (32%) to part-time work. For the primary analyses at 6 month post-HCT, 14 patients had already died or relapsed and 10 had returned to work. Among the remaining 106 patients, those with PCS >40 returned to work faster (Hazard Ratio (HR) 2.38, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.26-4.49). Female survivors were less likely to return to work than males (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.29-0.99). CONCLUSION: Return to work is a lengthy process for many survivors. Predictors of slower return include physical dysfunction and female gender. Implications for cancer survivors Realistic preparation for time off work is essential to long-term health and finances of cancer survivors.
Authors: Catherine E Mosher; William H Redd; Christine M Rini; Jack E Burkhalter; Katherine N DuHamel Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: H R Jäger; E J Williams; D G Savage; S A Rule; J V Hajnal; K Sikora; J M Goldman; G M Bydder Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1996-08 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: T Duell; M T van Lint; P Ljungman; A Tichelli; G Socié; J F Apperley; M Weiss; A Cohen; E Nekolla; H J Kolb Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1997-02-01 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Angela G E M de Boer; Taina Taskila; Anneli Ojajärvi; Frank J H van Dijk; Jos H A M Verbeek Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-02-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Rachel B Salit; Stephanie J Lee; Linda J Burns; Bronwen E Shaw; Navneet S Majhail; Neel S Bhatt; William A Wood; Karen L Syrjala Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: S Mayo; H A Messner; S B Rourke; D Howell; J C Victor; J Kuruvilla; J H Lipton; V Gupta; D D Kim; C Piescic; D Breen; A Lambie; D Loach; F V Michelis; N Alam; J Uhm; L McGillis; K Metcalfe Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2016-02-29 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: J Winterling; E Johansson; A Wennman-Larsen; L-M Petersson; P Ljungman; K Alexanderson Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2014-03-10 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Salene M W Jones; Jean C Yi; Heather S L Jim; Alison W Loren; Navneet S Majhail; Joseph Uberti; Victoria Whalen; Wendy M Leisenring; Mary E D Flowers; Stephanie J Lee; Karen L Syrjala Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-01-08 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: A Tichelli; S Gerull; A Holbro; A Buser; G Nair; M Medinger; D Heim; J P Halter; J R Passweg Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2017-06-26 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Margaret Bevans; Areej El-Jawahri; D Kathryn Tierney; Lori Wiener; William A Wood; Flora Hoodin; Erin E Kent; Paul B Jacobsen; Stephanie J Lee; Matthew M Hsieh; Ellen M Denzen; Karen L Syrjala Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant Date: 2016-09-19 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Julia A Goodwin; Elizabeth Ann Coleman; Ellen Sullivan; Robin Easley; Paula K McNatt; Nupur Chowdhury; Carol Beth Stewart Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2013 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.592