PURPOSE: To assess self-reported quality of life (QoL) experienced by anal cancer patients after radiochemotherapy, and to identify patient- and disease-related factors associated with QoL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 88 patients treated for anal cancer at our institution between 1990 and 2006 were identified from our database. Of these, 15 patients had died, and 4 were lost to follow-up. QoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire (cancer-specific QoL) and the colorectal cancer module QLQ-CR38 (site-specific QoL); 52 responses were received. The median follow-up was 36 months (range, 5-137 months). RESULTS: As for cancer-specific QoL, global health QoL score (mean 60.4) was similar to the general German population, whereas most of the function and symptom scale scores were considerably lower/higher in anal cancer patients. The most prominent mean score differences were observed in role functioning (-21.8 points), emotional functioning (-20.7 points), social functioning (-28.9 points), diarrhea (+34.6 points), and financial difficulties (+26.9 points; p < 0.001). As for site-specific QoL, the mean function scale scores ranged from 22.1 (sexual function) to 63.2 (body image), and the mean symptom scale scores from 14.7 (weight loss) to 69.0 (stoma-related problems, 4 patients) and 67.9 (male sexual dysfunction), respectively. Most of the QoL scores were not affected by late toxicity, patient- or disease-related factors. Fatigue (+18.2 points) emerged as the strongest predictor of impaired QoL. CONCLUSION: The global health QoL of anal cancer patients is comparable with that of the general German population, but there are specific limitations, e.g., sexual dysfunction, urological/gastrointestinal complaints, financial difficulties, fatigue, and a reduction in emotional and social well-being.
PURPOSE: To assess self-reported quality of life (QoL) experienced by anal cancerpatients after radiochemotherapy, and to identify patient- and disease-related factors associated with QoL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 88 patients treated for anal cancer at our institution between 1990 and 2006 were identified from our database. Of these, 15 patients had died, and 4 were lost to follow-up. QoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire (cancer-specific QoL) and the colorectal cancer module QLQ-CR38 (site-specific QoL); 52 responses were received. The median follow-up was 36 months (range, 5-137 months). RESULTS: As for cancer-specific QoL, global health QoL score (mean 60.4) was similar to the general German population, whereas most of the function and symptom scale scores were considerably lower/higher in anal cancerpatients. The most prominent mean score differences were observed in role functioning (-21.8 points), emotional functioning (-20.7 points), social functioning (-28.9 points), diarrhea (+34.6 points), and financial difficulties (+26.9 points; p < 0.001). As for site-specific QoL, the mean function scale scores ranged from 22.1 (sexual function) to 63.2 (body image), and the mean symptom scale scores from 14.7 (weight loss) to 69.0 (stoma-related problems, 4 patients) and 67.9 (male sexual dysfunction), respectively. Most of the QoL scores were not affected by late toxicity, patient- or disease-related factors. Fatigue (+18.2 points) emerged as the strongest predictor of impaired QoL. CONCLUSION: The global health QoL of anal cancerpatients is comparable with that of the general German population, but there are specific limitations, e.g., sexual dysfunction, urological/gastrointestinal complaints, financial difficulties, fatigue, and a reduction in emotional and social well-being.
Authors: Joseph A Roscoe; Maralyn E Kaufman; Sara E Matteson-Rusby; Oxana G Palesh; Julie L Ryan; Sadhna Kohli; Michael L Perlis; Gary R Morrow Journal: Oncologist Date: 2007
Authors: H Geinitz; B Marten-Mittag; C Schäfer; G Henrich; I Bittner; P Herschbach; A Dinkel; S Sehlen Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: D Steinmann; D Vordermark; H Geinitz; R Aschoff; A Bayerl; J Gerstein; M Hipp; B van Oorschot; H J Wypior; C Schäfer Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-11-18 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: S Hennies; H A Wolff; K Jung; M Rave-Fränk; J Gaedcke; M Ghadimi; C F Hess; H Becker; R M Hermann; H Christiansen Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-08-11 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: R O Schiel; W Herzog; H Hof; J Debus; H-C Friederich; A Brechtel; J Rummel; P Freytag; M Hartmann Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2013-06-09 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Matthias Sauter; Stephan R Vavricka; Georg Keilholz; Henriette Heinrich; Thomas Winder; Helmut Kranzbühler; Norbert Lombriser; Benjamin Misselwitz Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2017-06-26 Impact factor: 3.621