| Literature DB >> 23497387 |
Jeff Dunn, Shu Kay Ng, William Breitbart, Joanne Aitken, Pip Youl, Peter D Baade, Suzanne K Chambers.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This longitudinal study describes the five year trajectories of health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and life satisfaction in long term colorectal cancer survivors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A population-based sample of 1966 colorectal cancer survivors were surveyed at six time points from five months to five years post-diagnosis. Predictor variables were: socio-demographic variables, optimism; cancer threat appraisal; perceived social support. Quality of life was assessed with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (HR-QOL); and the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Growth mixture models were applied to identify trajectory classes and their predictors.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23497387 PMCID: PMC3648454 DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-11-46
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes ISSN: 1477-7525 Impact factor: 3.186
Figure 1Estimated mean trajectories of SWLS (four-class model with 5 covariates, N = 1615).
Predictors of SWLS trajectory class membership (N = 1615)
| Age (Youngera) | 1.22 (1.0, 1.5) | 1.25* (1.0, 1.6) | 2.01* (1.5, 2.8) | < 0.001 |
| Education level | | | | 0.010 |
| Less than 8 years | 1.04 (0.6, 1.9) | 0.37* (0.2, 0.9) | 0.26 (0.1, 2.2) | |
| 8 – 12 years or College | Reference | Reference | Reference | |
| University | 0.76 (0.4, 1.4) | 0.60 (0.3, 1.1) | 0.42 (0.1, 1.2) | |
| Social support (Dissatifiedb) | 1.44* (1.1, 1.8) | 1.62* (1.3, 2.0) | 1.89* (1.4, 2.5) | < 0.001 |
| Low cancer threat appraisal | 1.14* (1.1, 1.2) | 1.16* (1.1, 1.2) | 1.40* (1.3, 1.5) | < 0.001 |
| Low optimism | 1.11* (1.1, 1.2) | 1.19* (1.1, 1.3) | 1.31* (1.2, 1.4) | < 0.001 |
* significant at 0.05 level on the adjusted log odds of being in the class versus the Constant High class.
a patient age is categorized into “20-49”, “50-59”, “60-69”, “70-80” (treated as ordinal in GMMs).
b satisfaction with social support received (ordinal scale from 0 “very dissatisfied” to 5 “very satisfied”).
c likelihood ratio test (full model versus model without the predictor under consideration).
Figure 2Estimated mean trajectories of FACT-C (four-class model with 6 covariates, N = 1618).
Predictors of FACT-C trajectory class membership (N = 1618)
| Sex (Male) | 0.76 (0.5, 1.1) | 1.55 (0.7, 3.6) | 0.48* (0.3, 0.9) | 0.024 |
| Age (Youngera) | 0.99 (0.8, 1.3) | 1.22 (0.8, 1.9) | 1.74* (1.3, 2.4) | < 0.001 |
| Disease stage | | | | 0.002 |
| Stages 0, I, II | Reference | Reference | Reference | |
| Stages III, IV | 1.26 (0.8, 2.0) | 3.46* (1.7, 7.1) | 2.13* (1.1, 4.2) | |
| Unknown | 0.74 (0.4, 1.4) | 1.21 (0.4, 3.4) | 0.69 (0.3, 1.6) | |
| Social support (Dissatifiedb) | 1.42* (1.0, 2.0) | 1.14 (0.7, 1.9) | 2.32* (1.6, 3.3) | < 0.001 |
| Low cancer threat appraisal | 1.27* (1.2, 1.4) | 1.24* (1.1, 1.4) | 1.77* (1.6, 2.0) | < 0.001 |
| Low optimism | 1.10* (1.0, 1.2) | 1.06 (1.0, 1.1) | 1.27* (1.2, 1.4) | < 0.001 |
* significant at 0.05 level on the adjusted log odds of being in the class versus the Constant High class.
a patient age is categorized into “20-49”, “50-59”, “60-69”, “70-80” (treated as ordinal in GMMs).
b satisfaction with social support received (ordinal scale from 0 “very dissatisfied” to 5 “very satisfied”).
c likelihood ratio test (full model versus model without the predictor under consideration).
Predictors of CL trajectory class for various FACT-C sub domains (N = 1618)
| Sex (Male) | | 3.52* (1.9, 6.4) | | 0.39* (0.2, 0.8) | 0.23* (0.1, 0.4) |
| Age (Youngera) | | 1.48* (1.1, 2.1) | 1.89* (1.3, 2.7) | | |
| Socioeconomic Disadv. | | | | | 1.37* (1.1, 1.8) |
| Disease stage | | | | | |
| Stages 0, I, II | Reference | | Reference | Reference | |
| Stages III, IV | 2.61* (1.7, 3.9) | | 2.20* (1.2, 3.9) | 2.97* (1.5, 5.9) | |
| Unknown | | | | | |
| Remoteness of residence | | | | | |
| Major city | | | | | 0.42* (0.2, 0.9) |
| Inner regional | | | | | Reference |
| Outer regional | | | | | |
| Remote/very remote | | | | | |
| Social support (Dissatifiedb) | | 7.83* (3.7, 16) | 1.29* (1.0, 1.6) | 1.95* (1.3, 2.9) | 1.51* (1.2, 2.0) |
| Low cancer threat appraisal | 1.09* (1.0, 1.2) | 1.19* (1.1, 1.3) | 1.29* (1.1, 1.5) | 1.79* (1.5, 2.1) | 1.37* (1.2, 1.5) |
| Low optimism | 1.06* (1.0, 1.1) | 1.26* (1.2, 1.4) | 1.22* (1.1, 1.3) | 1.26* (1.1, 1.5) | 1.14* (1.1, 1.2) |
* shown only significant results at 0.05 level on the adjusted log odds of being in the CL class versus the CH class.
a patient age is categorized into “20-49”, “50-59”, “60-69”, “70-80” (treated as ordinal in GMMs).
b satisfaction with social support received (ordinal scale from 0 “very dissatisfied” to 5 “very satisfied”).