Mary E Sesto1, Mahpara Faatin2, Sijian Wang3, Amye J Tevaarwerk4, Douglas A Wiegmann2. 1. Departments of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. 2. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. 3. Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, WI, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The effect of cancer on employment and retirement status in an older work force is not well understood. This study examines whether cancer survivors were less likely to be working than a sibling comparison group. OBJECTIVES: To compare work-related variables between older cancer survivors and a group of non-cancer sibling controls. A secondary objective was to evaluate the effect of cancer site and time since cancer diagnosis on work-related variables. METHODS: Data from the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study (WLS) were used to assess work outcomes in cancer survivors (+CA, n=539, mean age=65.81, SD=4.75 years) and non-cancer sibling controls (-CA, n=539, mean age=63.95, SD=5.31 years). RESULTS: Survivors (+CA group) were more likely to report not working (61.8%) and to be completely retired (55%) than the -CA group (48.3% not employed; 42% retired). Controlling for age, gender and education, this effect persisted with the +CA group more likely to be not working (OR=1.40; 95% CI=1.08 to 1.83) and completely retired (OR=1.36; 95% CI=1.05 to 1.77) than the -CA group. Neither time since diagnosis nor cancer site affected work outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, older +CA survivors were less likely to be working and more likely to be completely retired than -CA sibling controls. Future research should evaluate factors affecting work status among older cancer survivors.
BACKGROUND: The effect of cancer on employment and retirement status in an older work force is not well understood. This study examines whether cancer survivors were less likely to be working than a sibling comparison group. OBJECTIVES: To compare work-related variables between older cancer survivors and a group of non-cancer sibling controls. A secondary objective was to evaluate the effect of cancer site and time since cancer diagnosis on work-related variables. METHODS: Data from the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study (WLS) were used to assess work outcomes in cancer survivors (+CA, n=539, mean age=65.81, SD=4.75 years) and non-cancer sibling controls (-CA, n=539, mean age=63.95, SD=5.31 years). RESULTS: Survivors (+CA group) were more likely to report not working (61.8%) and to be completely retired (55%) than the -CA group (48.3% not employed; 42% retired). Controlling for age, gender and education, this effect persisted with the +CA group more likely to be not working (OR=1.40; 95% CI=1.08 to 1.83) and completely retired (OR=1.36; 95% CI=1.05 to 1.77) than the -CA group. Neither time since diagnosis nor cancer site affected work outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, older +CA survivors were less likely to be working and more likely to be completely retired than -CA sibling controls. Future research should evaluate factors affecting work status among older cancer survivors.
Entities:
Keywords:
Older cancer survivors; employment; retirement; survivorship; work
Authors: M-L Lindbohm; E Kuosma; T Taskila; P Hietanen; K Carlsen; S Gudbergsson; H Gunnarsdottir Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2010-07-11 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Carla Parry; Erin E Kent; Angela B Mariotto; Catherine M Alfano; Julia H Rowland Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: K Robin Yabroff; William F Lawrence; Steven Clauser; William W Davis; Martin L Brown Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2004-09-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: E R Spelten; J H A M Verbeek; A L J Uitterhoeve; A C Ansink; J van der Lelie; T M de Reijke; M Kammeijer; J C J M de Haes; M A G Sprangers Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Jill A Bennett; Paul Brown; Linda Cameron; Lisa C Whitehead; David Porter; Katherine M McPherson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2008-11-27 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Amye J Tevaarwerk; Kris Kwekkeboom; Kevin A Buhr; Alexandra Dennee; William Conkright; Adedayo A Onitilo; Emily Robinson; Harish Ahuja; Roger W Kwong; Ranveer Nanad; Douglas A Wiegmann; Karen Chen; Noelle K LoConte; Kari B Wisinski; Mary E Sesto Journal: Cancer Date: 2020-11-24 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Pernille Pedersen; Maria Aagesen; Lars Hermann Tang; Niels Henrik Bruun; Ann-Dorthe Zwisler; Christina M Stapelfeldt Journal: Scand J Work Environ Health Date: 2020-01-13 Impact factor: 5.024