BACKGROUND: Premenopausal women represent approximately 35% of new breast cancer diagnoses. Diagnosis and treatment may lead to substantial disruption in quality of life (QOL). METHODS: Premenopausal patients (aged 18 to 50 years) treated for nonmetastatic breast cancer completed a mailed questionnaire. Multiple self-reported QOL measures and clinical data were collected. Cluster analysis and Cronbach's α were used to validate the survey. Analysis of variance was performed for specific interventions. Lower interference scores conveyed higher QOL. RESULTS: The response rate was 49.8%. Cronbach's α was 0.96. Immediate contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) carried the highest interference (mean, 3.3148) with sexuality compared with no CPM (mean, 2.85) or delayed CPM (P = .03). Breast conservation had the least interference with appearance (P < .01) and work and finances (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic mastectomy and CPM with or without reconstruction may adversely affect QOL. These findings suggest that the choice and timing of interventions may significantly affect patient satisfaction.
BACKGROUND: Premenopausal women represent approximately 35% of new breast cancer diagnoses. Diagnosis and treatment may lead to substantial disruption in quality of life (QOL). METHODS: Premenopausal patients (aged 18 to 50 years) treated for nonmetastatic breast cancer completed a mailed questionnaire. Multiple self-reported QOL measures and clinical data were collected. Cluster analysis and Cronbach's α were used to validate the survey. Analysis of variance was performed for specific interventions. Lower interference scores conveyed higher QOL. RESULTS: The response rate was 49.8%. Cronbach's α was 0.96. Immediate contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) carried the highest interference (mean, 3.3148) with sexuality compared with no CPM (mean, 2.85) or delayed CPM (P = .03). Breast conservation had the least interference with appearance (P < .01) and work and finances (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic mastectomy and CPM with or without reconstruction may adversely affect QOL. These findings suggest that the choice and timing of interventions may significantly affect patient satisfaction.
Authors: Pat Fobair; Susan L Stewart; Subo Chang; Carol D'Onofrio; Priscilla J Banks; Joan R Bloom Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: K Robin Yabroff; William W Davis; Elizabeth B Lamont; Angela Fahey; Marie Topor; Martin L Brown; Joan L Warren Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2007-01-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: M A Sprangers; M Groenvold; J I Arraras; J Franklin; A te Velde; M Muller; L Franzini; A Williams; H C de Haes; P Hopwood; A Cull; N K Aaronson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1996-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M J Brady; D F Cella; F Mo; A E Bonomi; D S Tulsky; S R Lloyd; S Deasy; M Cobleigh; G Shiomoto Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: N K Arora; D H Gustafson; R P Hawkins; F McTavish; D F Cella; S Pingree; J H Mendenhall; D M Mahvi Journal: Cancer Date: 2001-09-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: M N Levine; G H Guyatt; M Gent; S De Pauw; M D Goodyear; W M Hryniuk; A Arnold; B Findlay; J R Skillings; V H Bramwell Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1988-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Carly L Paterson; Cecile A Lengacher; Kristine A Donovan; Kevin E Kip; Cindy S Tofthagen Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2016 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Ashish A Deshmukh; Scott B Cantor; Melissa A Crosby; Wenli Dong; Yu Shen; Isabelle Bedrosian; Susan K Peterson; Patricia A Parker; Abenaa M Brewster Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-05-09 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Anne Oberguggenberger; Caroline Martini; Nathalie Huber; Lesley Fallowfield; Michael Hubalek; Martin Daniaux; Barbara Sperner-Unterweger; Bernhard Holzner; Monika Sztankay; Eva Gamper; Verena Meraner Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 4.430