PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate the impact of chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA) distress on body image, psychosocial well-being, and depression among breast cancer patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted at the breast cancer advocacy events held at 16 hospitals in Korea. Alopecia distress was assessed using the 'Chemotherapy-Induced Alopecia Distress Scale', body image and psychosocial well-being were measured by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and breast specific module (BR23), and depression was measured using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale. Means of outcomes were compared between low and high CIA distress groups. Univariable and multivariable linear regression models were used to analyze the relationship between the CIA distress and body image, psychosocial well-being, and depression. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-eight breast cancer patients participated in the study; the mean age was 48.4 (SD = 8.4) years, and 55.3% of the patients experienced higher distress from alopecia. In fully adjusted models, the high distress group was more likely to have a poorer body image than the low distress group (35.2 vs. 62.0; p < 0.001). Distressed patients were also more likely to report lower emotional (55.3 vs. 76.9; p < 0.001), role (58.6 vs. 72.0; p < 0.001), and social functioning (51.3 vs. 70.9; p < 0.001). The high distress group was also more likely to have depression compared with the low distress group (19.6 vs. 14.8; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy-induced alopecia distress was negatively associated with body image, psychosocial well-being, and depression in women with breast cancer. It is necessary to develop specific interventions to minimize distress due to alopecia for women with breast cancer.
PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate the impact of chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA) distress on body image, psychosocial well-being, and depression among breast cancerpatients. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted at the breast cancer advocacy events held at 16 hospitals in Korea. Alopecia distress was assessed using the 'Chemotherapy-Induced Alopecia Distress Scale', body image and psychosocial well-being were measured by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and breast specific module (BR23), and depression was measured using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale. Means of outcomes were compared between low and high CIA distress groups. Univariable and multivariable linear regression models were used to analyze the relationship between the CIA distress and body image, psychosocial well-being, and depression. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-eight breast cancerpatients participated in the study; the mean age was 48.4 (SD = 8.4) years, and 55.3% of the patients experienced higher distress from alopecia. In fully adjusted models, the high distress group was more likely to have a poorer body image than the low distress group (35.2 vs. 62.0; p < 0.001). Distressed patients were also more likely to report lower emotional (55.3 vs. 76.9; p < 0.001), role (58.6 vs. 72.0; p < 0.001), and social functioning (51.3 vs. 70.9; p < 0.001). The high distress group was also more likely to have depression compared with the low distress group (19.6 vs. 14.8; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy-induced alopecia distress was negatively associated with body image, psychosocial well-being, and depression in women with breast cancer. It is necessary to develop specific interventions to minimize distress due to alopecia for women with breast cancer.
Authors: Cécile Conte; Manuela Rueter; Guy Laurent; Robert Bourrel; Maryse Lapeyre-Mestre; Fabien Despas Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Christopher John Dunnill; Wafaa Al-Tameemi; Andrew Collett; Iain Stuart Haslam; Nikolaos Theodoros Georgopoulos Journal: Oncologist Date: 2017-09-26
Authors: C Paterson; M Kozlovskaia; M Turner; K Strickland; C Roberts; R Ogilvie; G Pranavan; P Craft Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2020-07-18 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Danbee Kang; Im-Ryung Kim; Yeon Hee Park; Young Hyuck Im; Di Zhao; Eliseo Guallar; Jin Seok Ahn; Juhee Cho Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-07-23 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: V R Belum; K Marulanda; C Ensslin; L Gorcey; T Parikh; S Wu; K J Busam; P A Gerber; M E Lacouture Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2015-09-19 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Hyrum S Eddington; Megan McLeod; Amber W Trickey; Nicolas Barreto; Katherine Maturen; Arden M Morris Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2021-05-01 Impact factor: 4.452