PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the influence of comorbid chronic diseases (CCD) and physical activity (PA) on quality of life (QOL) in lung cancer survivors (LCSs). METHODS: The study used a cross-sectional study design. A total of 701 LCSs were recruited from 17 comprehensive cancer rehabilitation clubs in Shanghai, China. Measurements used included the European Organization for Research and Treatment quality of life version 3 questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -General version 4 questionnaire (FACT-G). Independent variables were CCD and PA. Multiple linear regression models were used to control for the effect of sociodemographic characteristic. RESULTS: Subjects with CCD generally reported lower scores for most EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scales when compared to subjects without CCD, indicating poorer QOL. Subjects with PA generally reported higher scores for most EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scales when compared to subjects without PA, indicating better QOL. The influences of five times and more PA per week were larger than the influence of less than five times PA per week. Subjects without CCD and with PA generally reported similar scores for most EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scales when compared to others without CCD and PA. Subjects with CCD and PA generally reported higher scores for most EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scales when compared to other LCSs with CCD and without PA. CONCLUSIONS: CCD have significantly negative influence on QOL. PA has significantly positive influence on QOL among the LCSs with CCD, not among the other LCSs without CCD.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the influence of comorbid chronic diseases (CCD) and physical activity (PA) on quality of life (QOL) in lung cancer survivors (LCSs). METHODS: The study used a cross-sectional study design. A total of 701 LCSs were recruited from 17 comprehensive cancer rehabilitation clubs in Shanghai, China. Measurements used included the European Organization for Research and Treatment quality of life version 3 questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy -General version 4 questionnaire (FACT-G). Independent variables were CCD and PA. Multiple linear regression models were used to control for the effect of sociodemographic characteristic. RESULTS: Subjects with CCD generally reported lower scores for most EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scales when compared to subjects without CCD, indicating poorer QOL. Subjects with PA generally reported higher scores for most EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scales when compared to subjects without PA, indicating better QOL. The influences of five times and more PA per week were larger than the influence of less than five times PA per week. Subjects without CCD and with PA generally reported similar scores for most EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scales when compared to others without CCD and PA. Subjects with CCD and PA generally reported higher scores for most EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G scales when compared to other LCSs with CCD and without PA. CONCLUSIONS:CCD have significantly negative influence on QOL. PA has significantly positive influence on QOL among the LCSs with CCD, not among the other LCSs without CCD.
Authors: Richard J Battafarano; Jay F Piccirillo; Bryan F Meyers; Han-Shui Hsu; Tracey J Guthrie; Joel D Cooper; G Alexander Patterson Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: D F Cella; D S Tulsky; G Gray; B Sarafian; E Linn; A Bonomi; M Silberman; S B Yellen; P Winicour; J Brannon Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1993-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1993-03-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Elizabeth G Eakin; Danny R Youlden; Peter D Baade; Sheleigh P Lawler; Marina M Reeves; Jane S Heyworth; Lin Fritschi Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2007-07-19 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Alexander Thompson; Emanuele Di Angelantonio; Pei Gao; Nadeem Sarwar; Sreenivasa Rao Kondapally Seshasai; Stephen Kaptoge; Peter H Whincup; Kenneth J Mukamal; Richard F Gillum; Ingar Holme; Inger Njølstad; Astrid Fletcher; Peter Nilsson; Sarah Lewington; Rory Collins; Vilmundur Gudnason; Simon G Thompson; Naveed Sattar; Elizabeth Selvin; Frank B Hu; John Danesh Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-03-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: D E Ediebah; C Coens; E Zikos; C Quinten; J Ringash; M T King; J Schmucker von Koch; C Gotay; E Greimel; H Flechtner; J Weis; B B Reeve; E F Smit; M J B Taphoorn; A Bottomley Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2014-04-17 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Brett C Bade; J Madison Hyer; Benjamin T Bevill; Alex Pastis; Alana M Rojewski; Benjamin A Toll; Gerard A Silvestri Journal: Integr Cancer Ther Date: 2018-06-14 Impact factor: 3.279