Candyce H Kroenke1, Yvonne L Michael2, Xiao-Ou Shu3, Elizabeth M Poole4, Marilyn L Kwan1, Sarah Nechuta3, Bette J Caan1, John P Pierce5, Wendy Y Chen4,6. 1. Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Division of Research, Oakland, CA, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Drexel University School of Public Health, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA. 4. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 5. San Diego Moores Cancer Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA. 6. Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Larger social networks have been associated with better breast cancer survival. To investigate potential mediators, we evaluated associations of social network size and diversity with lifestyle and treatment factors associated with prognosis. METHODS: We included 9331 women from the After Breast Cancer Pooling Project who provided data on social networks within approximately two years following diagnosis. A social network index was derived from information about the presence of a spouse or intimate partner, religious ties, community participation, friendship ties, and numbers of living relatives. Diversity was assessed as variety of ties, independent of size. We used logistic regression to evaluate associations with outcomes and evaluated whether effect estimates differed using meta-analytic techniques. RESULTS: Associations were similar across cohorts though analyses of smoking and alcohol included US cohorts only because of low prevalence of these behaviors in the Shanghai cohort. Socially isolated women were more likely to be obese (OR = 1.21, 95% CI:1.03-1.42), have low physical activity (<10 MET-hours/week, OR = 1.55, 95% CI:1.36-1.78), be current smokers (OR = 2.77, 95% CI:2.09-3.68), and have high alcohol intake (≥15 g/d, OR = 1.23, 95% CI:1.00-1.51), compared with socially integrated women. Among node positive cases from three cohorts, socially isolated women were more likely not to receive chemotherapy (OR = 2.10, 95% CI:1.30-3.39); associations differed in a fourth cohort. Other associations (nonsignificant) were consistent with less intensive treatment in socially isolated women. Low social network diversity was independently associated with more adverse lifestyle, but not clinical, factors. CONCLUSIONS: Small, less diverse social networks measured post-diagnosis were associated with more adverse lifestyle factors and less intensive cancer treatment.
OBJECTIVE: Larger social networks have been associated with better breast cancer survival. To investigate potential mediators, we evaluated associations of social network size and diversity with lifestyle and treatment factors associated with prognosis. METHODS: We included 9331 women from the After Breast Cancer Pooling Project who provided data on social networks within approximately two years following diagnosis. A social network index was derived from information about the presence of a spouse or intimate partner, religious ties, community participation, friendship ties, and numbers of living relatives. Diversity was assessed as variety of ties, independent of size. We used logistic regression to evaluate associations with outcomes and evaluated whether effect estimates differed using meta-analytic techniques. RESULTS: Associations were similar across cohorts though analyses of smoking and alcohol included US cohorts only because of low prevalence of these behaviors in the Shanghai cohort. Socially isolated women were more likely to be obese (OR = 1.21, 95% CI:1.03-1.42), have low physical activity (<10 MET-hours/week, OR = 1.55, 95% CI:1.36-1.78), be current smokers (OR = 2.77, 95% CI:2.09-3.68), and have high alcohol intake (≥15 g/d, OR = 1.23, 95% CI:1.00-1.51), compared with socially integrated women. Among node positive cases from three cohorts, socially isolated women were more likely not to receive chemotherapy (OR = 2.10, 95% CI:1.30-3.39); associations differed in a fourth cohort. Other associations (nonsignificant) were consistent with less intensive treatment in socially isolated women. Low social network diversity was independently associated with more adverse lifestyle, but not clinical, factors. CONCLUSIONS: Small, less diverse social networks measured post-diagnosis were associated with more adverse lifestyle factors and less intensive cancer treatment.
Authors: Candyce H Kroenke; Laura D Kubzansky; Eva S Schernhammer; Michelle D Holmes; Ichiro Kawachi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Marilyn L Kwan; Wendy Y Chen; Shirley W Flatt; Erin K Weltzien; Sarah J Nechuta; Elizabeth M Poole; Michelle D Holmes; Ruth E Patterson; Xiao Ou Shu; John P Pierce; Bette J Caan Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2012-11-13 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: P Reynolds; P T Boyd; R S Blacklow; J S Jackson; R S Greenberg; D F Austin; V W Chen; B K Edwards Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 1994 Apr-May Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: John P Pierce; Susan Faerber; Fred A Wright; Cheryl L Rock; Vicky Newman; Shirley W Flatt; Sheila Kealey; Vicky E Jones; Bette J Caan; Ellen B Gold; Mary Haan; Kathryn A Hollenbach; Lovell Jones; James R Marshall; Cheryl Ritenbaugh; Marcia L Stefanick; Cynthia Thomson; Linda Wasserman; Loki Natarajan; Ronald G Thomas; Elizabeth A Gilpin Journal: Control Clin Trials Date: 2002-12
Authors: Candyce H Kroenke; Yvonne L Michael; Elizabeth M Poole; Marilyn L Kwan; Sarah Nechuta; Eric Leas; Bette J Caan; John Pierce; Xiao-Ou Shu; Ying Zheng; Wendy Y Chen Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-12-12 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: María Elena Martínez; Jonathan T Unkart; Li Tao; Candyce H Kroenke; Richard Schwab; Ian Komenaka; Scarlett Lin Gomez Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-05-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Bo Qin; Kate Kim; Noreen Goldman; Andrew G Rundle; Dhanya Chanumolu; Nur Zeinomar; Baichen Xu; Karen S Pawlish; Christine B Ambrosone; Kitaw Demissie; Chi-Chen Hong; Gina S Lovasi; Elisa V Bandera Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-03-25 Impact factor: 50.717
Authors: Julienne E Bower; Stephen L Shiao; Peggy Sullivan; Donald M Lamkin; Robert Atienza; Fernando Mercado; Jesusa Arevalo; Arash Asher; Patricia A Ganz; Steve W Cole Journal: JNCI Cancer Spectr Date: 2018-07-19