Mary Jo Burgoyne1, Kristin Bingen2, Julianne Leuck3, Mahua Dasgupta2, Polly Ryan4, Raymond G Hoffmann2. 1. 1 Cancer Network, Froedtert and the Medical College of Wisconsin , Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 2. 2 Department of Pediatrics, Medical College of Wisconsin , Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 3. 3 Department of Medicine, Froedtert and the Medical College of Wisconsin , Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 4. 4 Department of Patient Care Services, Froedtert and the Medical College of Wisconsin , Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Little is known about cancer-related distress during young adulthood. Results from the few studies that have directly assessed this age group have indicated that young adults (YAs) may be at greater risk of developing psychosocial difficulties due to their unique challenges of coping with cancer. This study's objective was to investigate cancer-related distress in YAs compared to older adults. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study compared the distress level of YAs (18-39 years old) with that of middle-aged (40-64 years old) and senior adults (65-90 years old) using the Distress Thermometer (DT) and associated Problem List (PL). Factors that may be associated with distress by age group were examined, including demographics, cancer type, and PL items endorsed. RESULTS: YAs had higher cancer-related distress than senior adults but similar distress levels to middle-aged adults. Findings from distress comparisons across demographics, cancer types, and PL items endorsed suggest that YAs and middle-aged adults had similar distress patterns when compared to senior adults, who had the lowest DT scores. Multivariable analyses indicated age-related risk factors for high distress, including gynecologic cancers for YAs; divorced, single, or unemployed statuses for middle-aged adults; and being of Hispanic ethnicity for senior adults. Female gender and practical, emotional, and physical problems were associated with distress for all age groups. CONCLUSION: There is a differential impact of cancer by age. It is important to screen for cancer-related distress, paying attention to risk factors by age to determine age-appropriate supportive care needs.
PURPOSE: Little is known about cancer-related distress during young adulthood. Results from the few studies that have directly assessed this age group have indicated that young adults (YAs) may be at greater risk of developing psychosocial difficulties due to their unique challenges of coping with cancer. This study's objective was to investigate cancer-related distress in YAs compared to older adults. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study compared the distress level of YAs (18-39 years old) with that of middle-aged (40-64 years old) and senior adults (65-90 years old) using the Distress Thermometer (DT) and associated Problem List (PL). Factors that may be associated with distress by age group were examined, including demographics, cancer type, and PL items endorsed. RESULTS: YAs had higher cancer-related distress than senior adults but similar distress levels to middle-aged adults. Findings from distress comparisons across demographics, cancer types, and PL items endorsed suggest that YAs and middle-aged adults had similar distress patterns when compared to senior adults, who had the lowest DT scores. Multivariable analyses indicated age-related risk factors for high distress, including gynecologic cancers for YAs; divorced, single, or unemployed statuses for middle-aged adults; and being of Hispanic ethnicity for senior adults. Female gender and practical, emotional, and physical problems were associated with distress for all age groups. CONCLUSION: There is a differential impact of cancer by age. It is important to screen for cancer-related distress, paying attention to risk factors by age to determine age-appropriate supportive care needs.
Entities:
Keywords:
Distress Thermometer; distress; psychosocial; supportive care
Authors: Claire J Han; Biljana Gigic; Martin Schneider; Yakup Kulu; Anita R Peoples; Jennifer Ose; Torsten Kölsch; Paul B Jacobsen; Graham A Colditz; Jane C Figueiredo; William M Grady; Christopher I Li; David Shibata; Erin M Siegel; Adetunji T Toriola; Alexis B Ulrich; Karen L Syrjala; Cornelia M Ulrich Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2020-03-12 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Kelly M Shaffer; Allison J Applebaum; Katherine N DuHamel; Sheila N Garland; Philip Gehrman; Jun J Mao Journal: Behav Sleep Med Date: 2018-11-26 Impact factor: 2.964
Authors: Barbara Muzzatti; Giulia Agostinelli; Francesca Bomben; Sara Busato; Cristiana Flaiban; Katiuscia Maria Gipponi; Giulia Mariutti; Sara Mella; Marika Piccinin; Maria Antonietta Annunziata Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2022-04-26
Authors: Eliza M Park; Elise M Stephenson; Cynthia W Moore; Allison M Deal; Anna C Muriel Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-10-27 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Helen Mizrach; Brett Goshe; Elyse R Park; Christopher Recklitis; Joseph A Greer; Yuchiao Chang; Natasha Frederick; Annah Abrams; Mary D Tower; Emily A Walsh; Mary Huang; Lisa Kenney; Alan Homans; Karen Miller; John Denninger; Ghazala Naheed Usmani; Jeffrey Peppercorn; Giselle K Perez Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2022-01-26