Nina Rottmann1,2, Dorte Gilså Hansen3, Mariët Hagedoorn4, Pia Veldt Larsen5,6, Anne Nicolaisen7, Pernille Envold Bidstrup8, Hanne Würtzen9, Henrik Flyger10, Niels Kroman11,12, Christoffer Johansen8,13. 1. National Research Centre for Cancer Rehabilitation, Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, J.B. Winsløws Vej 9, 5000, Odense C, Denmark. nrottmann@health.sdu.dk. 2. Department of Psychology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230, Odense M, Denmark. nrottmann@health.sdu.dk. 3. National Research Centre for Cancer Rehabilitation, Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, J.B. Winsløws Vej 9, 5000, Odense C, Denmark. 4. Health Sciences/Health Psychology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV, Groningen, The Netherlands. 5. Center for Clinical Epidemiology, Odense University Hospital, Sdr. Boulevard 29, 5000, Odense C, Denmark. 6. Research Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Sdr. Boulevard 29, 5000, Odense C, Denmark. 7. Center for Quality, Region of Southern Denmark, P.V. Tuxensvej 5, 5500, Middelfart, Denmark. 8. Unit of Survivorship, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, Strandboulevarden 49, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. 9. Multidisciplinary Pain Center, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. 10. Department of Breast Surgery, Herlev Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Herlev Ringvej 75, 2730, Herlev, Denmark. 11. Department of Breast Surgery, PBB, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. 12. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. 13. Oncology Department, Finsen Center, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify subgroups of breast cancer patients and their partners based on distinct trajectories of depressive symptoms, to examine how relationship quality and medical and sociodemographic factors were associated with these trajectories, and to explore whether patients and partners had similar trajectories. METHODS: A nationwide, population-based cohort of couples dealing with breast cancer was established in Denmark. Participants completed the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale at baseline and 5 and 12 months later. Sociodemographic and medical characteristics were retrieved from registers. A trajectory finite mixture model was used to identify trajectories. RESULTS: The trajectories of depressive symptoms over time were analyzed in 546 patients and 508 partners. Among patients, 13 % had a high stable trajectory, 38 % an intermediate decreasing trajectory, and 49 % a low trajectory. Similar trajectories were found for partners (11, 22, and 67 %, respectively). Compared to the low trajectory, trajectories with higher depressive symptoms were associated with poorer relationship quality and previous use of antidepressants for patients and partners and with younger age, comorbidity, basic education, and chemotherapy for patients. The trajectories of patients and their partners were weakly correlated. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable minority of patients and partners had a persistently high level of depressive symptoms. Poorer relationship quality and previous antidepressant use most consistently characterized patients and partners with higher depressive symptom trajectories. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: In clinical practice, attention to differences in depressive symptom trajectories is important to identify and target patients and partners who might need support.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify subgroups of breast cancerpatients and their partners based on distinct trajectories of depressive symptoms, to examine how relationship quality and medical and sociodemographic factors were associated with these trajectories, and to explore whether patients and partners had similar trajectories. METHODS: A nationwide, population-based cohort of couples dealing with breast cancer was established in Denmark. Participants completed the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale at baseline and 5 and 12 months later. Sociodemographic and medical characteristics were retrieved from registers. A trajectory finite mixture model was used to identify trajectories. RESULTS: The trajectories of depressive symptoms over time were analyzed in 546 patients and 508 partners. Among patients, 13 % had a high stable trajectory, 38 % an intermediate decreasing trajectory, and 49 % a low trajectory. Similar trajectories were found for partners (11, 22, and 67 %, respectively). Compared to the low trajectory, trajectories with higher depressive symptoms were associated with poorer relationship quality and previous use of antidepressants for patients and partners and with younger age, comorbidity, basic education, and chemotherapy for patients. The trajectories of patients and their partners were weakly correlated. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable minority of patients and partners had a persistently high level of depressive symptoms. Poorer relationship quality and previous antidepressant use most consistently characterized patients and partners with higher depressive symptom trajectories. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: In clinical practice, attention to differences in depressive symptom trajectories is important to identify and target patients and partners who might need support.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Cohort study; Couples; Depressive symptoms; Partner
Authors: Annette L Stanton; Patricia A Ganz; Julia H Rowland; Beth E Meyerowitz; Janice L Krupnick; Sharon R Sears Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-12-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Wayne A Bardwell; Loki Natarajan; Joel E Dimsdale; Cheryl L Rock; Joanne E Mortimer; Kathy Hollenbach; John P Pierce Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Helene Terp; Nina Rottmann; Pia Veldt Larsen; Mariët Hagedoorn; Henrik Flyger; Niels Kroman; Christoffer Johansen; Susanne Dalton; Dorte Gilså Hansen Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-12-10 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Wendy W T Lam; George A Bonanno; Anthony D Mancini; Samuel Ho; Miranda Chan; Wai Ka Hung; Amy Or; Richard Fielding Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Qi Chen; Lauren Terhorst; David A Geller; Wallis Marsh; Michael Antoni; Mary Amanda Dew; Michelle Biala; Josh Weinstein; Allan Tsung; Jennifer Steel Journal: J Psychosoc Oncol Date: 2020-05-05
Authors: Julienne E Bower; Joshua Wiley; Laura Petersen; Michael R Irwin; Steve W Cole; Patricia A Ganz Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Kate Ryan Kuhlman; Michael R Irwin; Patricia A Ganz; Catherine M Crespi; Laura Petersen; Arash Asher; Julienne E Bower Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Amanda N Gesselman; Silvia M Bigatti; Justin R Garcia; Kathryn Coe; David Cella; Victoria L Champion Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-07-04 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: A Nicolaisen; M Hagedoorn; D G Hansen; H L Flyger; R Christensen; N Rottmann; P B Lunn; H Terp; K Soee; C Johansen Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2018-01-26 Impact factor: 3.894