Joshua M Bauml1, Andrea Troxel2, C Neill Epperson3, Roger B Cohen4, Kathryn Schmitz5, Carrie Stricker6, Lawrence N Shulman4, Angela Bradbury4, Jun J Mao7, Corey J Langer4. 1. Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Electronic address: Joshua.bauml@uphs.upenn.edu. 2. Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. 3. Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. 4. Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. 5. Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, United States. 6. Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Carevive Systems, United States. 7. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic imaging may be a major source of cancer-related distress, a condition known as "scanxiety". Scant scholarly work has been performed to evaluate scan-associated distress in cancer. We sought to characterize risk factors for scan-associated distress among patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC), and to evaluate the impact of scan-associated distress on quality of life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study of patients with recurrent/metastatic NSCLC treated at an academic medical center. Clinical and demographic variables were obtained through chart abstraction and patient self-report. We used a modified version of the Impact of Event Scale 6 (IES-6) to specifically assess distress associated with scans, and quality of life was measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Lung (FACT-L). RESULTS: Among 103 participants (survey response rate 76.3%), median age was 67, 61.2% were women, and 82.5% were white. At the study visit, 72.8% of subjects discussed a recent scan, and 83% reported some scan-associated distress. Scan-associated distress was not associated with whether the patient had a recent scan, progressive disease or time from diagnosis. Scan-associated distress was associated with impaired quality of life (p=0.004); each unit increase in IES-6 corresponded to an approximately one-unit decrease in FACT-L score. CONCLUSION: Scan-associated distress is a common problem among patients with NSCLC, and is associated with impaired quality of life. Scan-associated distress severity was not associated with time since diagnosis or whether a recent scan was discussed at the study visit, which implies scan-associated distress may be a persistent problem. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic imaging may be a major source of cancer-related distress, a condition known as "scanxiety". Scant scholarly work has been performed to evaluate scan-associated distress in cancer. We sought to characterize risk factors for scan-associated distress among patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC), and to evaluate the impact of scan-associated distress on quality of life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study of patients with recurrent/metastatic NSCLC treated at an academic medical center. Clinical and demographic variables were obtained through chart abstraction and patient self-report. We used a modified version of the Impact of Event Scale 6 (IES-6) to specifically assess distress associated with scans, and quality of life was measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Lung (FACT-L). RESULTS: Among 103 participants (survey response rate 76.3%), median age was 67, 61.2% were women, and 82.5% were white. At the study visit, 72.8% of subjects discussed a recent scan, and 83% reported some scan-associated distress. Scan-associated distress was not associated with whether the patient had a recent scan, progressive disease or time from diagnosis. Scan-associated distress was associated with impaired quality of life (p=0.004); each unit increase in IES-6 corresponded to an approximately one-unit decrease in FACT-L score. CONCLUSION: Scan-associated distress is a common problem among patients with NSCLC, and is associated with impaired quality of life. Scan-associated distress severity was not associated with time since diagnosis or whether a recent scan was discussed at the study visit, which implies scan-associated distress may be a persistent problem. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer distress; Lung cancer; Quality of life; Scan-associated distress; Scanxiety
Authors: Hannah Arem; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Eric A Engels; Catherine M Alfano; Albert Hollenbeck; Yikyung Park; Charles E Matthews Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-12-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: K A M van den Bergh; M L Essink-Bot; G J J M Borsboom; E T Scholten; R J van Klaveren; H J de Koning Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2010-12-09 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Gregory J Riely; William Pao; Duykhanh Pham; Allan R Li; Naiyer Rizvi; Ennapadam S Venkatraman; Maureen F Zakowski; Mark G Kris; Marc Ladanyi; Vincent A Miller Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2006-02-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Mary K Morreale; Tanina F Moore; Seongho Kim; Heatherlun S Uphold; Lorna M Mabunda; Felicity W K Harper Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2019-08-22
Authors: David Malkin; Kim E Nichols; Joshua D Schiffman; Sharon E Plon; Garrett M Brodeur Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Chelsea K Osterman; Jaber Alanzi; James D Lewis; Elizabeth L Kaufman; Vivek Narayan; Ben Boursi; Ravy K Vajravelu; Frank I Scott; S Bruce Malkowicz; Ronac Mamtani Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2017-12-06 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Heather M Derry; Paul K Maciejewski; Andrew S Epstein; Manish A Shah; Thomas W LeBlanc; Valerie Reyna; Holly G Prigerson Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2019-02-06 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Kim Tam Bui; Belinda E Kiely; Haryana M Dhillon; Chris Brown; Kay Xu; Mohsen Shafiei; Prunella Blinman Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: James L Rogers; Elizabeth Vera; Alvina Acquaye; Nicole Briceno; Varna Jammula; Amanda L King; Heather Leeper; Martha M Quezado; Javier Gonzalez Alarcon; Lisa Boris; Eric Burton; Orieta Celiku; Anna Choi; Alexa Christ; Sonja Crandon; Ewa Grajkowska; Nicole Leggiero; Nicole Lollo; Marta Penas-Prado; Jennifer Reyes; Christine Siegel; Brett J Theeler; Michael Timmer; Kathleen Wall; Jing Wu; Kenneth Aldape; Mark R Gilbert; Terri S Armstrong Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2021-04-10
Authors: Kim Tam Bui; Roger Liang; Belinda E Kiely; Chris Brown; Haryana M Dhillon; Prunella Blinman Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 2.692