BACKGROUND: Papillary thyroid cancer is often described as the "good cancer" because of its treatability and relatively favorable survival rates. This study sought to characterize the thoughts of papillary thyroid cancer patients as they relate to having the "good cancer." METHODS: This qualitative study included 31 papillary thyroid cancer patients enrolled in an ongoing randomized trial. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants at the preoperative visit and two weeks, six weeks, six months, and one year after thyroidectomy. Grounded theory was used, inductively coding the first 113 interview transcripts with NVivo 11. RESULTS: The concept of thyroid cancer as "good cancer" emerged unprompted from 94% (n = 29) of participants, mostly concentrated around the time of diagnosis. Patients encountered this perception from healthcare providers, Internet research, friends, and preconceived ideas about other cancers. While patients generally appreciated optimism, this perspective also generated negative feelings. It eased the diagnosis of cancer but created confusion when individual experiences varied from expectations. Despite initially feeling reassured, participants described feeling the "good cancer" characterization invalidated their fears of having cancer. Thyroid cancer patients expressed that they did not want to hear that it's "only thyroid cancer" and that it's "no big deal," because "cancer is cancer," and it is significant. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with papillary thyroid cancer commonly confront the perception that their malignancy is "good," but the favorable prognosis and treatability of the disease do not comprehensively represent their cancer fight. The "good cancer" perception is at the root of many mixed and confusing emotions. Clinicians emphasize optimistic outcomes, hoping to comfort, but they might inadvertently invalidate the impact thyroid cancer has on patients' lives.
BACKGROUND:Papillary thyroid cancer is often described as the "good cancer" because of its treatability and relatively favorable survival rates. This study sought to characterize the thoughts of papillary thyroid cancerpatients as they relate to having the "good cancer." METHODS: This qualitative study included 31 papillary thyroid cancerpatients enrolled in an ongoing randomized trial. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants at the preoperative visit and two weeks, six weeks, six months, and one year after thyroidectomy. Grounded theory was used, inductively coding the first 113 interview transcripts with NVivo 11. RESULTS: The concept of thyroid cancer as "good cancer" emerged unprompted from 94% (n = 29) of participants, mostly concentrated around the time of diagnosis. Patients encountered this perception from healthcare providers, Internet research, friends, and preconceived ideas about other cancers. While patients generally appreciated optimism, this perspective also generated negative feelings. It eased the diagnosis of cancer but created confusion when individual experiences varied from expectations. Despite initially feeling reassured, participants described feeling the "good cancer" characterization invalidated their fears of having cancer. Thyroid cancerpatients expressed that they did not want to hear that it's "only thyroid cancer" and that it's "no big deal," because "cancer is cancer," and it is significant. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with papillary thyroid cancer commonly confront the perception that their malignancy is "good," but the favorable prognosis and treatability of the disease do not comprehensively represent their cancer fight. The "good cancer" perception is at the root of many mixed and confusing emotions. Clinicians emphasize optimistic outcomes, hoping to comfort, but they might inadvertently invalidate the impact thyroid cancer has on patients' lives.
Authors: Yong Gyu Hyun; Ahmad Alhashemi; Rouhi Fazelzad; Alyse S Goldberg; David P Goldstein; Anna M Sawka Journal: Thyroid Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Briseis Aschebrook-Kilfoy; Benjamin James; Sapna Nagar; Sharone Kaplan; Vanessa Seng; Habibul Ahsan; Peter Angelos; Edwin L Kaplan; Marlon A Guerrero; Jennifer H Kuo; James A Lee; Elliot J Mitmaker; Jacob Moalem; Daniel T Ruan; Wen T Shen; Raymon H Grogan Journal: Thyroid Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Megan K Applewhite; Benjamin C James; Sharone P Kaplan; Peter Angelos; Edwin L Kaplan; Raymon H Grogan; Briseis Aschebrook-Kilfoy Journal: World J Surg Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Eva-Maria Gamper; Lisa M Wintner; Margarida Rodrigues; Sabine Buxbaum; Bernhard Nilica; Susanne Singer; Johannes M Giesinger; Bernhard Holzner; Irene Virgolini Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-03-13 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Anna M Sawka; David P Goldstein; James D Brierley; Richard W Tsang; Lorne Rotstein; Shereen Ezzat; Sharon Straus; Susan R George; Susan Abbey; Gary Rodin; Mary Ann O'Brien; Amiram Gafni; Lehana Thabane; Jeannette Goguen; Asima Naeem; Lilian Magalhaes Journal: PLoS One Date: 2009-01-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Maria Papaleontiou; David Reyes-Gastelum; Brittany L Gay; Kevin C Ward; Ann S Hamilton; Sarah T Hawley; Megan R Haymart Journal: Thyroid Date: 2019-07-25 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Samantha A Diamond-Rossi; Jacqueline Jonklaas; Roxanne E Jensen; Charlene Kuo; Selma Stearns; Giuseppe Esposito; Bruce J Davidson; George Luta; Gary Bloom; Kristi D Graves Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2020-06-06 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Susan C Pitt; Elizabeth Wendt; Megan C Saucke; Corrine I Voils; Jason Orne; Cameron L Macdonald; Nadine P Connor; Rebecca S Sippel Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2019-07-12 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Amanda R Doubleday; Sarah E Robbins; Cameron L Macdonald; Dawn M Elfenbein; Nadine P Connor; Rebecca S Sippel Journal: Surgery Date: 2020-07-09 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Susan C Pitt; Megan C Saucke; Elizabeth M Wendt; David F Schneider; Jason Orne; Cameron L Macdonald; Nadine P Connor; Rebecca S Sippel Journal: Thyroid Date: 2020-11-04 Impact factor: 6.568