Literature DB >> 28528727

Sexual inactivity in partnered female cancer survivors.

Jennifer L Marino1, Christobel M Saunders2, Martha Hickey3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To measure sexual activity in a clinic population of partnered female cancer survivors, and to better understand reasons for sexual inactivity in this population.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Partnered peri- or post-menopausal cancer survivors seen at a specialty clinic for menopause symptoms after cancer completed Fallowfield's Sexual Activity Questionnaire, quality of life measures (the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General, Breast Cancer, and Endocrine Symptom Scales), and the Greene Climacteric Scale. Responses were compared between those who were sexually active and those who were not.
RESULTS: Of 316 partnered women who reported sexual activity status, most were breast cancer survivors (n=268, 85%) and were sexually active (n=227, 72%). Women who were not sexually active (n=89, 28%) were slightly older than those who were active (53.1v 51.0 years, p=0.049) but did not differ in menopausal status, time since cancer diagnosis, or treatment with chemotherapy, anti-estrogenic endocrine therapy or menopausal hormone therapy. Loss of interest in sex (78%) and being too tired (44%) were the most common reasons for sexual inactivity. Those who were not sexually active were more likely to be dissatisfied with their sex lives (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.52, 95% CI 1.66-7.48) and to have lost interest in sex (aOR 2.12, 95% CI 1.22-3.67). Compared with sexually active women, sexually inactive women were significantly less likely to feel sexually attractive or "able to feel like a woman" (respectively, aOR 2.51, 95% CI 1.01-6.24; aOR 2.21, 95% CI 1.32-3.71) and more likely to feel bothered by a weight change and self-conscious about the way they dressed, and to be bothered by hair loss (respectively, aOR 1.84, 95% CI 1.10-3.05; aOR 2.75, 95% CI 1.63-4.64; aOR 1.85, 95% CI 1.04-3.29). Those who were not sexually active had significantly lower average scores on breast-cancer-related quality of life than sexually active women but did not differ in physical, social or functional well-being or menopause-related quality of life. Pain with intercourse and vaginal dryness were equally common in both groups (respectively, sexually inactive 45.5% v. active 38.3%, aOR 1.28, 95%CI 0.75-2.18; 48.8% v. 49.5%, aOR 0.94, 95% CI 0.57-1.56).
CONCLUSIONS: Over one-quarter of partnered cancer survivors in this clinic-based sample were not sexually active. Sexually inactive women were more dissatisfied with their sex lives, felt less attractive and more self-conscious about their appearance. The reasons for sexual inactivity in cancer survivors are multifaceted and complex and rates of vaginal dryness and dyspareunia did not differ between sexually active and inactive women, suggesting that interventions to improve sexual function which are limited to treating vaginal dryness are unlikely to be effective.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Libido; Menopause; Sexual activity; Sexual dysfunction; Sexual satisfaction

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28528727     DOI: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2017.04.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Maturitas        ISSN: 0378-5122            Impact factor:   4.342


  3 in total

1.  Attitudes and Behavior of Patients with Gynecologic Malignancy Towards Sexual Issues: a Single-institutional Survey.

Authors:  Wei Chen; Qin Ma; Xiaoqin Chen; Chenyan Wang; Huijuan Yang; Yi Zhang; Shuang Ye
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  Sexual activity and functioning in long-term breast cancer survivors; exploring associated factors in a nationwide survey.

Authors:  Solveig K Smedsland; Kathrine F Vandraas; Synne K Bøhn; Alv A Dahl; Cecilie E Kiserud; Mette Brekke; Ragnhild S Falk; Kristin V Reinertsen
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Sexual Activity in Couples Dealing With Breast Cancer. A Cohort Study of Associations With Patient, Partner and Relationship-Related Factors.

Authors:  Nina Rottmann; Pia Veldt Larsen; Christoffer Johansen; Mariët Hagedoorn; Susanne Oksbjerg Dalton; Dorte Gilså Hansen
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-04-07
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.