Julienne E Bower1, Joshua Wiley2, Laura Petersen3, Michael R Irwin1, Steve W Cole4, Patricia A Ganz3. 1. Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles. 2. Monash University. 3. Division of Cancer Prevention and Control Research, Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center at UCLA. 4. Cousins Center for Psychoneuroimmunology, Semel Institute at University of California, Los Angeles.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Fatigue is a common side effect of cancer treatment, but there is considerable variability in fatigue severity and persistence among survivors. This study aimed to characterize longitudinal trajectories of fatigue after breast cancer treatment and to identify predictors of varying fatigue trajectories. METHODS: Women (N = 191) from the Mind-Body Study completed assessments after primary treatment for early stage breast cancer and at regular follow-ups that occurred up to 6 years after treatment (M = 4.3 years). Growth mixture models were used to characterize fatigue trajectories, and demographic, medical, and biobehavioral risk factors were examined as predictors of trajectory group. RESULTS: Five trajectories were identified, characterized as High, Recovery, Late, Low, and Very Low fatigue. The High and Recovery groups (40% of sample) evidenced elevated fatigue at posttreatment that declined in Recovery but persisted in the High group. In bivariate analyses, trajectory groups differed significantly on depressive symptoms, sleep disturbance, childhood adversity, body mass index, and the inflammatory marker soluble TNF receptor type II, which were higher in the High and/or Recovery groups. In multivariate models, depressive symptoms and childhood adversity distinguished High and Recovery from other groups. Rates of chemotherapy were higher in the Recovery than in the High or Late group, whereas rates of endocrine therapy were higher in the High than in the Recovery group. CONCLUSIONS: There are distinct longitudinal trajectories of fatigue after breast cancer treatment. Psychological factors are strongly associated with adverse fatigue trajectories, and together with treatment exposures may increase risk for cancer-related fatigue. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).
OBJECTIVE:Fatigue is a common side effect of cancer treatment, but there is considerable variability in fatigue severity and persistence among survivors. This study aimed to characterize longitudinal trajectories of fatigue after breast cancer treatment and to identify predictors of varying fatigue trajectories. METHODS:Women (N = 191) from the Mind-Body Study completed assessments after primary treatment for early stage breast cancer and at regular follow-ups that occurred up to 6 years after treatment (M = 4.3 years). Growth mixture models were used to characterize fatigue trajectories, and demographic, medical, and biobehavioral risk factors were examined as predictors of trajectory group. RESULTS: Five trajectories were identified, characterized as High, Recovery, Late, Low, and Very Low fatigue. The High and Recovery groups (40% of sample) evidenced elevated fatigue at posttreatment that declined in Recovery but persisted in the High group. In bivariate analyses, trajectory groups differed significantly on depressive symptoms, sleep disturbance, childhood adversity, body mass index, and the inflammatory marker soluble TNF receptor type II, which were higher in the High and/or Recovery groups. In multivariate models, depressive symptoms and childhood adversity distinguished High and Recovery from other groups. Rates of chemotherapy were higher in the Recovery than in the High or Late group, whereas rates of endocrine therapy were higher in the High than in the Recovery group. CONCLUSIONS: There are distinct longitudinal trajectories of fatigue after breast cancer treatment. Psychological factors are strongly associated with adverse fatigue trajectories, and together with treatment exposures may increase risk for cancer-related fatigue. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Peter Nieboer; Ciska Buijs; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; Caroline Seynaeve; Louk V A M Beex; Elsken van der Wall; Dick J Richel; Marianne A Nooij; Emile E Voest; Pierre Hupperets; Nanno H Mulder; Winette T A van der Graaf; Els M TenVergert; Harm van Tinteren; Elisabeth G E de Vries Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-10-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael A Andrykowski; John E Schmidt; John M Salsman; Abbie O Beacham; Paul B Jacobsen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-09-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Julienne E Bower; Patricia A Ganz; Katherine A Desmond; Coen Bernaards; Julia H Rowland; Beth E Meyerowitz; Thomas R Belin Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Hans Geinitz; Frank B Zimmermann; Reinhard Thamm; Monika Keller; Raymonde Busch; Michael Molls Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2004-03-06 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Kristine A Donovan; Paul B Jacobsen; Michael A Andrykowski; Erin M Winters; Lodovico Balducci; Uzma Malik; Daniel Kenady; Patrick McGrath Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Lynne I Wagner; Robert J Gray; Joseph A Sparano; Timothy J Whelan; Sofia F Garcia; Betina Yanez; Amye J Tevaarwerk; Ruth C Carlos; Kathy S Albain; John A Olson; Matthew P Goetz; Kathleen I Pritchard; Daniel F Hayes; Charles E Geyer; E Claire Dees; Worta J McCaskill-Stevens; Lori M Minasian; George W Sledge; David Cella Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2020-04-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Rina S Fox; Sonia Ancoli-Israel; Scott C Roesch; Erin L Merz; Sarah D Mills; Kristen J Wells; Georgia Robins Sadler; Vanessa L Malcarne Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-06-03 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Sofia F Garcia; Robert J Gray; Joseph A Sparano; Amye J Tevaarwerk; Ruth C Carlos; Betina Yanez; Ilana F Gareen; Timothy J Whelan; George W Sledge; David Cella; Lynne I Wagner Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-10-06 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Hongjin Li; Anna L Marsland; Yvette P Conley; Susan M Sereika; Catherine M Bender Journal: Biol Res Nurs Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 2.522
Authors: Julienne E Bower; Patricia A Ganz; Michael R Irwin; Steve W Cole; Deborah Garet; Laura Petersen; Arash Asher; Sara A Hurvitz; Catherine M Crespi Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Aasha I Hoogland; Heather S L Jim; Brian D Gonzalez; Brent J Small; Danielle Gilvary; Elizabeth C Breen; Julienne E Bower; Mayer Fishman; Babu Zachariah; Paul B Jacobsen Journal: Cancer Date: 2020-12-30 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ines Vaz-Luis; Antonio Di Meglio; Julie Havas; Mayssam El-Mouhebb; Pietro Lapidari; Daniele Presti; Davide Soldato; Barbara Pistilli; Agnes Dumas; Gwenn Menvielle; Cecile Charles; Sibille Everhard; Anne-Laure Martin; Paul H Cottu; Florence Lerebours; Charles Coutant; Sarah Dauchy; Suzette Delaloge; Nancy U Lin; Patricia A Ganz; Ann H Partridge; Fabrice André; Stefan Michiels Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 50.717