Victoria S Blinder1, Carolyn E Eberle2, Christina Tran3, Ting Bao4, Manmeet Malik5, Gabriel Jung6, Caroline Hwang7, Lewis Kampel8,9, Sujata Patil10, Francesca M Gany3. 1. Immigrant Health and Cancer Disparities Service, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Breast Medicine Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Avenue, Second Floor, New York, NY, 10017, USA. blinderv@mskcc.org. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, 135 Dauer Drive, 2101 McGavran-Greenberg Hall, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. 3. Immigrant Health and Cancer Disparities Service, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Avenue, Second Floor, New York, NY, 10017, USA. 4. Integrative Medicine Service and Breast Medicine Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA. 5. Department of Surgery, New York-Presbyterian Queens, 56-45 Main Street, Flushing, NY, 11355, USA. 6. Queens Medical Associates, 176-60 Union Turnpike, Suite 360, Fresh Meadows, NY, 11366, USA. 7. The Lincoln Breast Center, Department of Medicine, NY Health + Hospitals/Lincoln, 234 ugenio Maria De Hostos Blvd, Bronx, NY, 10451, USA. 8. The Ralph Lauren Center for Cancer Care, 191 Madison Avenue, New York, NY, 10035, USA. 9. Genitourinary Oncology Service, Sidney Kimmel Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 10. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485Lexington Avenue, Second Floor, New York, NY, 10017, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Racial/ethnic minorities experience greater job loss than whites during periods of economic downturn and after a cancer diagnosis. Therefore, race/ethnicity-matched controls are needed to distinguish the impact of illness on job loss from secular trends METHODS: Surveys were administered during and 4-month post-completion of breast cancer treatment. Patients were pre-diagnosis employed women aged 18-64, undergoing treatment for stage I-III breast cancers, who spoke English, Chinese, Korean, or Spanish. Each patient was asked to: (1) nominate peers who were surveyed in a corresponding timeframe (active controls), (2) report a friend's work status at baseline and follow-up (passive controls). Both types of controls were healthy, employed at baseline, and shared the nominating patient's race/ethnicity, language, and age. The primary outcome was number of evaluable patient-control pairs by type of control. A patient-control pair was evaluable if work status at follow-up was reported for both individuals. RESULTS: Of the 180 patients, 25% had evaluable active controls (45 patient-control pairs); 84% had evaluable passive controls (151 patient-control pairs). Although patients with controls differed from those without controls under each strategy, there was no difference in the percentage of controls who were working at follow-up (96% of active controls; 91% of passive controls). However, only 65% of patients were working at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients had evaluable passive controls. There was no significant difference in outcome between controls ascertained through either method IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Passive controls are a low-cost, higher-yield option to control for secular trends in racially/ethnically diverse samples.
PURPOSE: Racial/ethnic minorities experience greater job loss than whites during periods of economic downturn and after a cancer diagnosis. Therefore, race/ethnicity-matched controls are needed to distinguish the impact of illness on job loss from secular trends METHODS: Surveys were administered during and 4-month post-completion of breast cancer treatment. Patients were pre-diagnosis employed women aged 18-64, undergoing treatment for stage I-III breast cancers, who spoke English, Chinese, Korean, or Spanish. Each patient was asked to: (1) nominate peers who were surveyed in a corresponding timeframe (active controls), (2) report a friend's work status at baseline and follow-up (passive controls). Both types of controls were healthy, employed at baseline, and shared the nominating patient's race/ethnicity, language, and age. The primary outcome was number of evaluable patient-control pairs by type of control. A patient-control pair was evaluable if work status at follow-up was reported for both individuals. RESULTS: Of the 180 patients, 25% had evaluable active controls (45 patient-control pairs); 84% had evaluable passive controls (151 patient-control pairs). Although patients with controls differed from those without controls under each strategy, there was no difference in the percentage of controls who were working at follow-up (96% of active controls; 91% of passive controls). However, only 65% of patients were working at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients had evaluable passive controls. There was no significant difference in outcome between controls ascertained through either method IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Passive controls are a low-cost, higher-yield option to control for secular trends in racially/ethnically diverse samples.
Authors: Amye J Tevaarwerk; Ju-Whei Lee; Abigail Terhaar; Mary E Sesto; Mary Lou Smith; Charles S Cleeland; Michael J Fisch Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-12-21 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Victoria Blinder; Sujata Patil; Carolyn Eberle; Jennifer Griggs; Rose C Maly Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2013-07-25 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Marie Norredam; Ellen Meara; Mary Beth Landrum; Haiden A Huskamp; Nancy L Keating Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Angela G E M de Boer; Taina Taskila; Anneli Ojajärvi; Frank J H van Dijk; Jos H A M Verbeek Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-02-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Electra D Paskett; Katherine W Reeves; John M McLaughlin; Mira L Katz; Ann Scheck McAlearney; Mack T Ruffin; Chanita Hughes Halbert; Cristina Merete; Faith Davis; Sarah Gehlert Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2008-07-31 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Donatus U Ekwueme; K Robin Yabroff; Gery P Guy; Matthew P Banegas; Janet S de Moor; Chunyu Li; Xuesong Han; Zhiyuan Zheng; Anita Soni; Amy Davidoff; Ruth Rechis; Katherine S Virgo Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2014-06-13 Impact factor: 17.586