Mimi Ton1,2, Nathaniel F Watson3,4, Arthur Sillah1,2, Rachel C Malen1, Julia D Labadie1, Adriana M Reedy1, Stacey A Cohen5,6, Andrea N Burnett-Hartman1,7, Polly A Newcomb1,2, Amanda I Phipps1,2. 1. Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N, Seattle, WA 98109, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington School of Public Health, 3980 15th Ave NE, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, University of Washington School of Medicine, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. 4. University of Washington Medicine Sleep Center, University of Washington, 908 Jefferson St, Seattle, WA 98104, USA. 5. Division of Oncology, University of Washington, 825 Eastlake Ave E, Seattle, WA 98109, USA. 6. Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Ave N, Seattle, WA 98109, USA. 7. Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, 2550 S Parker Rd, Aurora, CO 80014, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Sleep quality in relation to anatomic site among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients is not well understood, though discerning the relationship could contribute to improved survivorship care. METHODS: We ascertained sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index) and other personal characteristics within an ongoing population-based study of CRC patients identified through a cancer registry (N = 1453). Differences in sleep quality by CRC site were analyzed using chi-square and ANOVA tests. We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association of tumor site with sleep quality concerns, adjusting for patient attributes and time since diagnosis. RESULTS: Sleeping problems were reported by 70% of CRC patients. Overall, participants with rectal (vs. colon) cancer were more likely (OR (95% CI)) to report general trouble sleeping (1.58 (1.19, 2.10)). Rectal cancer patients were also more likely than colon cancer patients to report changes in sleep patterns after cancer diagnosis (1.38 (1.05, 1.80)), and trouble sleeping specifically due to getting up to use the bathroom (1.53 (1.20, 1.96)) or pain (1.58 (1.15, 2.17)), but were less likely to report trouble sleeping specifically due to issues with breathing/coughing/snoring (0.51 (0.27, 0.99)). CONCLUSION: Overall, rectal cancer patients were more likely to have sleep complications compared to colon cancer patients. This suggests sleep-focused survivorship care may be adapted according to CRC site to ensure patients receive appropriate support.
PURPOSE: Sleep quality in relation to anatomic site among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients is not well understood, though discerning the relationship could contribute to improved survivorship care. METHODS: We ascertained sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index) and other personal characteristics within an ongoing population-based study of CRCpatients identified through a cancer registry (N = 1453). Differences in sleep quality by CRC site were analyzed using chi-square and ANOVA tests. We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association of tumor site with sleep quality concerns, adjusting for patient attributes and time since diagnosis. RESULTS: Sleeping problems were reported by 70% of CRCpatients. Overall, participants with rectal (vs. colon) cancer were more likely (OR (95% CI)) to report general trouble sleeping (1.58 (1.19, 2.10)). Rectal cancerpatients were also more likely than colon cancerpatients to report changes in sleep patterns after cancer diagnosis (1.38 (1.05, 1.80)), and trouble sleeping specifically due to getting up to use the bathroom (1.53 (1.20, 1.96)) or pain (1.58 (1.15, 2.17)), but were less likely to report trouble sleeping specifically due to issues with breathing/coughing/snoring (0.51 (0.27, 0.99)). CONCLUSION: Overall, rectal cancerpatients were more likely to have sleep complications compared to colon cancerpatients. This suggests sleep-focused survivorship care may be adapted according to CRC site to ensure patients receive appropriate support.
Authors: D K Lei; M Yousaf; S R Janmohamed; P P Vakharia; R Chopra; R Sacotte; K R Patel; V Singam; S Immaneni; R Kantor; D Y Hsu; J I Silverberg Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2020-03-05 Impact factor: 9.302
Authors: D Howell; T K Oliver; S Keller-Olaman; J R Davidson; S Garland; C Samuels; J Savard; C Harris; M Aubin; K Olson; J Sussman; J MacFarlane; C Taylor Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2013-11-27 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Joseph A Roscoe; Maralyn E Kaufman; Sara E Matteson-Rusby; Oxana G Palesh; Julie L Ryan; Sadhna Kohli; Michael L Perlis; Gary R Morrow Journal: Oncologist Date: 2007