| Literature DB >> 34480622 |
Yangjun Liu1, Erik Pettersson2, Anna Schandl1,3, Sheraz Markar1,4,5, Asif Johar1, Pernilla Lagergren6,7.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the trajectory of psychological distress from 1 to 2 years after esophageal cancer surgery, and whether dispositional optimism could predict the risk of postoperative psychological distress.Entities:
Keywords: Anxiety; Depression; Esophageal cancer; Optimism; Psychological distress; Survivorship
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34480622 PMCID: PMC8727404 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-021-06517-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Support Care Cancer ISSN: 0941-4355 Impact factor: 3.359
Characteristics of the 192 patients with esophageal cancer surgery
| Number (%) | |
|---|---|
| Age [mean (SD)] | 66.3 (8.5) |
| Sex | |
| Female | 28 (14.6) |
| Male | 164 (85.4) |
| Cohabitation status | |
| Non-cohabitating | 44 (22.9) |
| Cohabitating | 148 (77.1) |
| Education level | |
| Nine-year compulsory school | 48 (25.0) |
| Upper secondary school | 85 (44.3) |
| Higher education | 59 (30.7) |
| Tumor stage | |
| Complete regression after neoadjuvant therapy/I | 71 (37.0) |
| II | 62 (32.3) |
| III–IV | 59 (30.7) |
| Tumor histology | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 163 (84.9) |
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 29 (15.1) |
| Postoperative complications (Clavien–Dindo grade) | |
| No complication | 69 (35.9) |
| I–II | 54 (28.1) |
| III–IV | 69 (35.9) |
| Neoadjuvant therapy | |
| Yes | 158 (82.3) |
| No | 34 (17.7) |
| Surgical approach | |
| Total minimally invasive esophagectomy | 52 (27.1) |
| Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy | 63 (32.8) |
| Open esophagectomy | 77 (40.1) |
| Charlson comorbidity index | |
| 0 | 94 (49.0) |
| 1 | 60 (31.3) |
| ≥ 2 | 38 (19.8) |
| LOT sum score [mean (SD)] | 15.2 (3.0) |
SD, standard deviation; LOT-R, Life Orientation Test-Revised
Fig. 1Observed proportion and estimated probability of clinically significant psychological distress after esophageal cancer surgery
Fig. 2Estimated probability of psychological distress as a function of LOT-R sum score for three assessment time points after esophageal cancer surgery. Note. LOT-R: Life Orientation Test-Revised. The estimated probability is calculated from latent growth curve model, holding other included variables (age, sex, cohabitating status and education level) at their mean values
Results from the three hierarchical random intercept models examining the predictive validity of dispositional optimism on psychological distress after esophageal cancer surgery
| Model A | Model B | Model C | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main analysis (LOT-R sum score) | Odds ratio | Unstandardized | 0.56 (0.40, 0.80) | 0.56 (0.40, 0.79) | 0.55 (0.39, 0.78) |
Sensitivity analysis (latent factor) | |||||
Model A, crude mode; Model B, adjusted for age, sex, cohabitation status and education level; Model C, adjusted for age, sex, cohabitation status, education level, comorbidity, neoadjuvant therapy, tumor stage, histology, and postoperative complication within 30 days post-surgery; LOT-R, Life Orientation Test-Revised. Main analysis, models used LOT-R sum score to represent dispositional optimism; Sensitivity analysis, models incorporated factor analysis and used latent factor to represent dispositional optimism. Full standardization means both the independent and the dependent variables were standardized