Antonio Di Meglio1,2, Julie Havas1, Davide Soldato1,3, Daniele Presti1,4, Elise Martin1, Barbara Pistilli1,2, Gwenn Menvielle5, Agnes Dumas6, Cecile Charles1, Sibille Everhard7, Anne-Laure Martin7, Charles Coutant8, Carole Tarpin9, Laurence Vanlemmens10, Christelle Levy11, Olivier Rigal12, Suzette Delaloge1,2, Nancy U Lin13, Patricia A Ganz14, Ann H Partridge13, Fabrice André1,2, Stefan Michiels15,16, Ines Vaz-Luis1,2. 1. INSERM Unit 981-Molecular Predictors and New Targets in Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France; University Paris-Saclay. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France. 3. Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, University of Genova, Genova, Italy. 4. Department of Internal Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy. 5. Sorbonne University, INSERM, Pierre Louis Institute of Epidemiology and Public Health, Paris, France. 6. Universite de Paris, ECEVE UMR 1123, INSERM, Paris, France. 7. UNICANCER, Paris, France. 8. Centre Georges-François Leclerc, Dijon, France. 9. Institut Paoli Calmettes, Marseille, France. 10. Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France. 11. Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France. 12. Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen, France. 13. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA. 14. University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. 15. Service de Biostatistique et d'Epidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France. 16. Oncostat U1018, Inserm, University Paris-Saclay, Ligue Contre le Cancer, Villejuif, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Fatigue is common and troublesome among breast cancer survivors; however, limited tools exist to predict its risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants with stage I-III breast cancer were prospectively included from CANTO (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01993498), collecting longitudinal data at diagnosis (before the initiation of any cancer treatment) and 1 (T1), 2 (T2), and 4 (T3) years after diagnosis. The main outcome was severe global fatigue at T2 (score ≥ 40/100, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30). Analyses at T3 were exploratory. Secondary outcomes included physical, emotional, and cognitive fatigue (EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-FA12). Multivariable logistic regression models retained associations with severe fatigue by bootstrapped Augmented Backward Elimination. Validation methods included 10-fold internal cross-validation, overoptimism-corrected area under the receiver operating characteristic curves, and external validation. RESULTS: Among 5,640, 5,000, and 3,400 patients at T1, T2, and T3, respectively, the prevalence of post-treatment severe global fatigue was 35.6%, 34.0%, and 31.5% in the development cohort. Retained risk factors for severe global fatigue at T2 were severe pretreatment fatigue (adjusted odds ratio v no 3.191 [95% CI, 2.704 to 3.767]); younger age (for 1-year decrement 1.015 [1.009 to 1.022]), higher body mass index (for unit increment 1.025 [1.012 to 1.038]), current smoking behavior (v never 1.552 [1.291 to 1.866]), worse anxiety (v noncase 1.265 [1.073 to 1.492]), insomnia (for unit increment 1.005 [1.003 to 1.007]), and pain at diagnosis (for unit increment 1.014 [1.010 to 1.017]), with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.75). Receipt of hormonal therapy was a risk factor for severe fatigue at T3 (v no 1.448 [1.165 to 1.799]). Dimension-specific risk factors included body mass index for physical fatigue and emotional distress for emotional and cognitive fatigue. CONCLUSION: We propose a predictive model to assess fatigue among breast cancer survivors, within a personalized survivorship care framework. This may help clinicians to provide early management interventions or to correct modifiable risk factors and offer more tailored monitoring and education to patients at risk of severe post-treatment fatigue.
PURPOSE: Fatigue is common and troublesome among breast cancer survivors; however, limited tools exist to predict its risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants with stage I-III breast cancer were prospectively included from CANTO (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01993498), collecting longitudinal data at diagnosis (before the initiation of any cancer treatment) and 1 (T1), 2 (T2), and 4 (T3) years after diagnosis. The main outcome was severe global fatigue at T2 (score ≥ 40/100, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30). Analyses at T3 were exploratory. Secondary outcomes included physical, emotional, and cognitive fatigue (EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-FA12). Multivariable logistic regression models retained associations with severe fatigue by bootstrapped Augmented Backward Elimination. Validation methods included 10-fold internal cross-validation, overoptimism-corrected area under the receiver operating characteristic curves, and external validation. RESULTS: Among 5,640, 5,000, and 3,400 patients at T1, T2, and T3, respectively, the prevalence of post-treatment severe global fatigue was 35.6%, 34.0%, and 31.5% in the development cohort. Retained risk factors for severe global fatigue at T2 were severe pretreatment fatigue (adjusted odds ratio v no 3.191 [95% CI, 2.704 to 3.767]); younger age (for 1-year decrement 1.015 [1.009 to 1.022]), higher body mass index (for unit increment 1.025 [1.012 to 1.038]), current smoking behavior (v never 1.552 [1.291 to 1.866]), worse anxiety (v noncase 1.265 [1.073 to 1.492]), insomnia (for unit increment 1.005 [1.003 to 1.007]), and pain at diagnosis (for unit increment 1.014 [1.010 to 1.017]), with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.75). Receipt of hormonal therapy was a risk factor for severe fatigue at T3 (v no 1.448 [1.165 to 1.799]). Dimension-specific risk factors included body mass index for physical fatigue and emotional distress for emotional and cognitive fatigue. CONCLUSION: We propose a predictive model to assess fatigue among breast cancer survivors, within a personalized survivorship care framework. This may help clinicians to provide early management interventions or to correct modifiable risk factors and offer more tailored monitoring and education to patients at risk of severe post-treatment fatigue.
Authors: Alicia Collado-Hidalgo; Julienne E Bower; Patricia A Ganz; Steve W Cole; Michael R Irwin Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1993-03-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Stephanie R Land; Benjamin A Toll; Carol M Moinpour; Sandra A Mitchell; Jamie S Ostroff; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Sonia A Duffy; Ellen R Gritz; Nancy A Rigotti; Thomas H Brandon; Sheila A Prindiville; Linda P Sarna; Robert A Schnoll; Roy S Herbst; Paul M Cinciripini; Scott J Leischow; Carolyn M Dresler; Michael C Fiore; Graham W Warren Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2016-02-17 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Ethan Basch; Amylou C Dueck; Lauren J Rogak; Lori M Minasian; William Kevin Kelly; Ann M O'Mara; Andrea M Denicoff; Drew Seisler; Pamela J Atherton; Electra Paskett; Lisa Carey; Maura Dickler; Rebecca S Heist; Andrew Himelstein; Hope S Rugo; William M Sikov; Mark A Socinski; Alan P Venook; Douglas J Weckstein; Diana E Lake; David D Biggs; Rachel A Freedman; Charles Kuzma; Jeffrey J Kirshner; Deborah Schrag Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 31.777
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
Authors: Antonio Di Meglio; Elise Martin; Tracy E Crane; Cecile Charles; Aude Barbier; Bruno Raynard; Anthony Mangin; Olivier Tredan; Carole Bouleuc; Paul H Cottu; Laurence Vanlemmens; Carine Segura-Djezzar; Anne Lesur; Barbara Pistilli; Florence Joly; Thomas Ginsbourger; Bernadette Coquet; Iris Pauporte; Guillemette Jacob; Aude Sirven; Julia Bonastre; Jennifer A Ligibel; Stefan Michiels; Ines Vaz-Luis Journal: Trials Date: 2022-03-04 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Matteo Lambertini; Claudia Massarotti; Julie Havas; Barbara Pistilli; Anne-Laure Martin; Alexandra Jacquet; Charles Coutant; Florence Coussy; Asma Dhaini Mérimèche; Florence Lerebours; Christine Rousset-Jablonski; Christelle Jouannaud; Olivier Rigal; Marion Fournier; Patrick Soulie; Maria Alice Franzoi; Lucia Del Mastro; Ann H Partridge; Fabrice André; Ines Vaz-Luis; Antonio Di Meglio Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-09-01
Authors: Antonio Di Meglio; Julie Havas; Arnauld S Gbenou; Elise Martin; Mayssam El-Mouhebb; Barbara Pistilli; Gwenn Menvielle; Agnes Dumas; Sibille Everhard; Anne-Laure Martin; Paul H Cottu; Florence Lerebours; Charles Coutant; Anne Lesur; Olivier Tredan; Patrick Soulie; Laurence Vanlemmens; Florence Joly; Suzette Delaloge; Patricia A Ganz; Fabrice André; Ann H Partridge; Lee W Jones; Stefan Michiels; Ines Vaz-Luis Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 50.717