Delphine Hequet1,2,3, Anne-Sophie Hamy4,5, Noemie Girard4, Enora Laas4, Florence Coussy6, Roman Rouzier4,7, Marie Preau8,9, Lidia Delrieu10,11, Agnes Dumas12,13, Fabien Reyal4,7. 1. Department of Surgical Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France. delphine.hequet@curie.fr. 2. INSERM U900, Institut Curie, St-Cloud, France. delphine.hequet@curie.fr. 3. Department of Surgery, Institut Curie, Paris, France. delphine.hequet@curie.fr. 4. Department of Surgical Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France. 5. University of Paris, Paris, France. 6. Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris, France. 7. INSERM U900, Institut Curie, St-Cloud, France. 8. Social Psychology Research Group (UR GRePS), Lyon 2 University, Lyon, France. 9. Inserm UMR 1296, Radiation: Defense, Health Environment, Lyon, France. 10. Residual Tumor & Response To Treatment Laboratory, RT2Lab, Translational Research Department, INSERM, U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Paris, France. 11. Paris University, Paris, France. 12. Université de Paris, ECEVE UMR 1123, INSERM (National Institute for Health and Medical Research), Paris, France. 13. Clinical Research Department, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the dynamics of the determinants of returning to work (RTW) in a population of patients treated for breast cancer (BC) in a real-world setting. METHOD: We conducted a retrospective study including 1278 BC patients working or looking for work at the time of diagnosis. We performed a focused principal component analysis to highlight the dimensions of a persistent decline in work capacity. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify correlates of non-RTW 1 and 2 years after treatment. RESULTS: One-third (31%, n = 389) of patients continued working during treatment. At study inclusion, 1100 patients had returned to work (89%). Three-quarters (n = 508, 75%) of the women reported a decline in work capacity 1 year after RTW and 22% (n = 148) presented a persistent decline in work capacity 2 years after the diagnosis. The odds ratio for non-RTW at 1 year was significantly higher for patients treated with a combination of chemotherapy and trastuzumab (OR = 1.72, 95% CI [1.07-2.76]), manual workers (OR = 3.99, 95% CI [1.54-10.81]), patients with lower incomes (OR = 2.33, 95% CI [1.29-4.19]), and patients experiencing fatigue (OR = 1.81, 95% CI [1.34-2.48]). The odds ratio for non-RTW at 2 years was higher for various occupational categories (OR = 3.49, 95% CI [1.89-6.74] for clerks, OR = 4.58, 95% CI [1.48-12.82] for self-employed workers, OR = 8.98, 95% CI [2.69-27.89] for manual workers), patients with comorbidities (OR = 2.80, 95% CI [1.61-4.93]), and patients experiencing anxiety symptoms (OR = 2.54, 95% CI [1.18-5.76]), while the impact of the type of treatment was no longer significantly associated with RTW. CONCLUSION: The determinants of RTW change over time. Patients should be offered supportive interventions tailored to risk factors and time from diagnosis.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the dynamics of the determinants of returning to work (RTW) in a population of patients treated for breast cancer (BC) in a real-world setting. METHOD: We conducted a retrospective study including 1278 BC patients working or looking for work at the time of diagnosis. We performed a focused principal component analysis to highlight the dimensions of a persistent decline in work capacity. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify correlates of non-RTW 1 and 2 years after treatment. RESULTS: One-third (31%, n = 389) of patients continued working during treatment. At study inclusion, 1100 patients had returned to work (89%). Three-quarters (n = 508, 75%) of the women reported a decline in work capacity 1 year after RTW and 22% (n = 148) presented a persistent decline in work capacity 2 years after the diagnosis. The odds ratio for non-RTW at 1 year was significantly higher for patients treated with a combination of chemotherapy and trastuzumab (OR = 1.72, 95% CI [1.07-2.76]), manual workers (OR = 3.99, 95% CI [1.54-10.81]), patients with lower incomes (OR = 2.33, 95% CI [1.29-4.19]), and patients experiencing fatigue (OR = 1.81, 95% CI [1.34-2.48]). The odds ratio for non-RTW at 2 years was higher for various occupational categories (OR = 3.49, 95% CI [1.89-6.74] for clerks, OR = 4.58, 95% CI [1.48-12.82] for self-employed workers, OR = 8.98, 95% CI [2.69-27.89] for manual workers), patients with comorbidities (OR = 2.80, 95% CI [1.61-4.93]), and patients experiencing anxiety symptoms (OR = 2.54, 95% CI [1.18-5.76]), while the impact of the type of treatment was no longer significantly associated with RTW. CONCLUSION: The determinants of RTW change over time. Patients should be offered supportive interventions tailored to risk factors and time from diagnosis.