Dataset Information

Long-Term Longitudinal Patterns of Patient-Reported Fatigue After Breast Cancer: A Group-Based Trajectory Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Fatigue is recognized as one of the most burdensome and long-lasting adverse effects of cancer and cancer treatment. We aimed to characterize long-term fatigue trajectories among breast cancer survivors.

Methods

We performed a detailed longitudinal analysis of fatigue using a large ongoing national prospective clinical study (CANcer TOxicity, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01993498) of patients with stage I-III breast cancer treated from 2012 to 2015. Fatigue was assessed at diagnosis and year 1, 2, and 4 postdiagnosis. Baseline clinical, sociodemographic, behavioral, tumor-related, and treatment-related characteristics were available. Trajectories of fatigue and risk factors of trajectory-group membership were identified by iterative estimates of group-based trajectory models.

Results

Three trajectory groups were identified for severe global fatigue (n = 4,173). Twenty-one percent of patients were in the high-risk group, having risk estimates of severe global fatigue of 94.8% (95% CI, 86.6 to 100.0) at diagnosis and 64.6% (95% CI, 59.2 to 70.1) at year 4; 19% of patients clustered in the deteriorating group with risk estimates of severe global fatigue of 13.8% (95% CI, 6.7 to 20.9) at diagnosis and 64.5% (95% CI, 57.3 to 71.8) at year 4; 60% were in the low-risk group with risk estimates of 3.6% (95% CI, 2.5 to 4.7) at diagnosis and 9.6% (95% CI, 7.5 to 11.7) at year 4. The distinct dimensions of fatigue clustered in different trajectory groups than those identified by severe global fatigue, being differentially affected by sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment-related factors.

Conclusion

Our findings highlight the multidimensional nature of cancer-related fatigue and the complexity of its risk factors. This study helps to identify patients with increased risk of severe fatigue and to inform personalized interventions to ameliorate this problem.

SUBMITTER: Vaz-Luis I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9242405 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:For older women with breast cancer, local therapy options may include lumpectomy plus whole-breast irradiation (Lump + WBI), lumpectomy plus brachytherapy (Lump + Brachy), lumpectomy alone (Lump alone), mastectomy without radiation therapy (Mast alone), and mastectomy plus radiation therapy (Mast + RT). We surveyed a population-based cohort of older breast cancer survivors to assess the association of local therapy with long-term quality-of-life outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS:We used nationally comprehensive Medicare claims to identify women aged ?67 years in whom nonmetastatic breast cancer was diagnosed in 2009, who were treated with 1 of the 5 aforementioned treatment options, and who were still alive in 2015. From this cohort, 1650 patients (330 patients per treatment) were randomly selected. A survey that included the CanSORT (Cancer Surveillance and Outcomes Research Team) Satisfaction with Breast Cosmetic Outcome, BREAST-Q, Decisional Regret Scale, and EQ-5D-3L was mailed to potential participants. We used multivariable linear regression to assess associations between local therapy and outcomes after adjusting for patient, disease, and treatment covariates. RESULTS:Among the 489 women who returned the surveys (30% response rate), the median age at diagnosis was 72 years (range, 67-87 years). The interval from diagnosis to survey completion was approximately 6 years for all patients. Compared with Lump + WBI (adjusted score, 3.40), the CanSORT cosmetic satisfaction scores were higher for Lump + Brachy (score, 3.77; P = .007) and Lump alone (score, 3.80; P = .04) and lower for Mast + RT (score, 3.01; P = .006). Similar trends were seen for BREAST-Q cosmetic satisfaction. BREAST-Q psychosocial, sexual, and physical well-being and EQ-5D-3L global health status tended to be better in patients treated with less irradiation and less surgery. BREAST-Q adverse radiation effects were worse for Lump + WBI compared with Lump + Brachy. Decisional regret regarding surgery and radiation therapy did not differ across groups. Compared with patients treated with Lump + WBI, patients treated with Lump + Brachy and Lump alone reported slightly higher rates of in-breast recurrence (excess risk of 5.8% and 6.4%, respectively; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS:In this nationally diverse cohort, less irradiation and less surgery were associated with better long-term quality-of-life outcomes. However, patient regret regarding surgery and radiation therapy was similar across all groups.

Project description:Background One aim of unilateral postmastectomy breast reconstruction (BR) is to restore symmetry with the contralateral breast. As such, unilateral prosthetic reconstruction often requires a contralateral symmetry procedure (CSP). There is sparse literature on the impact of CSPs on long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) such as satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aims to describe PROs following CSPs, using a validated PRO tool, BREAST-Q. The hypothesis is that CSPs are associated with greater patient-reported satisfaction and HRQoL.Methods This study is a single institutional analysis of prospectively collected BREAST-Q scores of patients who underwent unilateral prosthetic BR during 2011 to 2015. Women 18 years and older with BREAST-Q scores measured ≥ 9months after BR with or without CSP(s) at the time of expander replacement were included. Patients were classified into four subcohorts: augmentation, mastopexy, reduction, and no symmetry procedure (controls). Sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, and BREAST-Q scores were analyzed. Multivariable linear regression was performed.Results Of 553 patients, 67 (12%) underwent contralateral augmentation, 68 (12%) mastopexy, 93(17%) reduction, and 325 (59%) were controls. Mean follow-up time was 52 months. Satisfaction with breast and outcomes were higher in the augmentation compared with the control groups (p = 0.01). On multivariable analysis, augmentation remained an independent predictor of satisfaction with breast (p = 0.04). Physical well-being scores were lower for contralateral mastopexy and reduction compared with the controls with a trend toward statistical significance on multivariable models. Psychological and sexual well-being was similar across groups.Conclusion Prosthetic reconstruction with contralateral breast augmentation was associated with greater satisfaction with breast and reconstructive outcome. In contrast, breast reduction and mastopexy procedures demonstrated equivalent satisfaction with breasts compared with controls but may be associated with lower physical well-being. Such information can be used to improve the shared decision-making process for women who choose unilateral prosthetic BR.

Project description:BackgroundThe effect of surgeon factors on patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is unknown and may help patients make informed care decisions.MethodsWe performed a survey study of women aged ≥ 67 years with non-metastatic breast cancer diagnosed in 2009 and treated with guideline-concordant BCT, to determine the association of surgeon factors with patient-reported outcomes. The treating surgeon was identified using Medicare claims, and surgeon factors were identified via the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. The primary outcome was patient-reported cosmetic satisfaction measured by the Cancer Surveillance and Outcomes Research Team (CanSORT) Satisfaction with Breast Cosmetic Outcome instrument, while secondary outcomes included BREAST-Q subdomains. All patient, treatment, and surgeon covariables were included in a saturated multivariable linear regression model with backward elimination applied until remaining variables were p < 0.1.ResultsOf 1650 women randomly selected to receive the questionnaire, 489 responded, of whom 289 underwent BCT. Median age at diagnosis was 72 years and the time from diagnosis to survey was 6 years. The mean adjusted CanSORT score was higher for patients treated by surgical oncologists than patients treated by non-surgical oncologists (4.01 [95% confidence interval [CI] 3.65-4.38] vs. 3.53 [95% CI 3.28-3.77], p = 0.006). Similarly, mean adjusted BREAST-Q Physical Well-Being (91.97 [95% CI 86.13-97.80] vs. 83.04 [95% CI 80.85-85.22], p = 0.006) and Adverse Radiation Effects (95.28 [95% CI 91.25-99.31] vs. 88.90 [95% CI 86.23-91.57], p = 0.004) scores were better among patients treated by surgical oncologists.ConclusionsSpecialized surgical oncology training is associated with improved long-term patient-reported outcomes. These findings underscore the value of specialized training and may be useful to patients choosing their care team.

Project description:BackgroundNonadherence to aromatase inhibitors (AIs) is common and increases risk of breast cancer (BC) recurrence. We analyzed factors associated with nonadherence among patients enrolled in S1105, a randomized trial of text messaging.MethodsAt enrollment, patients were required to have been on an adjuvant AI for at least 30 days and were asked about financial, medication, and demographic factors. They completed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) representing pain (Brief Pain Inventory), endocrine symptoms (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Symptoms), and beliefs about medications (Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medicine; Brief Medication Questionnaire). Our primary endpoint was AI nonadherence at 36 months, defined as urine AI metabolite assay of less than 10 ng/mL or no submitted specimen. We evaluated the association between individual baseline characteristics and nonadherence with logistic regression. A composite risk score reflecting the number of statistically significant baseline characteristics was examined.ResultsWe analyzed data from 702 patients; median age was 60.9 years. Overall, 35.9% patients were nonadherent at 36 months. Younger patients (younger than age 65 years) were more nonadherent (38.8% vs 28.6%, odds ratio [OR] = 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05 to 2.16; P = .02). Fourteen baseline PRO scales were each statistically significantly associated with nonadherence. In a composite risk model categorized into quartile levels, each increase in risk level was associated with a 46.5% increase in the odds of nonadherence (OR = 1.47, 95% CI =1.26 to 1.70; P < .001). The highest-risk patients were more than 3 times more likely to be nonadherent than the lowest-risk patients (OR = 3.14, 95% CI = 1.97 to 5.02; P < .001).ConclusionsThe presence of multiple baseline PRO-specified risk factors was statistically significantly associated with AI nonadherence. The use of these assessments can help identify patients for targeted interventions to improve adherence.