No abstract

No abstract

Purpose Understanding the quality of life (QoL) of cancer survivors is relevant to both clinical practice and health care policy. The current study compared the QoL profile in this specific population with that of a normative sample for the general population, as well as with those of both healthy and oncological patients normative sub-samples. In addition, associations between the obtained QoL profile and the main socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of the sample were examined. Methods Three hundred and ninety-two adult long-term cancer survivors (i.e., people 5 + years from their cancer diagnosis who were free from it and its treatments) were enrolled during follow-up visits and compiled the Short Form 36 Health Survey. Results In comparison with the normative data for the adult general population, the present sample showed lower scores in Physical functioning, Role-physical limitation, and Roleemotional limitations (all differences were both statistically and clinically significant); the difference in Vitality was only statistically significant. In all eight SF-36 scales, scores of the present sample were clinically and statistically lower than those of the normative healthy subsample, whereas they were statistically and clinically higher than those of normative subsample which had experienced cancer, except for Rolephysical limitation. The QoL profile was associated with gender (p = 0.002), age (p = 0.001), education (p < 0.001), occupational status (p < 0.001), and the presence of other health issues (p < 0.001). Conclusion These data support the utility of rehabilitative programs which integrate both healthcare and social interventions. In addition, they encourage the monitoring of the health status of this specific population, within a broad frame which simultaneously takes into consideration health and QoL.

Background Despite the possible traumatic significance of cancer and of the incidence, prevalence, and survival of young women with breast cancer, these patients are underrepresented in multidimensional research. In the present survey, QoL and psychological distress were studied in a sample of young female breast cancer patients during the first year of their disease. More in detail, the study was firstly aimed to assess if QoL of 18–45 years old female breast cancer patients was different from QoL of women from the general population and if it changed over time. Secondly, it described the psychological distress and its change over time. Finally, it assessed if QoL registered 1 year post-surgery may be explained by QoL and/or psychological distress registered during the hospitalization. Methods One hundred six, consecutive 18–45 years old, female primary breast cancer patients undergoing anticancer surgery filled out the Short Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and a socio-demographic and clinical form during hospitalization to receive surgery (T0), and again at 12 months post-surgery (T1). Results At T0, participants showed a better physical functioning ( p = 0 .001) than the female normative sample, whereas their mental functioning was worse ( p < 0 .001). In this time, mental functioning within our sample was weaker than physical functioning ( p < 0 .001). Over time, physical functioning decreased ( p < 0 .001), whereas mental functioning increased ( p < 0 .001). Both at T0 and T1, anxiety was higher than depression ( p < 0 .05). Both distress dimensions decreased over time ( p < 0 .001). Nevertheless, at T0 the 25.5 and 26.4% of the sample were respectively possible and probable cases of anxiety, whereas the 17.9 and 9.4% were possible and probable cases of depression. At T1, the percentages were 17.9 and 18.9% for anxiety, and 8.5 and 6.6% for depression. In both considered times, a better QoL corresponded to less psychological distress. However, QoL and psychological distress assessed at T0 did not predict the QoL at T1. Conclusions This study documented as QoL and psychological distress may change during the first year after surgery for a primary breast cancer in young women; therefore, they should be monitored over time to detect and treat women with alarming levels on them.

Our data support the usefulness of multi-disciplinary follow-ups for long-term cancer survivors and the need to pay particular attention to the psycho-emotional long-term and late-presenting sequels of cancer and its treatment.

Introduction The well‐being and quality of life (QoL) of long‐term cancer survivors may be affected, both positively and negatively, by psychosocial factors related to the experience of being a cancer patient. We investigated whether, in long‐term cancer survivors, the psychosocial impacts of cancer associate with socio‐demographic–clinical variables; whether, within the positive and negative dimensions taken separately, some impacts are more intense than others; and whether these impacts explain QoL. Methods Italian long‐term cancer survivors (n = 500) completed the Impact of Cancer (IOC‐V2) and Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF‐36) questionnaires. Results The IOC‐V2 negative impact score associated with gender, education, occupational status and health issues, whereas no association was found between the positive impact score and socio‐demographic–clinical variables. Of the positive impacts, Altruism/Empathy was the highest (p < 0.001); Positive self‐evaluation was higher than Health awareness (p = 0.001); and Meaning of cancer was the lowest (p < 0.001). Among the negative impacts, Worry was the highest (p < 0.001), whereas Body changes concerns was higher than both Appearance concerns (p < 0.001) and Life Interferences (p < 0.001). The assessed impacts explained more than 25% of the variance of both physical and mental functioning scores. Conclusions The provided data document psychosocial factors affecting QoL in Italian long‐term cancer survivors.

In cancer patients, depression causes suffering during the whole disease trajectory and it also influences the personal perception of well-being as well as treatment adherence. Consequently, its better definition is needed for planning more tailored supportive programmes. This study was aimed to provide information on depressive state intensity and prevalence in an heterogeneous sample of cancer inpatients. In addition, associations were studied between depressive state and different socio-demographic and clinical factors. A total of 1,147 consecutive adult cancer inpatients completed the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Scale on Depression together with a form for collecting socio-demographic and clinical data. The mean score of depression was 16.9 (SD = 9.3). There were differences in depression intensity associated with gender (p < .001), age (p = .001) and cancer type (p < .001), but not with education level (p = .282) or marital status (p = .436). Of the entire sample 13.9% had depressive states; this percentage raised to 26.2% if a less stringent criterion was used. These data reinforce the importance of a clinical and research focus on depression in oncology. As differences according to gender, age and diagnosis exist in depression prevalence and intensity, tailored supportive intervention should be planned and verified for effectiveness and efficacy.

These data encourage a multidimensional assessment of emotional functioning of this specific population.