Search

BACKGROUND: Variations in symptom development among breast cancer (BC) survivors are understudied. We examined: (Q1) Symptom trajectories of pain, fatigue, insomnia, breast, and arm symptoms in BC survivors, (Q2) possible patterns or cluster-like associations between trajectory classification of different symptoms, and (Q3) characteristics of survivors assigned to high-burden symptom trajectories.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Participants were 968 women (mean age = 59.6 years) treated for early-stage BC and followed across a three-year postoperative period. As part of routine follow-up procedures, patients reported symptom burden and functioning levels at each hospital visit using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the BC-specific module (QLQ-BR-23). Growth mixture modeling (GMM) analysis was used to differentiate potential subgroups of individuals with similar longitudinal symptom patterns, i.e., symptom trajectories (Q1). With this approach, groups experiencing persistent, highly distressing cancer- and treatment-related late effects (LEs) may be identified. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used for Q2 and logistic regression analysis for Q3.RESULTS: GMM identified two relatively parallel trajectories across the tested symptoms: The majority of the sample exhibited a low-burden symptom trajectory (74.4-89.2%) and a minority by a high-burden symptom trajectory (10.8-25.6%). LCA revealed that approximately one in five women (18.8%) were likely to be members of the high-burden symptom trajectory across all tested symptoms. In addition to a high probability of being burdened over time across multiple symptoms, these women were also characterized by poorer self-reported physical and social functioning.CONCLUSION: A substantial minority followed a high-burden symptom trajectory for several years following BC treatment. Associations were found in trajectory classification across symptoms, indicating that cancer-related LEs appear in clusters of multiple concurrent symptoms.

Background: Survival rates for breast cancer (BC) are increasing, leading to growing interest in treatment-related late-effects. The aim of the present study was to explore late effects using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in postmenopausal BC survivors in standard follow-up care. The results were compared to age- and gender-matched data from the general Danish population. Material and methods: Postmenopausal BC survivors in routine follow-up care between April 2016 and February 2018 at the Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark were asked to complete the EORTC QLQ-C30 and BR23 questionnaires together with three items on neuropathy, myalgia, and arthralgia from the PRO-CTCAE. Patients were at different time intervals from primary treatment, enabling a cross-sectional study of reported late effects at different time points after primary treatment. The time intervals used in the analysis were year ≤1, 1–2, 2–3, 3–4, 4–5 and 5+. The QLQ-C30 results were compared with reference data from the general Danish female population. Between-group differences are presented as effect sizes (ESs) (Cohen’s d). Results: A total of 1089 BC survivors participated. Compared with the reference group, BC survivors reported better global health status 2–3 and 4–5 years after surgery (d = 0.26) and physical functioning 2–3 years after (0.21). Poorer outcomes in BC survivors compared with the reference group were found for cognitive functioning (0–4 and 5+ years), fatigue (0–2 years), insomnia (1–3 years), emotional functioning (3–4 years), and social functioning (≤1 year after surgery) with ESs ranging from 0.20 to 0.41. For the remaining outcomes, no ESs exceeded 0.20. Conclusion: Only small to medium ESs were found for better global health and physical functioning and poorer outcomes for cognitive functioning, fatigue, insomnia, emotional functioning, and social functioning in postmenopausal BC survivors, who otherwise reported similar overall health-related quality of life compared with the general Danish female population.

Introduction: Xerostomia is a frequent complication after curative intended radiotherapy (RT) for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Assessment of xerostomia is commonly done by the physician. The aim of this study is to investigate the relation between patient and physician-rated xerostomia and to predict the degree of xerostomia from patients with self-reported xerostomia based on delivered doses to the oral cavity, parotid, and submandibular glands. Material and methods: During a 2-year period, consecutive HNSCC patients attending the follow-up clinic were included. All included patients had self-reported xerostomia, and completed the disease-specific EORTC QLQ-H&N35 questionnaire. The physician assessed the degree of xerostomia with the DAHANCA toxicity scale and was blinded for the EORTC score. Oral cavity, parotid, and submandibular glands (OAR) were delineated on the planning CT according to international guidelines. DVH were extracted from treatment plans. Logistic regression tested the relation between mean doses, patient characteristics, and xerostomia scores. Differences between DVH values and scoring of xerostomia were analyzed with a Kruskal–Wallis test. The relation between xerostomia and dose distributions was further investigated using principal component analysis (PCA). Results: In total, 109 patients were included in the study. A weak correlation was seen between patient and physician-rated toxicity (p =.001), however, in general patients reported more toxicity than physicians. For EORTC score ≥2, the multi-variable analysis was significant for doses to the oral cavity, tobacco status and use of xerogenic medication. Neither the DVH analysis nor the PCA found any clear distinction between xerostomia scores for EORTC or DAHANCA and investigated OARs. Conclusion: Patients tended to report higher scores of xerostomia than the physician. PCA indicated a complex relation between doses to the OAR and xerostomia scores, showing e.g., that reducing doses in one organ was on the expense of increased dose to another organ.