Relationship between socioeconomic determinants, social support and oncological treatment in elderly Czech women with breast cancer: pilot study
Authors:
Kateřina Skřivanová 1; Dagmar Brančiková 2; Tomáš Svěrák 3; Ľubomíra Anderková 3; Nela Elfmarková 3; Marcela Bendová 4; Hana Peterková 1; Eva Holoubková 1; Jiří Jarkovský 5; Klára Benešová 5; Markéta Protivánková 2; Luboš Minář 4; Ladislav Dušek 5
Authors place of work:
Ústav psychologie a psychosomatiky LF MU, Brno
1; Interní hematologická a onkologická klinika LF MU a FN Brno
2; Středoevropský technologický institut MU (CEITEC MU), Brno
3; Gynekologicko-porodnická klinika LF MU a FN Brno
4; Institut biostatistiky a analýz MU, Brno
5
Published in the journal:
Prakt Gyn 2015; 19(3): 172-181
Category:
Oncogynecology: Original Article
Summary
The objective of the study was to investigate the relationship between social support, socioeconomic determinants and oncological treatment progress in patients with complications due to the toxicity of antitumor therapy, viral diseases during 6 months following surgery, as well as postoperative complications. The study sample consisted of 139 female patients with breast cancer (age median: 65 years), and social support (SS) and socioeconomic status (SES) were evaluated based on a structured interview. SES was estimated based on income and education classification. The analyses performed included information from patients’ documentation, including data on the occurrence of general therapy complications, postoperative complications, and the occurrence of infectious viral diseases within the first 6 months following surgery. The level of statistical significance of the differences within category-specific variables between the analysed groups was evaluated with Fisher’s exact test. The differences in statistical significance between groups with and without SS were found within the entire group of patients, while viral diseases occurred less in patients with SS (no viral diseases 70.3% vs 48.3% without SS). Patients with SS and below 60 years of age experienced a lower occurrence of postoperative complications (56.7% vs 0%), as well as generally lower numbers of complications resulting from oncological treatment (more than 4 complications occurred in 47.1% of patients with SS vs 100% of patients without SS). Patients with SS in the Stage II–III experienced a lower occurrence of viral diseases (63.2% no virosis vs 28.6%) and a lower occurrence of complications (35.5% more than four complications vs 73.3%). A statistically significant relationship (P = 0.015) was determined between the education of patients and the number of complications in patients in Stage II–III: more than four complications occurred in patients with basic and vocational education (55.9%), compared to patients with secondary and higher education (32.6%). An increasing trend was determined for the relationship between SES and the occurrence of complications due to oncological treatment (P = 0.06) within the group of patients with Stage II–III breast cancer. We have found evidence supporting the idea of a relationship between social support and oncological treatment for older patients across clinical stages and for the relationship between SES and the occurrence of complications for older women in Stage II–III. Social support is a factor which is of great importance for patient health, while higher socioeconomic status and education play a significant role, too.
Keywords:
breast cancer – oncological treatment – social support – socioeconomic status
Zdroje
1. Dušek L, Mužík J, Gelnarová E et al. Cancer incidence and mortality in the Czech Republic. Klin Onkol 2014; 27(6): 406–423.
2. Skovajsová M, Májek O, Daneš J et al. Výsledky národního programu screeningu karcinomu prsu v České republice. Klin Onkol 2014; 27(Suppl 2): S69-S78.
3. Dušek L, Májek O, Mužík J et al. Vývoj epidemiologie zhoubných nádorů prsu u žen dle nových dat Národního onkologického registru ČR a dalších datových zdrojů. Prakt Gyn 2013; 17(1): 31–39.
4. Adler NE, Rehkopf DH. U.S. Disparities in health: Descriptions, causes, and mechanism. Annu Rev Public Health 2008; 29: 235–252. Dostupné z DOI: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.29.020907.090852>.
5. Krieger N, Chen JT, Waterman PD et al. Race/ethnicity, gender, and monitoring socioeconomic gradients in health: a comparison of area-based socioeconomic measures – the Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project. Am J Public Health 2003; 93(10): 1655–1671.
6. Stowe R, Peek M, Perez N et al. Herpesvirus reactivation and socioeconomic position: A community based study. J Epidemiol Community Health 2010; 64(8): 666–671. Dostupné z DOI: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech.2008.078808>.
7. Fagundes PCH, Bennett J, Alfano CM et al. Social Support and Socioeconomic Status Interact to Predict Epstein-Barr Virus Latency in Women Awaiting Diagnosis or Newly Diagnosed with Breast Cancer. Health Psychol 2012; 31(1):11–19. Dostupné z DOI: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025599>.
8. Herndon JE, Kornblith AB, Holland JC et al. Effect of socioeconomic status as measured by education level on survival in breast cancer clinical trials. Psycho-Oncology 2013; 22(2):315–323. Dostupné z DOI: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.2094>.
9. Byers TE, Wolf HJ, Bauer KR et al. Patterns of Care Study Group. The impact of socioeconomic status on survival after cancer in the United States: findings from the National Program of Cancer Registries Patterns of Care Study. Cancer 2008; 113(3): 582–591.
10. Kitagawa EM, Hauser PM. Differential Mortality in the United States: A Study in Socioeconomic Epidemiology. Harvard University Press: Cambridge 1973. ISBN 978–0674205611.
11. House JS. Work stress and social support. (Addison-Wesley series on occupational stress). Book 4. Addison-Wesley: 1981. ISBN 978–0201031010.
12. Helgeson V, Cohen S. Social Support and Adjustment to Cancer: Reconciling Descriptive, Correlational and Intervention Research. Health Psychol 1996; 15(2): 135–148.
13. Nausheen B, Gidron Y, Peveler R et al. Social support and cancer progression: a systematic review. J Psychosom Res 2009; 67 (5): 403–415.
14. Leung J, Pachana NA, MCLaughlin D. Social support and health-related quality of life in women with breast cancer: a longitudinal study. Psycho-Oncology 2014; 23(9): 1014–1020. Dostupné z DOI: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.3523>.
15. Bolger N, Amarel D. Effects of social support visibility on adjustment to stres: experimental evidence. J Pers Soc Psychol 2007; 92(3):458–75. Dostupné z DOI: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.92.3.458>.
16. Bloom JR, Spiegel D. The relationship of two dimensions of social support to the psychological well-being and social functioning of women with advanced breast cancer. Soc Sci Med 1984; 19(8): 831–837.
17. Jamison KR, Wellisch DK, Pasnau RO. Psychosocial aspects of mastectomy: I. The women’s perspective. Am J Psychiatry 1978; 135(4): 432–436.
18. Zemore SR, Shepel LF. Effects of breast cancer and mastectomy on emotional support and adjustment. Soc Sci Med 1989; 28(1): 19–27.
19. Wimberly SR, Carver ChS, Laurenceau JP et al. Perceived partner reactions to diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer: impact on psychosocial and psychosexual adjustment. J Consult Clin Psychol 2005; 73(2): 300–311.
20. Hughes S, Jaremka LM, Alfano CM et al. Social support predicts inflammation, pain, and depressive symptoms: longitudinal relationship among breast cancer survivors. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2014; 42: 38–44. Dostupné z DOI: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2013.12.016>.
21. Kroenke CH, Kubzansky LD, Schernhammer ES et al. Social network, social support, and survival after breast cancer diagnosis. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24(7): 1105–1111.
22. Fagundes CP, Glaser R, Malarkey WB et al. Childhood adversity and herpesvirus latency in breast cancer survivors. Health Psychol 2013; 32(3):337–344. Dostupné z DOI: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028595>.
23. Yoo GJ, Levine EG, Aviv C et al. Older Women, breast cancer, and social support. Support Care Cancer 2010;18(12):1521–1530. Dostupné z DOI: <http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/s00520–009–0774–4>.
24. MacKinnon JA, Duncan RC, Huang Y et al. Detecting an association between socioeconomic status and late stage breast cancer using spatial analysis and area-based measures. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007; 16(4):756–762.
25. Sabatino SA, Coates RJ, Uhler RJ et al. Disparities in mammography use among US women aged 40–64 years, by race, ethnicity, income, and health insurance status, 1993 and 2005. Med Care 2008; 46(7): 692–700.
26. Ward E, Halpern M, Schrag N et al. Association of insurance with cancer care utilization and outcomes. CA Cancer J Clin 2008; 58(1): 9–31.
27. Bickell NA, LePar F, Wang JJ et al. Lost opportunities: physicians' reasons and disparities in breast cancer treatment. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25(18): 2516–2521.
Štítky
Paediatric gynaecology Gynaecology and obstetrics Reproduction medicineČlánok vyšiel v časopise
Practical Gynecology
2015 Číslo 3
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- Ocular indications for caesarean section
- Pelvic congestion syndrome and its treatment
- Dydrogesterone – clinical benefits of its metabolic neutrality
- How to correctly proceed in cases of suspicions of rape or sexual abuse