Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Change in the value of work after breast cancer: evidence from a prospective cohort

  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Survivorship Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Return to work (RTW) after cancer can be modulated by psychosocial factors, including a reordering of one’s life values, with more emphasis on private life than work-life. This change in patients’ outlook on work-life is however poorly understood.

Methods

We used data from a French cohort (CANTO, NCT01993498) of women diagnosed with stage I–III primary breast cancer (BC) prospectively assessing life priorities between work and private life at diagnosis and 2 years after diagnosis. We identified women who reported a shift in life values toward private life, and we investigated the clinical, demographic, work-related, and psychosocial determinants of this change using logistic regressions.

Results

Overall, 46% (N = 1097) of the women had reordered their life priorities toward private life 2 years after diagnosis. The factors positively associated with this shift included being diagnosed with stage III BC, perceiving one’s job as not very interesting, being an employee/clerk (vs. executive occupation), perceiving no support from the supervisor at baseline, perceiving negative interferences of cancer in daily life, and perceiving a positive impact from experiencing cancer. Depressive symptoms were negatively associated with this shift.

Conclusion

After BC, there seems to be an important reordering of life values, with more emphasis on private life. This change is influenced by clinical determinants, but also by work-related and psychosocial factors.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

Stakeholders should consider this change in a patient’s outlook on work-life as much as the classical physical late effects when designing post-BC programs to support RTW.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA A Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Thévenon O, Horko K. Increased women’s labour force participation in Europe: progress in the work-life balance or polarization of behaviours? Population INED. 2009;64:235–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Women in the Labor Force | U.S. Department of Labor [Internet]. [cited 2021 Apr 7]. Available from: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/wb/data/facts-over-time/women-in-the-labor-force#civilian-labor-force-by-sex

  4. Mehnert A, de Boer A, Feuerstein M. Employment challenges for cancer survivors. Cancer. 2013;119:2151–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Carlsen K, Jensen AJ, Rugulies R, Christensen J, Bidstrup PE, Johansen C, et al. Self-reported work ability in long-term breast cancer survivors. A population-based questionnaire study in Denmark. Acta Oncol. 2013;52:423–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dumas A, Vaz Luis I, Bovagnet T, El Mouhebb M, Di Meglio A, Pinto S, et al. Impact of breast cancer treatment on employment: results of a multicenter prospective cohort study (CANTO). J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:734–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lee MK, Kang HS, Lee KS, Lee ES. Three-year prospective cohort study of factors associated with return to work after breast cancer diagnosis. J Occup Rehabil. 2017;27:547–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mehnert A. Employment and work-related issues in cancer survivors. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2011;77:109–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schmidt ME, Scherer S, Wiskemann J, Steindorf K. Return to work after breast cancer: the role of treatment-related side effects and potential impact on quality of life. Euro J Cancer Care. 2019;28:e13051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sun Y, Shigaki CL, Armer JM. Return to work among breast cancer survivors: a literature review. Supp Care Cancer. 2017;25:709–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Butow P, Laidsaar-Powell R, Konings S, Lim CYS, Koczwara B. Return to work after a cancer diagnosis: a meta-review of reviews and a meta-synthesis of recent qualitative studies. J Cancer Surviv. 2020;14:114–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wang L, Hong BY, Kennedy SA, Chang Y, Hong CJ, Craigie S, et al. Predictors of unemployment after breast cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:1868–79.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Drolet M, Maunsell E, Brisson J, Mâsse B, Deschênes L. Not working 3 years after breast cancer: predictors in a population-based study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8305–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Høyer M, Nordin K, Ahlgren J, Bergkvist L, Lambe M, Johansson B, et al. Change in working time in a population-based cohort of patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2853–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Johnsson A, Fornander T, Rutqvist L-E, Vaez M, Alexanderson K, Olsson M. Predictors of return to work ten months after primary breast cancer surgery. Acta Oncol. 2009;48:93–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wennman-Larsen A, Svärd V, Alexanderson K, Friberg E. Factors of decisive importance for being in work or not during two years after breast cancer surgery: content analysis of 462 women’s open answers. BMC Women’s Health. 2021;21:332.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Bower JE, Meyerowitz BE, Bernaards CA, Rowland JH, Ganz PA, Desmond KA. Perceptions of positive meaning and vulnerability following breast cancer: predictors and outcomes among long-term breast cancer survivors. Ann Behav Med. 2005;29:236–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Duijts SFA, van Egmond MP, Gits M, van der Beek AJ, Bleiker EM. Cancer survivors’ perspectives and experiences regarding behavioral determinants of return to work and continuation of work. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39:2164–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fisher C, O’Connor M. “Motherhood” in the context of living with breast cancer. Cancer Nurs. 2012;35:157–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Johnsson A, Fornander T, Rutqvist LE, Olsson M. Factors influencing return to work: a narrative study of women treated for breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Care. 2010;19:317–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lilliehorn S, Hamberg K, Kero A, Salander P. Meaning of work and the returning process after breast cancer: a longitudinal study of 56 women. Scand J Caring Sci. 2013;27:267–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nilsson MI, Olsson M, Wennman-Larsen A, Petersson L-M, Alexanderson K. Women’s reflections and actions regarding working after breast cancer surgery—a focus group study. Psycho-Oncol. 2013;22:1639–44.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Gudbergsson S, Fosså S, Dahl A. Is cancer survivorship associated with reduced work engagement? A NOCWO Study. J Cancer Surviv. 2008;2:159–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hakanen J, Lindbohm M-L. Work engagement among breast cancer survivors and the referents: the importance of optimism and social resources at work. J Cancer Surviv. 2008;2:283–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Maunsell E, Drolet M, Brisson J, Brisson C, Mâsse B, Deschênes L. Work situation after breast cancer: results from a population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:1813–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Nilsson MI, Saboonchi F, Alexanderson K, Olsson M, Wennman-Larsen A, Petersson L-M. Changes in importance of work and vocational satisfaction during the 2 years after breast cancer surgery and factors associated with this. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10:564–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Baker F, Denniston M, Smith T, West MM. Adult cancer survivors: how are they faring? Cancer. 2005;104:2565–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Courtens AM, Stevens FC, Crebolder HF, Philipsen H. Longitudinal study on quality of life and social support in cancer patients. Cancer Nurs. 1996;19:162–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Manne S, Ostroff J, Winkel G, Goldstein L, Fox K, Grana G. Posttraumatic growth after breast cancer: patient, partner, and couple perspectives. Psychosom Med. 2004;66:442–54.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Liamputtong P, Suwankhong D. Breast cancer diagnosis: biographical disruption, emotional experiences and strategic management in Thai women with breast cancer. Sociol Health Illn. 2015;37:1086–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Reeve J, Lloyd-Williams M, Payne S, Dowrick C. Revisiting biographical disruption: exploring individual embodied illness experience in people with terminal cancer. Health (London). 2010;14:178–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sinding C, Wiernikowski J. Disruption foreclosed: older women’s cancer narratives. Health (London). 2008;12:389–411.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Vaz-Luis I, Cottu P, Mesleard C, Martin AL, Dumas A, Dauchy S, et al. UNICANCER: French prospective cohort study of treatment-related chronic toxicity in women with localised breast cancer (CANTO). ESMO Open [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2021 Mar 25];4. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6735667/

  34. Petersson L-M, Nilsson MI, Alexanderson K, Olsson M, Wennman-Larsen A. How do women value work shortly after breast cancer surgery and are their valuations associated with being on sick leave? J Occup Rehabil. 2013;23:391–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Bouhnik A-D, Bendiane M-K, Cortaredona S, Sagaon Teyssier L, Rey D, Berenger C, et al. The labour market, psychosocial outcomes and health conditions in cancer survivors: protocol for a nationwide longitudinal survey 2 and 5 years after cancer diagnosis (the VICAN survey). BMJ Open. 2015;5:e005971.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:373–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Giesinger JM, Kuijpers W, Young T, Tomaszewski KA, Friend E, Zabernigg A, et al. Thresholds for clinical importance for four key domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30: physical functioning, emotional functioning, fatigue and pain. Health Qual Life Outcome. 2016;14:87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67:361–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Blanchin M, Dauchy S, Cano A, Brédart A, Aaronson NK, Hardouin J-B. Validation of the French translation-adaptation of the impact of cancer questionnaire version 2 (IOCv2) in a breast cancer survivor population. Health Qual Life Outcome. 2015;13:110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Zebrack BJ, Ganz PA, Bernaards CA, Petersen L, Abraham L. Assessing the impact of cancer: development of a new instrument for long-term survivors. Psychooncology. 2006;15:407–21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Rasmussen DM, Elverdam B. The meaning of work and working life after cancer: an interview study. Psychooncology. 2008;17:1232–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Westman B, Bergenmar M, Andersson L. Life, illness and death—Existential reflections of a Swedish sample of patients who have undergone curative treatment for breast or prostatic cancer. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2006;10:169–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sears SR, Stanton AL, Danoff-Burg S. The yellow brick road and the emerald city: benefit finding, positive reappraisal coping and posttraumatic growth in women with early-stage breast cancer. Health Psychol. 2003;22:487–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. 5th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  45. Burke WW, Litwin GH. A causal model of organizational performance and change. J Manag. 1992;18:523–45.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Menguc B, Auh S, Yeniaras V, Katsikeas CS. The role of climate: implications for service employee engagement and customer service performance. J Acad Mark Sci. 2017;45:428–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Schultz DP, Schultz SE. Psychology and Work Today. 10th ed. London: Routledge; 2020.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the patients and their families as well as all of the investigators and their staff involved in CANTO. We also thank all the UNICANCER team the cohort management. The authors thank Thomas BOVAGNET and Sandrine PINTO for their advice and help with data processing.

Funding

The study was supported by the French Foundation for Cancer Research Grant No. ARC, PGA1 RF20170205420 and by Susan G. Komen Career Catalyst Research Grant No. CCR17483507 to I.V.L. and the ODYSSEA Program. The CANTO study is supported by the French government under the Investment for the Future Program, which is managed by the National Research Agency, Grant No. ANR-10-COHO0004. Elsa CAUMETTE’s research was funded by the University of Montpellier’s Department of Maieutics.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sorbonne Université, INSERM, Institut Pierre Louis d’Epidémiologie Et de Sante Publique, Paris, France

    Elsa Caumette, Garazi Ruiz de Azua & Gwenn Menvielle

  2. Department of Maieutics, Université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France

    Elsa Caumette

  3. INSERM Unit U 981, Villejuif, France

    Antonio Di Meglio, Inès Vaz-Luis, Julie Havas, Elise Martin & Suzette Delaloge

  4. Breast Cancer Unit, Department of Cancer Medecine, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France

    Antonio Di Meglio, Inès Vaz-Luis & Julie Havas

  5. Bordeaux Population Health Research Center (U1219), Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France

    Cécile Charles

  6. Clinical Research Department, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France

    Julie Havas

  7. Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France

    Laurence Vanlemmens

  8. Unicancer, Paris, France

    Sibille Everhard & Anne-Laure Martin

  9. Centre Alexis Vautrin, Vandoeuvre Les Nancy, France

    Asma Dhaini Merimeche

  10. Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen, France

    Olivier Rigal

  11. Centre George François Leclerc, Dijon, France

    Charles Coutant

  12. Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France

    Marion Fournier

  13. Institut Jean Godinot Reims, Reims, France

    Christelle Jouannaud

  14. Institut de Cancérologie de L’Ouest – Centre Paul Papin, Angers, France

    Patrick Soulie

  15. Institut Curie, Paris, France

    Paul-Henri Cottu

  16. Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France

    Olivier Tredan

  17. Université de Paris, ECEVE UMR 1123, INSERM (National Institute for Health and Medical Research), Paris, France

    Agnès Dumas

Authors
  1. Elsa Caumette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Antonio Di Meglio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Inès Vaz-Luis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cécile Charles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Julie Havas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Garazi Ruiz de Azua
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Elise Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Laurence Vanlemmens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Suzette Delaloge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Sibille Everhard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Anne-Laure Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Asma Dhaini Merimeche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Olivier Rigal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Charles Coutant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Marion Fournier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Christelle Jouannaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Patrick Soulie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Paul-Henri Cottu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Olivier Tredan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Gwenn Menvielle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Agnès Dumas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization/methodology: Elsa Caumette, Gwenn Menvielle, Agnès Dumas.

Resources: Ines Vaz Luis, Gwenn Menvielle

Data curation, formal analysis: Elsa Caumette, Julie Havas, Antonio Di Meglio, Gwenn Menvielle, Agnès Dumas.

Writing: All the authors

Validation: All the authors

Supervision: Gwenn Menvielle, Agnès Dumas

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Agnès Dumas.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The study was approved by the French regulatory authorities under reference B11158-20 (09/14/2011) and the French Ethics Committee Ile de France VII under reference 11–039 (10/14/2011).

Consent to participate

All the women were aged 18 or over at diagnosis and provided written informed consent.

Conflict of interest

Elsa Caumette: no conflict of interest; Inès Vaz-Luis have personal financial interests: institutional support from Pfizer Amgen, AstraZeneca (Public Speaking); Cécile Charles: no conflict of interest; Julie Havas: no conflict of interest; Garazi Ruiz de Azua: no conflict of interest; Elise Martin: no conflict of interest; Antonio Di Meglio: no conflict of interest; Suzette Delaloge reports institutional consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Besins, Sanofi, Rappta; institutional honoraria from AstraZeneca, Seagen, MSD, Pfizer; institutional investigating fees from Taiho, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Sanofi, G1 therapeutics, BMS, Pfizer, Roche; and personal support for attending US conference from AstraZeneca and Pfizer; Olivier Rigal Honoraria: Pfizer, Seagen et Viatris; Charles Coutant: Honoraria: Roche, MSD, AstraZeneca, Seagen; Marion Fournier Symposium rémunéré Myriade genetics SFCO; Christelle Jouannaud Honoraria: Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Pfizer; Travel/Accommodations/expenses: Novartis; Patrick Soulie no disclosure; Paul-Henri Cottu Honoraria: Pfizer, Roche, Lilly, Pierre Fabre, Institution honoraria: Novartis, NanoString Technologies; Consultant/Advisory Role: Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Lilly; Research funding: Novartis, Pfizer; Travel/Accommodations/expenses: Pfizer, Roche; Olivier Tredan Grants: Roche, BMS, MSD-Merck, personal fees: Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Pierre Fabre, Seagen, Roche, MSD-Merck; Asma Dhaini Merimeche, Laurence Vanlemmens, Sibille Everhard, Anne-Laure Martin: NO DISCLOSURE; Gwenn Menvielle: no conflict of interest; Agnès Dumas: no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Caumette, E., Di Meglio, A., Vaz-Luis, I. et al. Change in the value of work after breast cancer: evidence from a prospective cohort. J Cancer Surviv 17, 694–705 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-022-01197-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-022-01197-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation