Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Coping with modesty during radiotherapy for breast cancer: a multicentric study

  • Research
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed tumour, representing nearly 30% of all new cases in women. Radiotherapy (RT) plays a crucial role in the management of breast cancer. The objective of this study is to assess modesty in patients undergoing RT for breast cancer and take their suggestions and ideas into consideration to enhance the quality of treatment in this regard.

Methods

The study enrolled 555 breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant RT in three Italian centres. Patients completed a self-test questionnaire assessing their comfort level concerning modesty during therapy and their relationship with strangers and healthcare professionals. The impact of religious views and potential changes in sexuality were also examined.

Results

Results showed that modesty was a common concern across the overall cohort of patients, with discomfort in being undressed during RT correlating with discomfort experienced in other daily life situations. Most patients felt more at ease with same sex healthcare workers. Age was also a major factor with younger patients generally feeling more comfortable with healthcare workers of the same age group. Interestingly, the surgical technique used (mastectomy vs. quadrantectomy) did not significantly influence modesty perceptions. Patients provided valuable suggestions to improve privacy and modesty during RT.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that modesty is an important issue for women undergoing RT, which can be influenced by personal characteristics and hospital-related factors. A reflection about the need to address modesty concerns and to incorporate dedicated interventions for protecting patients’ physical and emotional well-being is warranted. Initiatives to improve communication, involvement, and body image support should also be integrated into the care path of patients to better their overall therapeutic experience. This study paves the way for broader research and interventions in daily cancer care.

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
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Enquiries about data availability should be directed to the authors.

References

  1. https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/jrc-news-and-updates/2020-cancer-incidence-and-mortality-eu-27-countries-2020-07-22_en#

  2. Dafni U, Tsourti Z, Alatsathianos I (2019) Breast cancer statistics in the European Union: incidence and survival across European countries. Breast Care (Basel) 14:344–353. https://doi.org/10.1159/000503219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gradishar WJ, Moran MS, Abraham J et al (2023) NCCN Guidelines® insights: breast cancer, version 4.2023. Natl Compr Canc Netw 21:594–608. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2023.0031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Probst H, Rosbottom K, Crank H, Stanton A, Reed H (2021) The patient experience of radiotherapy for breast cancer: a qualitative investigation as part of the SuPPORT 4 All study. Radiography (Lond) 27:352–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2020.09.011

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gregucci F, Fozza A, Falivene S, Italian Society of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) Breast Group et al (2020) Present clinical practice of breast cancer radiotherapy in Italy: a nationwide survey by the Italian Society of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) Breast Group. Radiol Med 125:674–682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-020-01147-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Meattini I, Palumbo I, Becherini C et al (2022) The Italian Association for Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) position statements for postoperative breast cancer radiation therapy volume, dose, and fractionation. Radiol Med 127:1407–1411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-022-01563-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Carnevale A, Scaringi C, Scalabrino G et al (2013) Radiation therapy after breast reconstruction: outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction. Radiol Med 11:1240–1250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-013-0947-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim K, Park H (2021) Factors affecting anxiety and depression in young breast cancer survivors undergoing radiotherapy. Eur J Oncol Nurs 50:101898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2021.101898

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hauth F, De-Colle C, Weidner N, Heinrich V, Zips D, Gani C (2021) Quality of life and fatigue before and after radiotherapy in breast cancer patients. Strahlenther Onkol 197:281–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-020-01700-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Halkett GK, Kristjanson LJ, Lobb E, O’Driscoll C, Taylor M, Spry N (2010) Meeting breast cancer patients’ information needs during radiotherapy: what can we do to improve the information and support that is currently provided? Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 19:538–547. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2354.2009

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Andrews CS (2011) Defining and exploring modesty in Jewish American women. J Religion Health 50:818–834. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-010-9435-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Grilo AM, Gomes AI, Monsanto F, Albino D, Augusto C, Pragana C (2020) First day of radiotherapy for women with breast cancer: predictors of anxiety. Support Care Cancer 28(3):1241–1248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-04902-1. 

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Grilo AM, Vieira L, Carolino E, Costa M, Galaio S, Melo I, Geão A, Santos A, Colarinha P (2020) Cancer patient experience in a nuclear medicine department: comparison between bone scintigraphy and 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med Technol 48(3):254–262. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnmt.119.239285. 

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Reagan LJ (1997) Engendering the dread disease: women, men, and cancer. Am J Public Health 87:1779–1787. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.87.11.1779

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Epstein RM, Borrell i Carrió F (2001) Pudor, honor, and autoridad: the evolving patient-physician relationship in Spain. Patient Educ Couns 45:51–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0738-3991(01)00143-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Padela AI et al (2012) Religious values and healthcare accommodations: voices from the American Muslim community. J Gen Intern Med 27:708–715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-011-1965-5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Yosef AR (2008) Health beliefs, practice, and priorities for health care of Arab Muslims in the United States. J Transcult Nurs 19:284–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043659608317450

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. National Radiotherapy Advisory Group, Breakthrough Breast Cancer, Breast Cancer Care (2005) What breast cancer patients want from a world class radiotherapy service

  19. Kim HY (2017) Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Chi-squared test and Fisher’s exact test. Restor Dent Endod 42:152–155. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2017.42.2.152. 

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Guimond ME, Salman K (2013) Modesty matters: cultural sensitivity and cervical cancer prevention in Muslim women in the United States. Nurs Womens Health 17:210–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-486X.12034. 

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Dareng EO, Jedy-Agba E, Bamisaye P et al (2015) Influence of spirituality and modesty on acceptance of self-sampling for cervical cancer screening. PLoS ONE 10:e0141679. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141679

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Gabel P, Larsen MB, Nielsen PB, Svendstrup DB, Andersen B (2017) Satisfaction, discomfort, obligations, and concerns in population-based breast cancer screening: cross-sectional study in a Danish population. BMC Health Serv Res 17:489. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2438-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Hughes MK, Lacy S, Nelson CJ (2015) “Sexual dysfunction” in geriatric psycho-oncology: a quick reference on the psychosocial dimensions of cancer symptom management. In: Holland JC, Weiss Wiesel T, Nelson CJ, Roth AJ, Alici Y. Oxford University Press

  24. Dinapoli L, Colloca G, Di Capua B, Valentini V (2021) Psychological aspects to consider in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment. Curr Oncol Rep 23(3):38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-021-01049-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Barbagli M, Dalla Zuanna G, Garelli F (2010) La sessualità degli italiani. Il Mulino, Bologna

    Google Scholar 

  26. Garelli F, Ferrero Camoletto R (2017) Oltre il comune senso del pudore? Riflessioni a margine di una ricerca sociologica sulla sessualità. Spazio Filosofico. (ISSN: 2038-6788)

  27. Palmisano S, Todesco L (2021) Modernizzazione e differenze di genere nella religiosità: il caso italiano. 87-XLV 2021 Quaderni di Sociologia

  28. Chan CW, Choi KC, Wong RS et al (2016) Examining the cervical screening behaviour of women aged 50 or above and its predicting factors: a population-based survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health 13:1195. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13121195

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Hewitt M, Devesa SS, Breen N (2004) Cervical cancer screening among U.S. women: analyses of the 2000 National Health Interview Survey. Prev Med 39:270–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.03.035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kołodziejczyk A, Pawłowski T (2019) Negative body image in breast cancer patients. Adv Clin Exp Med 28:1137–1142. https://doi.org/10.17219/acem/103626

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Janz NK, Mujahid M, Lantz PM et al (2005) Population-based study of the relationship of treatment and sociodemographics on quality of life for early stage breast cancer. Qual Life Res 14:1467–1479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-0288-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, Horton J, Davis TE, McFadden ET, Carbone PP (1982) Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol 5:649–655

Download references

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UOC di Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy

    Luca Boldrini, Edda Boccia, Chiara Elia, Veronica Pollutri, Gaia Sartori, Stefania Manfrida, Valeria Masiello, Fabio Marazzi & Maria Antonietta Gambacorta

  2. ipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche ed Ematologiche, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy

    Luca Boldrini & Maria Antonietta Gambacorta

  3. UOS di Psicologia Clinica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy

    Loredana Dinapoli, Elisa Marconi & Daniela Pia Rosaria Chieffo

  4. Ospedale Generale Regionale F. Miulli, Radiation Oncology Department, Acquaviva delle Fonti, BA, Italy

    Morena Caliandro, Fabiana Gregucci & Alba Fiorentino

  5. Ospedale “Infermi” - AUSL della Romagna, Dipartimento di Radioterapia, Rimini, Italy

    Sarah Pia Colangione

  6. Dipartimento Scienze della Salute della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblica, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy

    Daniela Pia Rosaria Chieffo

  7. Department of Medicine, LUM University, Casamassima (BA), Italy

    Alba Fiorentino

Authors
  1. Luca Boldrini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Loredana Dinapoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Edda Boccia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Morena Caliandro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sarah Pia Colangione
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Chiara Elia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Veronica Pollutri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Gaia Sartori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Fabiana Gregucci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Elisa Marconi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Stefania Manfrida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Valeria Masiello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Daniela Pia Rosaria Chieffo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Fabio Marazzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Alba Fiorentino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Maria Antonietta Gambacorta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by LD, MC, SPC, CE, VP, GS. Statistical analysis was performed by EB. Data interpretation: LB, EB and LB. The first draft of the manuscript was written by LB, LD and EB. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Loredana Dinapoli.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 13 KB)

Supplementary file2 (DOCX 17 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Boldrini, L., Dinapoli, L., Boccia, E. et al. Coping with modesty during radiotherapy for breast cancer: a multicentric study. Breast Cancer Res Treat (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-024-07365-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-024-07365-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation