Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The role of psychosocial resources for long-term breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors: prevalence and associations with health-related quality of life

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Many long-term cancer survivors still have to adjust to possible adverse consequences of the illness or treatment. Resources can play an important role in this adjustment process, but research on this topic is limited, especially for very long-term survivors. This study explores, which resources are most frequently indicated by different subgroups of cancer survivors, and what role resources play for functioning and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in cancer survivors with and without recurrence.

Methods

The sample of 6030 breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors (5–16 years post-diagnosis) was recruited in a German multi-regional population-based study. Personal resources were assessed by a 27-item checklist; HRQL was assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). General linear models were used to analyze associations of resources with HRQL.

Results

Participants indicated on average 11.4 (SD 5.1) resources as helpful. Family, activities with others, and partnership were indicated most commonly overall, but frequencies varied according to age, sex, and tumor site. Physical activity, health, professional help, calmness, hope, optimism, and hobbies were most important in explaining HRQL variance. Cancer survivors with recurrence and many resources were found to report similar HRQL as survivors without recurrence and only few resources.

Conclusions

The study underlines the importance and situational variability of personal and social resources for cancer survivors’ HRQL, even years post-diagnosis. Not only the availability, but also the individual perception and significance of resources should be considered in follow-up 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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: IARC CancerBase no. 11 (2013) International Agency for Research on Cancer. Accessed 2017/07/17

  2. American Cancer Society (2016) Cancer treatment & survivorship facts & figures 2016–2017. American Cancer Society, Atlanta

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bericht zum Krebsgeschehen in Deutschland 2016 (2016). Zentrum für Krebsregisterdaten im Robert Koch-Institut, Berlin

  4. Parry C, Kent EE, Mariotto AB, Alfano CM, Rowland JH (2011) Cancer survivors: a booming population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 20(10):1996–2005. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-11-0729

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Khan NF, Mant D, Carpenter L, Forman D, Rose PW (2011) Long-term health outcomes in a British cohort of breast, colorectal and prostate cancer survivors: a database study. Br J Cancer 105:S29–S37. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.420

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Koch-Gallenkamp L, Bertram H, Eberle A, Holleczek B, Schmid-Höpfner S, Waldmann A, Zeissig SR, Brenner H, Arndt V (2016) Fear of recurrence in long-term cancer survivors—do cancer type, sex, time since diagnosis, and social support matter? Health Psychol 35(12):1329–1333. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000374.supp (Supplemental)

  7. Arndt V, Koch-Gallenkamp L, Jansen L, Bertram H, Eberle A, Holleczek B, Schmid-Höpfner S, Waldmann A, Zeissig SR, Brenner H (2017) Quality of life in long-term and very long-term cancer survivors versus population controls in Germany. Acta Oncol:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2016.1266089

  8. Lazarus RS, Folkman S (1984) Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hobfoll SE (1989) Conservation of resources: a new attempt at conceptualizing stress. Am Psychol 44(3):513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Coughlin SS (2008) Surviving cancer or other serious illness: a review of individual and community resources. CA Cancer J Clin 58(1):60–64. https://doi.org/10.3322/CA.2007.0001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hamama-Raz Y, Solomon Z (2006) Psychological adjustment of melanoma survivors: the contribution of hardiness, attachment, and cognitive appraisal. J Individ Differ 27(3):172–182. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001.27.3.172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Molina Y, Yi JC, Martinez-Gutierrez J, Reding KW, Yi-Frazier JP, Rosenberg AR (2014) Resilience among patients across the cancer continuum: diverse perspectives. Clin J Oncol Nurs 18(1):93–101. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.CJON.93-101

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Pinquart M, Fröhlich C, Silbereisen RK (2007) Change in psychological resources of younger and older cancer patients during chemotherapy. Psycho-Oncology 16(7):626–633. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.1103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Pinquart M, Fröhlich C (2009) Psychosocial resources and subjective well-being of cancer patients. Psychol Health 24(4):407–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440701717009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hobfoll SE, Lilly RS (1993) Resource conservation as a strategy for community psychology. J Community Psychol 21(2):128–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6629(199304)21:2<128::AID-JCOP2290210206>3.0.CO;2-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Schuurmans H, Steverink N, Frieswijk N, Buunk BP, Slaets JPJ, Lindenberg S (2005) How to measure self-management abilities in older people by self-report. The development of the SMAS-30. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehab 14(10):2215–2228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-8166-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Glasgow RE, Toobert DJ, Barrera JM, Strycker LA (2005) The chronic illness resources survey: cross-validation and sensitivity to intervention. Health Educ Res 20(4):402–409. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyg140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Trösken AK (2003) Das Berner Ressourceninventar: Ressourcenpotentiale und Ressourcenrealisierung aus konsistenztheoretischer Sicht. University of Bern

  19. Hobfoll SE (2002) Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Rev Gen Psychol 6(4):307–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lechner SC, Carver CS, Antoni MH, Weaver KE, Phillips KM (2006) Curvilinear associations between benefit finding and psychosocial adjustment to breast cancer. J Consult Clin Psychol 74(5):828–840. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.74.5.828

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pinquart M, Fröhlich C, Silbereisen RK (2006) Altersunterschiede in psychosozialen Ressourcen und im Befinden von Krebspatienten am Beginn einer Chemotherapie. = age differences in psychosocial resources and psychological well-being of cancer patients at the start of chemotherapy. Z Gerontol Geriatr 39(5):344–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-006-0406-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Goldzweig G, Andritsch E, Hubert A, Walach N, Perry S, Brenner B, Baider L (2009) How relevant is marital status and gender variables in coping with colorectal cancer? A sample of middle-aged and older cancer survivors. Psycho-Oncology 18(8):866–874. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.1499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Low M, Stegmaier C, Ziegler H, Rothenbacher D, Brenner H (2004) Epidemiological investigations of the chances of preventing, recognizing early and optimally treating chronic diseases in an elderly population (ESTHER study). Dtsch Med Wochenschr 129(49):2643–2647. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-836089

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lechner S Resource checklist, developed for the German study “ESTHER” (Epidemiologische Studie zu Chancen der Verhütung, Früherkennung und optimierten Therapie chronischer Erkrankungen in der älteren Bevölkerung). Unpublished work

  25. Connor KM, Davidson JRT (2003) Development of a new resilience scale: the Connor-Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC). Depress Anxiety 18(2):76–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.10113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, Filiberti A, Flechtner H, Fleishman SB, de Haes JCJM, Kaasa S, Klee M, Osoba D, Fazavi D, Rofe PB, Schraub S, Sneeuw K, Sullivan M, Takeda F (1993) The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85(5):365–376

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by a grant from the German Cancer Aid (No. 108262).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Unit of Cancer Survivorship, Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), P.O.B. 10 19 49, 69009, Heidelberg, Germany

    Daniela Doege, Melissa Thong & Volker Arndt

  2. Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany

    Lena Koch-Gallenkamp & Hermann Brenner

  3. Cancer Registry of North Rhine-Westphalia, Bochum, Germany

    Heike Bertram

  4. Bremen Cancer Registry, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology – BIPS, Bremen, Germany

    Andrea Eberle

  5. Saarland Cancer Registry, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Bernd Holleczek

  6. Hamburg Cancer Registry, Ministry of Health and Consumer Protection, Hamburg, Germany

    Mechthild Waldeyer-Sauerland & Annika Waldmann

  7. Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany

    Annika Waldmann

  8. Cancer Registry of Rhineland-Palatinate, Mainz, Germany

    Sylke Ruth Zeissig

  9. Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany

    Hermann Brenner

  10. German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany

    Hermann Brenner

Authors
  1. Daniela Doege
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Melissa Thong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lena Koch-Gallenkamp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Heike Bertram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andrea Eberle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Bernd Holleczek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mechthild Waldeyer-Sauerland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Annika Waldmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Sylke Ruth Zeissig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hermann Brenner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Volker Arndt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniela Doege.

Ethics declarations

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 16.4 kb)

ESM 2

(DOCX 17 kb)

ESM 3

(DOCX 15.9 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Doege, D., Thong, M., Koch-Gallenkamp, L. et al. The role of psychosocial resources for long-term breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors: prevalence and associations with health-related quality of life. Support Care Cancer 27, 275–286 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4317-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4317-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation