TY - JOUR
T1 - Positive and negative survivor-specific psychosocial consequences of childhood cancer
T2 - the DCCSS-LATER 2 psycho-oncology study
AU - Maas, Anne
AU - Maurice-Stam, Heleen
AU - the Dutch LATER Study group
AU - van der Aa-van Delden, Alied M.
AU - van Dalen, Elvira C.
AU - van Dulmen-den Broeder, Eline
AU - Tissing, Wim J.E.
AU - Loonen, Jacqueline J.
AU - van der Pal, Helena J.H.
AU - de Vries, Andrica C.H.
AU - van den Heuvel-Eibrink, Marry M.
AU - Janssens, Geert O.
AU - Ronckers, Cécile
AU - Neggers, Sebastian
AU - Bresters, Dorine
AU - Louwerens, Marloes
AU - Versluys, Birgitta A.B.
AU - van der Heiden-van der Loo, Margriet
AU - Kremer, Leontien C.M.
AU - van Gorp, Marloes
AU - Grootenhuis, Martha A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2023.
PY - 2024/10
Y1 - 2024/10
N2 - Purpose: Numerous studies investigated generic psychosocial outcomes in survivors of childhood cancer (CCS). The present study aimed to describe survivor-specific psychosocial consequences in CCS, and to identify socio-demographic and medical associated factors. Methods: CCS from the Dutch Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (DCCSS)-LATER cohort (diagnosed 1963–2001) part 2 (age ≥ 18 years, diagnosed < 18 years, ≥ 5 years since diagnosis) completed the Benefit & Burden Scale (BBSC) and the Impact of Cancer–Childhood Cancer (IOC-CS). Items were scored on a 5-point Likert scale (range 1–5). We examined outcomes with descriptive statistics, and socio-demographic and medical associated factors with regression analyses, corrected for multiple testing (p < 0.004). Results: CCS, N = 1713, age mean (M) 36 years, 49% female, ≥ 15 years since diagnosis, participated. On average, CCS reported ‘somewhat’ Benefit (M = 2.9), and ‘not at all’ to ‘a little’ Burden (M = 1.5) of childhood cancer. Average scores on IOC-CS’ positive impact scales ranged from 2.5 (Personal Growth) to 4.1 (Socializing), and on the negative impact scales from 1.4 (Financial Problems) to 2.4 (Thinking/Memory). Apart from cognitive problems, CCS reported challenges as worries about relationship status, fertility, and how cancer had affected siblings. Female sex was associated with more Personal Growth, and more negative impact. CCS more highly educated, partnered, and employed had higher positive and lower negative impact. CCS older at diagnosis reported more positive impact. CNS tumor survivors and those who had head/cranium radiotherapy had higher negative impact. CNS tumor survivors reported less positive impact. Conclusion and implications: The majority of CCS reported positive impact of cancer while most CCS reported little negative impact. While this may indicate resiliency in most CCS, health care providers should be aware that they can also experience survivor-specific challenges that warrant monitoring/screening, information provision and psychosocial support.
AB - Purpose: Numerous studies investigated generic psychosocial outcomes in survivors of childhood cancer (CCS). The present study aimed to describe survivor-specific psychosocial consequences in CCS, and to identify socio-demographic and medical associated factors. Methods: CCS from the Dutch Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (DCCSS)-LATER cohort (diagnosed 1963–2001) part 2 (age ≥ 18 years, diagnosed < 18 years, ≥ 5 years since diagnosis) completed the Benefit & Burden Scale (BBSC) and the Impact of Cancer–Childhood Cancer (IOC-CS). Items were scored on a 5-point Likert scale (range 1–5). We examined outcomes with descriptive statistics, and socio-demographic and medical associated factors with regression analyses, corrected for multiple testing (p < 0.004). Results: CCS, N = 1713, age mean (M) 36 years, 49% female, ≥ 15 years since diagnosis, participated. On average, CCS reported ‘somewhat’ Benefit (M = 2.9), and ‘not at all’ to ‘a little’ Burden (M = 1.5) of childhood cancer. Average scores on IOC-CS’ positive impact scales ranged from 2.5 (Personal Growth) to 4.1 (Socializing), and on the negative impact scales from 1.4 (Financial Problems) to 2.4 (Thinking/Memory). Apart from cognitive problems, CCS reported challenges as worries about relationship status, fertility, and how cancer had affected siblings. Female sex was associated with more Personal Growth, and more negative impact. CCS more highly educated, partnered, and employed had higher positive and lower negative impact. CCS older at diagnosis reported more positive impact. CNS tumor survivors and those who had head/cranium radiotherapy had higher negative impact. CNS tumor survivors reported less positive impact. Conclusion and implications: The majority of CCS reported positive impact of cancer while most CCS reported little negative impact. While this may indicate resiliency in most CCS, health care providers should be aware that they can also experience survivor-specific challenges that warrant monitoring/screening, information provision and psychosocial support.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85159577249&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11764-023-01394-1
DO - 10.1007/s11764-023-01394-1
M3 - Article
C2 - 37170006
AN - SCOPUS:85159577249
SN - 1932-2259
VL - 18
SP - 1505
EP - 1516
JO - Journal of Cancer Survivorship
JF - Journal of Cancer Survivorship
IS - 5
ER -