Quality of life assessment in breast cancer women: how does it explain their supportive care needs? — ASN Events
  1. Schedule
  2. IPOS Symposium - Integration of psychosocial support throughout cancer care: Perspectives from around the globe
  3. Quality of life assessment in breast cancer women: how does it explain their supportive care needs?

Quality of life assessment in breast cancer women: how does it explain their supportive care needs? (#297)

Anne Bredart 1 2 , Jean-Luc Kop 3 , Anne-Claude Griesser 4 , Khalil Zaman 4 , Bénédicte Panes-Ruedin 4 , Wendy Jeanneret 4 , Sylvia Zimmers 1 , Vincent Berthet 3 , Chavie Fiszer 1 2 , Sylvie Dolbeault 1 5 6
  1. Institut Curie, Paris, IDF, France
  2. Psychology LPPSEA 4057, University Paris Descartes, Boulogne-Billancourt, France
  3. Inter-Psy, Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France
  4. University Hospital CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland
  5. Inserm, U 669, Paris, France
  6. UMR-S0669, Univ Paris-Sud and Univ Paris Descartes, Paris, France

Background: Supportive care services have been implemented to provide medical, nursing and psychosocial care along the cancer continuum, with the goal to improve quality of life (QoL). QoL assessment is performed to identify patients’ symptoms and needs; however patients’ perceived troubles do not necessarily translate into perceived needs for care. To further examine this relationship, we assessed: 1) how responses to the EORTC QLQ-C30 scales explain score variation in the SCNS-SF34 supportive care needs scales; 2) which breast cancer (BC) patients’ socio-demographics (age, having children, education) and clinical characteristics (time since diagnosis, undergoing treatment) are associated to statistical differences in discrepancies between QoL and supportive care needs responses.
Methods: 384 (73% response rate) BC patients were recruited in ambulatory chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or surgery hospital services at Institut Curie (France) and CHUV (Switzerland), provided data. Discrepancies between QoL and needs responses were measured using residuals from 5 multiple regression models with the 15 EORTC QLQ-C30 scales as independent variables and the 5 SCNS-SF34 as dependent variables.
Results: Score variation (R2) in the SCNS-SF34 scales ranged from .14 (sexual needs) to .51 (physical and daily living needs) (all p < .001). BC patients undergoing treatment evidenced higher psychological needs than it would have been predicted from their QoL data (η2=.02, p<.01); those with no children evidenced lower psychological needs than it would have been predicted from their QoL data (η2=.02, p<.01); BC patients with a high school education level evidenced higher needs for information and for care/support than it would have been predicted from their QoL data (η2=.03, p<.01; η2=.03, p<.05). No discrepancy was found for the physical and sexual needs scales and according to age and time since diagnosis.
Discussion: This study highlights subgroups of BC patients whose care needs differ from their reported symptoms or difficulties providing indications for better care targeting.

This abstract is planned as part of the symposium entitled, "Integration of Psychosocial Support Throughout Cancer Care: Perspectives from Around the Globe