Purpose Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a common psychological issue in breast cancer (BC) survivors during early survivorship but whether the same is true among long-term survivors has yet to be empirically evaluated. This study investigated FCR level, its associated factors, and impact on quality of life (QoL) in long-term BC survivors. Materials and Methods Participants included women diagnosed with BC between 2004 and 2010 at two tertiary hospitals. Survey was conducted in 2020. The study measured FCR with the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory and other patient-reported outcomes, including depression and cancer-related QoL. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with FCR, and structural equation modeling was conducted to explore the impact of FCR on other outcomes. Results Of 333 participants, the mean age at diagnosis was 45.5, and 46% experienced FCR. Age at diagnosis ≤ 45 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.51 to 4.60), shorter time since diagnosis (aOR, 1.75, 95% CI, 1.08 to 2.89), and having a history of recurrence (aOR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.16 to 5.65) was associated with more FCR. FCR was significantly associated with an increased risk of depression (β=0.471, p < 0.001) and negatively impacted emotional functioning (β=–0.531, p < 0.001). In addition, a higher FCR level may impair overall health-related QoL in long-term BC survivors (β=–0.108, p=0.021).ConclusionTen years after diagnosis, long-term BC survivors still experienced a high level of FCR. Further, the negative impact of FCR on QoL and increased depression risk require an FCR screening and appropriate interventions to enhance long-term BC survivors' QoL.

The effects of vegetable preference and leisure-time physical activity (LPA) on cancer have been inconsistent. We examined the effects of dietary preference and physical activity, as well as their combined effect on cancer risk. This prospective cohort study included 444,963 men, older than 40 years, who participated in a national health examination program begun in 1996. Based on the answer to the question "What kind of dietary preference do you have?" we categorized dietary preference as (1) vegetables, (2) mixture of vegetables and meat, and (3) meats. We categorized LPA as low (< 4 times/wk, < 30 min/session), moderate (2–4 times/wk, ≥ 30 min/session or ≥ 5 times/wk, < 30 min/session), or high (≥ 5 times/wk, ≥ 30 min/session). We obtained cancer incidence data for 1996 through 2002 from the Korean Central Cancer Registry. We used a standard Poisson regression model with a log link function and person-time offset to estimate incidence and relative risk.. During the 6-year follow-up period, we identified 14,109 cancer cases. Multivariate analysis revealed that a preference for vegetables or a mixture of vegetables and meat as opposed to a preference for meat played a significant protective role against lung cancer incidence (aRR, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68–0.98). Compared with the low LPA group, subjects with moderate-high LPA had a significantly lower risk for stomach (aRR, 0.91; 95%CI, 0.86–0.98), lung (aRR, 0.83; 95%CI, 0.75–0.92), and liver (aRR, 0.88; 95%CI, 0.81–0.95) cancer. Among current smokers, the combined moderate-high LPA and vegetable or mixture of vegetables and meat preference group showed a 40% reduced risk of lung cancer (aRR, 0.60; 95%CI, 0.47–0.76) compared with the combined low LPA and meat preference group. Among never/former smokers, subjects with moderate-high LPA and a preference for vegetables or a mixture of vegetables and meat showed reduced stomach cancer risk (aRR, 0.72; 95%CI, 0.54–0.95). Our findings add to the evidence of the beneficial effects of vegetable preference on lung cancer risk and of physical activity on lung, stomach, and liver cancer risk. Additionally, vegetable preference combined with LPA might significantly reduce lung and stomach cancer risk.

Considering the high morbidity and mortality of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with malignancy, they are regarded as a priority for COVID-19 vaccination. However, general vaccine uptake rates among cancer patients are known to be lower than in their healthy counterparts. Thus, we aimed to investigate the attitude and acceptance rates for the COVID-19 vaccine in cancer patients and identify predictive factors for vaccination that could be modified to increase vaccine uptake rates, via a paper-based survey (58 items over six domains). A total of 1001 cancer patients participated in this nationwide, multicenter survey between February and April 2021. We observed that 61.8% of respondents were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Positive predictive factors found to be independently associated with vaccination were male gender, older age, obesity, previous influenza vaccination history, absence of cancer recurrence, time since cancer diagnosis over 5 years, and higher EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale scores. Along with the well-known factors that are positively correlated with vaccination, here, we report that patients’ disease status and current health status were also associated with their acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination. Moreover, 91.2% of cancer patients were willing to be vaccinated if their attending physicians recommend it, indicating that almost 30% could change their decision upon physicians’ recommendation. Unlike other factors, which are unmodifiable, physicians’ recommendation is the single modifiable factor that could change patients’ behavior. In conclusion, we firstly report that Korean cancer patients’ acceptance rate of the COVID-19 vaccination was 61.8% and associated with disease status and current health status. Physicians should play a major role in aiding cancer patients’ decision-making concerning COVID-19 vaccines.

We aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of quality of life (QOL) for predicting survival among disease-free survivors of surgically-treated lung cancer after the completion of cancer treatment. We administered the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), the Quality of Life Questionnaire Lung Cancer Module (QLQ-LC13), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and Posttraumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI) to 809 survivors who were surgically-treated for lung cancer at two hospitals from 2001 through 2006. We gathered mortality data by linkage to the National Statistical Office through December 2011. We used Cox proportional hazard models to compute adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) to estimate the relationship between QOL and survival. Analyses of QOL items adjusted for age, sex, stage, body mass index, and physical activity showed that scores for poor physical functioning, dyspnea, anorexia, diarrhea, cough, personal strength, anxiety, and depression were associated with poor survival. With adjustment for the independent indicators of survival, final multiple proportional hazard regression analyses of QOL show that physical functioning (aHR, 2.39; 95 % CI, 1.13–5.07), dyspnea (aHR, 1.56; 95 % CI, 1.01–2.40), personal strength (aHR, 2.36; 95 % CI, 1.31–4.27), and anxiety (aHR, 2.13; 95 % CI, 1.38–3.30) retained their independent prognostic power of survival. This study suggests that patient-reported QOL outcomes in disease-free survivors of surgically-treated lung cancer after the completion of active treatment has independent prognostic value for long-term survival.

Kim JH, et al. J Gynecol Oncol. 2022 May;33(4):e54. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2022.33.e54