Opinion statement: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a problem for a significant proportion of cancer survivors during and after active cancer treatment. However, CRF is underdiagnosed and undertreated. Interventions are available for CRF although there is no gold standard. Based on current level of evidence, exercise seems to be most effective in preventing or ameliorating CRF during the active- and posttreatment phases.

Background: With improving prognosis, the ability to return to work after cancer has become a realistic goal but only little is known regarding details such as sustainability, financial consequences, and potential determinants of return to work in long-term survivors in Germany. Methods: We studied return to work in a population-based sample of 1558 long-term cancer survivors, diagnosed in 1994–2004 with breast, colorectal or prostate cancer before age 60 (mean 50.1). Information regarding employment status and financial difficulties was obtained via mailed questionnaires from patients who were identified by six population-based cancer registries in Germany. Cumulative incidence of return to work was determined by time-to-event analysis with consideration of competing events. Chi² tests and multiple logistic regression modeling were employed to identify potential sociodemographic and clinical determinants of return to work. Results: Within a mean period since diagnosis of 8.3 years, 63% of all working-age cancer survivors initially returned to their old job and another 7% took up a new job. Seventeen percent were granted a disability pension, 6% were early retired (not cancer-related), 4% became unemployed, and 1% left the job market for other reasons. Resumption of work occurred within the first 2 years after diagnosis in 90% of all returnees. Cancer-related reduction of working hours was reported by 17% among all returnees and 6% quit their job due to cancer within 5 years past return to work. The probability of return to work was strongly related with age at diagnosis, tumor stage, education, and occupational class but did not differ with respect to the tumor site, gender nor marital status. Conclusions: Most long-term survivors after breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer of working-age are able to return to work. However, financial problems might arise due to a reduction in working hours. An additional provision of targeted interventions for high-risk groups should be discussed.

Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

Purpose Little research has been done to identify possible cancer-related fatigue (CRF) subtypes and to classify cancer survivors accordingly. We aimed to identify CRF subtypes in a large population-based sample of (long term) stage I–III colorectal cancer survivors. We also identified factors associated with the CRF subtypes. Methods Respondents completed the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory and other validated questionnaires on anxiety and reduced positive affect (anhedonia), sleep quality, and lifestyle factors (body mass index and physical activity). Latent class analysis was used to derive the CRF subtypes. Factors associated with the derived CRF subtypes were determined with multinomial logistic regression. Results Three CRF classes were identified: class 1 (no fatigue and distress, n = 644, 56%), class 2 (low fatigue, moderate distress, n = 256, 22%), and class 3 (high fatigue, moderate distress, n = 256, 22%). Multinomial logistic regression results show that survivors in class 3 were more likely to be female, were treated with radiotherapy, have comorbid diabetes mellitus, and be overweight/obese than survivors in class 1 (reference). Survivors in classes 2 and 3 were also more likely to have comorbid heart condition, report poorer sleep quality, experience anhedonia, and report more anxiety symptoms when compared with survivors in class 1. Conclusions Three distinct classes of CRF were identified which could be differentiated with sleep quality, anxiety, anhedonia, and lifestyle factors. Implications for cancer survivors The identification of CRF subtypes with distinct characteristics suggests that interventions should be targeted to the CRF subtype.

The 2018 update of the Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention does not mention fatigue-related symptoms. Nevertheless, patients with asthma frequently report tiredness, lack of energy, and daytime sleepiness. Quantitative research regarding the prevalence of fatigue in asthmatic patients is lacking. This retrospective cross-sectional study of outpatients with asthma upon referral to a chest physician assessed fatigue (Checklist Individual Strength-Fatigue (CIS-Fatigue)), lung function (spirometry), asthma control (Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)), dyspnea (Medical Research Council (MRC) scale), exercise capacity (six-minute walk test (6MWT)), and asthma-related Quality-of-Life (QoL), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) during a comprehensive health-status assessment. In total, 733 asthmatic patients were eligible and analyzed (47.4 ± 16.3 years, 41.1% male). Severe fatigue (CIS-Fatigue ≥ 36 points) was detected in 62.6% of patients. Fatigue was not related to airflow limitation (FEV1, ρ = −0.083); was related moderately to ACQ (ρ = 0.455), AQLQ (ρ = −0.554), and MRC (ρ = 0.435; all p-values < 0.001); and was related weakly to 6MWT (ρ = −0.243, p < 0.001). In stepwise multiple regression analysis, 28.9% of variance in fatigue was explained by ACQ (21.0%), MRC (6.5%), and age (1.4%). As for AQLQ, 42.2% of variance was explained by fatigue (29.8%), MRC (8.6%), exacerbation rate (2.6%), and age (1.2%). Severe fatigue is highly prevalent in asthmatic patients; it is an important determinant of disease-specific QoL and a crucial yet ignored patient-related outcome in patients with asthma.