Next Article in Journal
Novel Histologic Categorization Based on Lauren Histotypes Conveys Prognostic Information for Gastroesophageal Junction Cancers—Analysis from a Large Single Center Cohort in Germany
Next Article in Special Issue
Improving Survivors’ Quality of Life Post-Treatment: The Perspectives of Rural Australian Cancer Survivors and Their Carers
Previous Article in Journal
Lysosomal Calcium Channels in Autophagy and Cancer
Previous Article in Special Issue
Exploring Older Women’s Attitudes to and Experience of Treatment for Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Qualitative Phenomenological Study
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Fatigue among Long-Term Breast Cancer Survivors: A Controlled Cross-Sectional Study

by
Saskia W. M. C. Maass
1,*,
Daan Brandenbarg
1,
Liselotte M. Boerman
1,
Peter F. M. Verhaak
2,
Geertruida H. de Bock
3 and
Annette J. Berendsen
1
1
Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 196, 9700 AD Groningen, The Netherlands
2
NIVEL, Netherlands Institute of Health Services Research, 3513 CR Utrecht, The Netherlands
3
Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Cancers 2021, 13(6), 1301; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13061301
Submission received: 25 January 2021 / Revised: 6 March 2021 / Accepted: 9 March 2021 / Published: 15 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Cancer Survivorship)

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

The number of long-term breast cancer survivors is increasing. Earlier research showed that many breast cancer survivors suffer from fatigue during and shortly after treatment. Fatigue is distressing and can severely impact quality of life. In this research, we assessed whether the prevalence of fatigue is also elevated long after breast cancer treatment. We showed that even ten years after diagnosis, one in four breast cancer survivors experience fatigue. This is more than women of the same age without a history of cancer. In addition, we found that fatigue among long-term breast cancer survivors was associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety.

Abstract

Background: Fatigue is the most common and persistent symptom among women in the first five years after a breast cancer diagnosis. However, long-term prevalence of fatigue, among breast cancer survivors, needs further investigation. Aim: To compare fatigue experienced by long-term breast cancer survivors with that in a reference population and to evaluate the determinants of that fatigue. Design and Setting: A cross-sectional cohort study of 350 breast cancer survivors ≥5 years after diagnosis and a reference population of 350 women matched by age and general practitioner. Method: Fatigue was measured using the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI-20), and a sum score of >60 (multidimensional fatigue) was the primary outcome. Logistic regression was applied to compare the prevalence of multidimensional fatigue between the survivor and reference populations, adjusted for body mass index (BMI) and for cardiovascular and psychological variables. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were estimated. Logistic regression was applied to evaluate the determinants of multidimensional fatigue among the survivors. Results: Breast cancer survivors (median 10 years after diagnosis), more often experienced multidimensional fatigue than the reference population (26.6% versus 15.4%; OR, 2.0 [95%CI, 1.4–2.9]), even after adjusting for confounders. The odds of multidimensional fatigue were also higher among survivors with symptoms of depression (32.2% versus 2.7%; OR, 17.0 [95%CI, 7.1–40.5]) or anxiety (41.9% versus 10.1%; OR, 6.4 [95%CI, 3.6–11.4]). Conclusion: One in four breast cancer survivors experience multidimensional fatigue and fatigue occurs more frequently than in women of the same age and general practitioner. This fatigue appears to be associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety.

1. Introduction

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women [1], and due to an ageing population, its incidence is increasing in Western countries [2]. Fortunately, better treatment regimens mean that survival has also increased over recent decades, leading to a growth in the number of long-term survivors [3]. A downside of this has been that a growing population of women are experiencing the negative long-term effects of breast cancer therapy [4]. Among these effects, fatigue is the most common complaint among survivors, with a prevalence of 40%–80% [5,6]. Fatigue can be distressing and can severely affect daily life, potentially persisting into the long term [7]. Several mechanisms have been described to explain fatigue in survivors. It may be related to the disease itself, to the treatment, or to the physical or psychological side effects [8], having known associations with anxiety, depression, and cardiac dysfunction [9,10]. Fatigue also appears to be multidimensional, with different subtypes described, including general, physical, or mental fatigue, as well as reduced activity and reduced motivation [11]. Despite being studied extensively among breast cancer survivors, little is known about the long-term prevalence of fatigue in this population. Indeed, most studies have only reported data up to 5 years after diagnosis, and they have not compared fatigue among survivors to that among women with no cancer [12,13,14,15,16]. Given that fatigue is common in the general population, and the prevalence varies between studies (10.8%–21.6%) [17,18], such a comparison is necessary to enable the accurate interpretation of the data.
In this study, we evaluated the prevalence of multidimensional fatigue, and its persistence over time, among long-term breast cancer survivors compared to a reference population. We also evaluated the association of multidimensional fatigue with factors such as breast cancer treatment, cardiac dysfunction, depression, and anxiety.

2. Method

2.1. Context

In the Netherlands, almost all inhabitants are registered with a general practitioner (GP). All GPs record clinical contacts in electronic databases in which they assign codes according to the International Classification for Primary Care, and prescribed medication is coded using the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification system [19,20].

2.2. BLOC Study

This present study was embedded in the previously published cross-sectional BLOC study [21,22], which was designed to explore the long-term effects of breast cancer treatment on cardiac dysfunction and psychological distress. Between 2013 and 2016, we compared 350 women treated for breast cancer 5 or more years previously to 350 women with no history of cancer matched by age and GP. Women with a local/locoregional recurrence were included if the recurrence was diagnosed more than five years ago. Half of the breast cancer survivors were treated with chemotherapy (with or without radiotherapy) and the other half were treated with radiotherapy alone. After receiving written informed consent, all participants completed questionnaires, underwent echocardiography, and had their BMI calculated. Details of cancer treatment and cardiovascular diagnoses were extracted from hospital files and GP medical records. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (accessed on 25 January 2021)(ID: NCT01904331) and approved by the medical ethics committee of the University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG).

2.3. Current Study

For the current study, we compared multidimensional fatigue between the two cohorts and explored the factors associated with multidimensional fatigue in breast cancer survivors. These factors included age, time since breast cancer diagnosis, type of cancer treatment, systolic cardiac dysfunction, cardiovascular disease (CVD), depression, and anxiety.

2.3.1. Primary Outcome

Multidimensional fatigue was measured with the Dutch version of the 20-item Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI-20) questionnaire [23]. This measures five subtypes of fatigue: general fatigue, physical fatigue, mental fatigue, reduced activity, and reduced motivation. In turn, each subtype has four questions that are each scored on a five-point Likert-scale to give subtypes scores of 4–20. Fatigue was considered present for a subtype if the subtype score was >12 [24], and multidimensional fatigue was considered present if the total score was >60 [25]. Participants were also classified as having severe multidimensional fatigue if they scored >12 on all subtypes.

2.3.2. Variables

Information on CVD was obtained from the electronic medical records of the participants’ GPs. All CVD diagnoses up to the time of the cross-sectional study were included. A list of CVD codes that were included is provided in Supplementary Data S1. The presence of any of these codes in the participant’s file was taken to indicate a diagnosis. Echocardiography was also performed to measure systolic cardiac function, which we defined as a left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) <54%, using the biplane method of disk summation (modified Simpson’s rule) recommended by the European Association for Cardiovascular Imaging/American Society of Echocardiography (EACVI/ASE) [26].
Depression and anxiety were assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), a self-reporting questionnaire that comprises subscales for symptoms of depression (HADS-D) and anxiety (HADS-A). Each subtype consists of seven items, with scores ranging from 0 to 3 per item. For this study, we used a cut-off of ≥8 per subscale to indicate the presence of depression or anxiety symptoms (includes both mild and severe). The HADS performs well in recognizing depression and anxiety disorders [27]. Contrasting with other questionnaires to identify depression or anxiety symptoms, the HADS does not include a question about tiredness or sleeping difficulties [23].

2.4. Statistics

Medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) are reported to describe continuous variables, whereas numbers and percentages are reported to describe categorical variables. For the purpose of analyses, the date of breast cancer diagnosis, functioned as the index date for the matched control. Hereby, we could make a comparison between the breast cancer survivors and matched controls, including adjusting for time since diagnosis. Univariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the prevalence of multidimensional fatigue (sum score >60), and its persistence over time, among long-term survivors compared to the reference population. We set the presence of multidimensional fatigue (yes or no) as the outcome of interest and stratified the analyses according to time since diagnosis for women <10 years and those at ≥10 years after diagnosis. In multivariable logistic regression, the results were adjusted for time since diagnosis ≥10 years, BMI >30, LVEF <54%, CVD ≥1, HADS-D ≥8, and HADS-A ≥8. The presence of severe multidimensional fatigue and the fatigue subtypes were evaluated in the same way. In addition, an independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the mean sum MFI score for breast cancer survivors to the mean sum MFI of the reference population. This analysis was repeated, stratified for time since diagnosis for women <10 years versus ≥10 years after breast cancer diagnosis.
We performed further univariate logistic regression analyses to evaluate the associations between being a breast cancer survivor with or without multidimensional fatigue (the outcome) and the various factors of interest (the determinants). The following factors were considered: age > 65 years at assessment, ≥10 years since diagnosis, BMI > 30, treatment (chemo- and or radiotherapy), hormonal therapy, CVD ≥ 1, LVEF < 54%, HADS-D ≥ 8, and HADS-A ≥ 8. We applied a full model in the multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for all variables and describing the absolute effects of statistically significant associations between the factors and multidimensional fatigue. This was repeated for severe multidimensional fatigue and all fatigue subtypes. All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

3. Results

Participants had a median age of 63 (IQR 57–68) years and breast cancer survivors had a median follow-up duration of 10 (IQR 7–14) years after diagnosis (Table 1). A total of 22 breast cancer survivors were included (≥5 years) after a local/locoregional recurrence.

3.1. Fatigue among Survivors and Reference Population

Breast cancer survivors experienced multidimensional fatigue significantly more often than the reference population (26.6% vs. 15.4%; OR, 2.0 [95%CI, 1.4–2.9]; Table 2). This remained for survivors <10 years after diagnosis (29.2% vs. 13.7%; OR, 2.6 [95%CI, 1.5–4.5]), but the significant difference was lost for those >10 years after diagnosis (24.3% vs. 16.9%; OR, 1.6 [95%CI, 0.95–2.6]). The mean sum score of the MFI was significantly higher for breast cancer survivors in comparison to the reference population. Moreover, breast cancer survivors in both stratified groups (time since diagnosis <10 years or ≥10 years) had significantly higher mean sum scores on the MFI than the reference population.
Severe multidimensional fatigue was significantly more prevalent among survivors than in the reference population, (6.6% vs. 1.7%; OR, 4.0 [95%CI, 1.6–10.1]), as was each fatigue subtype: general fatigue (40.7% vs. 25.4%; OR, 2.0 [95%CI, 1.5–2.8]), physical fatigue (32.6% vs. 20.9%; OR, 1.8 [95%CI, 1.3–2.6]), reduced activity (24.0% vs. 14.0%; OR, 1.9 [95%CI, 1.3–2.9]), reduced motivation (17.8% vs. 11.7%; OR, 1.6 [95%CI, 1.1–2.5]), and mental fatigue (26.3% vs. 14.3%; OR, 2.1 [95%CI, 1.5–3.1]). After adjusting for time since diagnosis (≥10 years), BMI > 30, systolic cardiac dysfunction, CVD, depression, and anxiety, the odds remained significant for all fatigue subtypes except for reduced motivation.

3.2. Fatigue among Breast Cancer Survivors

As shown in Table 3, symptoms of depression or anxiety were significantly more common among breast cancer survivors with (OR, 17.0 [95%CI, 7.1–40.5]) than without (OR, 6.4 [95%CI, 3.6–11.4]) multidimensional fatigue. These odds remained significant after adjusting for age, time since diagnosis (≥10 years), BMI > 30, chemo- and or radiotherapy, hormonal therapy, systolic cardiac dysfunction, CVD, depression, and anxiety. Multidimensional fatigue among breast cancer survivors was not significantly associated with cardiac dysfunction (OR, 1.3 [95%CI, 0.7–2.5]) or CVD (OR, 1.8 [95%CI, 0.97–3.3]). Finally, multidimensional fatigue was experienced by 81.1% of the survivors with symptoms of depression and by 60.0% of those with symptoms of anxiety, with both being considerably higher than the 26.6% (95%CI, 22.0–31.5%) observed among all breast cancer survivors (Table 4). Comparable data were observed for severe multidimensional fatigue and all subtypes of fatigue.

4. Discussion

4.1. Summary

A quarter of the long-term breast cancer survivors in our cohort experienced multidimensional fatigue, and this occurred significantly more often than in a reference population of the same age. After considering the time since diagnosis, survivors experienced more fatigue than the reference population. Multidimensional fatigue among survivors was significantly associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety, but not with cardiac dysfunction or CVD. Indeed, breast cancer survivors with symptoms of depression or anxiety had higher levels of all fatigue subtypes. There is a need for greater awareness of persistent multidimensional fatigue and psychological problems in these women.

4.2. Comparison with Existing Literature

Fatigue is known to be a persistent symptom after treatment for breast cancer [28]. In our study, we additionally confirmed that this fatigue persists for a longer period than has previously been reported. Indeed, after a median follow-up of 10 years, 26.6% of breast cancer survivors experienced multidimensional fatigue, which is consistent with previous estimates from studies with shorter follow-up periods. A meta-analysis of patients with several types of cancer, reported a pooled prevalence of fatigue of 26.9% with a maximum follow-up of 10 years [29]. Studies of breast cancer survivors ≥5 years after diagnosis report prevalence rates of 16%–35% [13,30,31,32]. These estimates are particularly noteworthy given that we included survivors with a median of 10 years’ follow-up (IQR 7–14 years), whereas other researchers have included survivors up to 7 years after diagnosis, except for Bower et al., who included patients up to 10 years after diagnosis (mean 6.3 ± 1.0 years). In addition, Cella et al. reported that, ≥5 years after diagnosis, 33% of breast cancer survivors experienced at least 2 weeks of fatigue in the month before they were interviewed [28]. The wide range of estimates can be explained by the use of different questionnaires and contrasting time periods from diagnosis.
Overall, we showed that the differences in multidimensional fatigue between breast cancer survivors and controls were statistically significant up to 10 years after diagnosis, supporting the results of studies with different methodologies [33,34]. However, in this study, also breast cancer survivors 10 or more years after diagnosis scored significantly higher on fatigue than the reference population. The relatively older age of our long-term breast cancer survivors may contribute both to their symptom burden and to the persistence of fatigue, similar to the results of a study amongst older breast cancer survivors questioned 3 years after diagnosis [35]. After 10 years of follow-up, however, any differences become less significant because of the increase in the prevalence of fatigue among the reference population. This finding was also reported in a study comparing cancer patients of different ages with the general population [36].
In the present study, symptoms of depression and anxiety were significantly associated with multidimensional fatigue among long-term breast cancer survivors. Similarly, other researchers have established an association between fatigue, depression, and anxiety in studies of breast cancer survivors over 2 years [37]. Bower et al., for example, found an association between psychological factors and adverse fatigue trajectories up to 6 years after diagnosis [38].

4.3. Strengths and Limitations

A strength of this study is that we performed the comparison with a reference population matched by age and GP. This approach allowed us to separate the effects of breast cancer and its treatment from the effects of ageing over the long study duration. By including a random sample of breast cancer survivors and then enquiring about fatigue, we are also able to provide a more accurate prevalence measure than had we relied on women visiting a clinic. Another strength is that we only included breast cancer survivors at least 5 years after diagnosis, which resulted in a cohort median of 10 years since diagnosis. Although previous studies have reported that fatigue is persistent, none has used such a long follow-up period. Given the increasing number of long-term breast cancer survivors, it is important to know if fatigue persists this long after diagnosis. Measuring fatigue with the MFI-20 was also beneficial because it includes multiple fatigue subtypes, allowing for these to be stratified and for key issues to be identified.
Despite the strengths of our research, it is important to note that using strict cut-offs for the fatigue and severe fatigue subtypes may have resulted in an underestimation of the true prevalence [39]. Another limitation is that GPs may have coded inconsistently, which could have led to cases of CVD being missed and an underestimation of CVD diagnoses. By matching survivors and controls by the same GP, we anticipate that the impact on the comparison should be minimized. However, absolute numbers could have been underestimated and resulted in an underpowered analysis of the association with multidimensional fatigue. In addition, we did not adjust for all known determinants for fatigue [29,40]. We also measured cardiac function by echocardiography rather than the gold standard of cardiovascular MRI [41], although this should be tempered with knowledge that measuring the ejection fraction by Simpson’s 2D echo has been shown to produce comparable results [42]. Finally, the cross-sectional design precludes any comment on the course and causality related to fatigue among breast cancer survivors.

4.4. Implications for Research and/or Practice

Of note, approximately a quarter of breast cancer survivors still experienced multidimensional fatigue after more than 10 years of follow-up. However, because more women in the reference population also experienced multidimensional fatigue as women aged, the statistical significance of the difference was lost over time. Future research should explore this finding and the course of fatigue in a longitudinal study.
Regarding the clinical implications, our findings indicate that GPs should be vigilant for long-term (multidimensional) fatigue. Other research has shown that physical activity and exercise improve cancer-related fatigue, depression, and overall quality of life [43]. If fatigue is related to depression or anxiety, these could be modifiable factors that could improve fatigue if targeted appropriately. Fortunately, treatment options for depression and anxiety have proven to be as effective in cancer survivors as in the general population [44]; for example, cognitive behavioral therapy has been proven effective in breast cancer survivors [45]. It was also evident that depression and anxiety were associated with reduced motivation among breast cancer survivors, possibly implying that survivors with fatigue and reduced motivation may have depression or anxiety, or that stimulating motivation may be a necessary first step towards improvement.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/13/6/1301/s1, Supplementary Data S1. International Classification of Primary Care Codes for Cardiovascular Diseases.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.W.M.C.M., L.M.B., G.H.d.B. and A.J.B.; methodology, S.W.M.C.M., D.B., P.F.M.V., G.H.d.B. and A.J.B.; software, L.M.B.; validation, S.W.M.C.M., D.B., L.M.B., G.H.d.B. and A.J.B.; formal analysis, S.W.M.C.M., D.B.; investigation, S.W.M.C.M., L.M.B.; resources, A.J.B.; data curation, S.W.M.C.M., L.M.B. and A.J.B.; writing—original draft preparation, S.W.M.C.M., D.B., P.F.M.V., G.H.d.B. and A.J.B.; writing—review and editing, S.W.M.C.M., D.B., L.M.B., P.F.M.V., G.H.d.B. and A.J.B.; visualization, S.W.M.C.M.; supervision, P.F.M.V., G.H.d.B. and A.J.B.; project administration, S.W.M.C.M., L.M.B. and A.J.B.; funding acquisition, L.M.B., G.H.d.B. and A.J.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by unrestricted grants from Pink Ribbon (grant no. 2011.WO18.C118), Stichting de Friesland (“BLOC-studie” DS 20), the University of Groningen, and the UMCG.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the medical ethics committee of the University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG) (METc 2012.323, 28 February 2013).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The anonymized data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the women and GPs who participated. We also want to thank the medical students who helped to obtain the data.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ferlay, J.; Colombet, M.; Soerjomataram, I.; Mathers, C.; Parkin, D.; Piñeros, M.; Znaor, A.; Bray, F. Estimating the global cancer incidence and mortality in 2018: GLOBOCAN sources and methods. Int. J. Cancer 2019, 144, 1941–1953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Bray, F.; Møller, B. Predicting the future burden of cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2006, 6, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Bray, F.; McCarron, P.; Parkin, D.M. The changing global patterns of female breast cancer incidence and mortality. Breast Cancer Res. 2004, 6, 229–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Mols, F.; Vingerhoets, A.J.; Coebergh, J.W.; van de Poll-Franse, L.V. Quality of life among long-term breast cancer survivors: A systematic review. Eur. J. Cancer 2005, 41, 2613–2619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Minton, O.; Stone, P. How common is fatigue in disease-free breast cancer survivors? A systematic review of the literature. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2008, 112, 5–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Saligan, L.N.; Olson, K.; Filler, K.; Larkin, D.; Cramp, F.; Sriram, Y.; Escalante, C.P.; Del Giglio, A.; Kober, K.M.; Kamath, J. The biology of cancer-related fatigue: A review of the literature. Supportive Care Cancer 2015, 23, 2461–2478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. de Ligt, K.; Heins, M.; Verloop, J.; Ezendam, N.; Smorenburg, C.; Korevaar, J.; Siesling, S. The impact of health symptoms on health-related quality of life in early-stage breast cancer survivors. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2019, 178, 703–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  8. Curt, G.A.; Breitbart, W.; Cella, D.; Groopman, J.E.; Horning, S.J.; Itri, L.M.; Johnson, D.H.; Miaskowski, C.; Scherr, S.L.; Portenoy, R.K.; et al. of cancer-related fatigue on the lives of patients: New findings from the Fatigue Coalition. Oncologist 2000, 5, 353–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Janssens, K.A.; Zijlema, W.L.; Joustra, M.L.; Rosmalen, J.G. Mood and Anxiety Disorders in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Fibromyalgia, and Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Results from the LifeLines Cohort Study. Psychosom. Med. 2015, 77, 449–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bartels, M.N. Fatigue in cardiopulmonary disease. Phys. Med. Rehabil. Clin. N. Am. 2009, 20, 389–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Portenoy, R.K.; Itri, L.M. Cancer-related fatigue: Guidelines for evaluation and management. Oncologist 1999, 4, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Ganz, P.A.; Desmond, K.A.; Leedham, B.; Rowland, J.H.; Meyerowitz, B.E.; Belin, T.R. Quality of life in long-term, disease-free survivors of breast cancer: A follow-up study. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2002, 94, 39–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Goldstein, D.; Bennett, B.K.; Webber, K.; Boyle, F.; de Souza, P.L.; Wilcken, N.R.; Scott, E.M.; Toppler, R.; Murie, P.; O’Malley, L.; et al. Cancer-related fatigue in women with breast cancer: Outcomes of a 5-year prospective cohort study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2012, 30, 1805–1812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Helgeson, V.S.; Tomich, P.L. Surviving cancer: A comparison of 5-year disease-free breast cancer survivors with healthy women. Psychooncology 2005, 14, 307–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Servaes, P.; Gielissen, M.F.; Verhagen, S.; Bleijenberg, G. The course of severe fatigue in disease-free breast cancer patients: A longitudinal study. Psychooncology 2007, 16, 787–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Andrykowski, M.A.; Curran, S.L.; Lightner, R. Off-treatment fatigue in breast cancer survivors: A controlled comparison. J. Behav. Med. 1998, 21, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Engberg, I.; Segerstedt, J.; Waller, G.; Wennberg, P.; Eliasson, M. Fatigue in the general population-associations to age, sex, socioeconomic status, physical activity, sitting time and self-rated health: The northern Sweden MONICA study 2014. BMC Public Health 2017, 17, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Galland-Decker, C.; Marques-Vidal, P.; Vollenweider, P. Prevalence and factors associated with fatigue in the Lausanne middle-aged population: A population-based, cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open 2019, 9, e027070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Lamberts, H.; Wood, M. ICPC, International Classification of Primary Care; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  20. Anonymous. WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology (1999) ATC Index with DDS; World Health Organisation: Oslo, Norway, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  21. Boerman, L.M.; Maass, S.W.M.C.; van der Meer, P.; Gietema, J.A.; Maduro, J.H.; Hummel, Y.M.; Berger, M.Y.; de Bock, G.H.; Berendsen, A.J. Long-term outcome of cardiac function in a population-based cohort of breast cancer survivors: A cross-sectional study. Eur. J. Cancer 2017, 81, 56–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Maass, S.; Boerman, L.; Verhaak, P.; Du, J.; de Bock, G.; Berendsen, A. Long-term psychological distress in breast cancer survivors and their matched controls: A cross-sectional study. Maturitas 2019, 130, 6–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Smets, E.; Garssen, B.; Cull, A.; De Haes, J. Application of the multidimensional fatigue inventory (MFI-20) in cancer patients receiving radiotherapy. Br. J. Cancer 1996, 73, 241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Schwarz, R.; Krauss, O.; Hinz, A. Fatigue in the general population. Onkologie 2003, 26, 140–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Tian, J.; Hong, J. Application of the Chinese version of the MFI-20 in detecting the severe fatigue in cancer patients. Supportive Care Cancer 2013, 21, 2217–2223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Lang, R.M.; Badano, L.P.; Mor-Avi, V.; Afilalo, J.; Armstrong, A.; Ernande, L.; Flachskampf, F.A.; Foster, E.; Goldstein, S.A.; Kuznetsova, T.; et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: An update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2015, 28, 1–39.e14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Bjelland, I.; Dahl, A.A.; Haug, T.T.; Neckelmann, D. The validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: An updated literature review. J. Psychosom. Res. 2002, 52, 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Cella, D.; Davis, K.; Breitbart, W.; Curt, G. Fatigue Coalition Cancer-related fatigue: Prevalence of proposed diagnostic criteria in a United States sample of cancer survivors. J. Clin. Oncol. 2001, 19, 3385–3391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Abrahams, H.; Gielissen, M.; Schmits, I.; Verhagen, C.; Rovers, M.; Knoop, H. Risk factors, prevalence, and course of severe fatigue after breast cancer treatment: A meta-analysis involving 12 327 breast cancer survivors. Ann. Oncol. 2016, 27, 965–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Bower, J.E.; Ganz, P.A.; Desmond, K.A.; Bernaards, C.; Rowland, J.H.; Meyerowitz, B.E.; Belin, T.R. Fatigue in long-term breast carcinoma survivors: A longitudinal investigation. Cancer 2006, 106, 751–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Reinertsen, K.V.; Cvancarova, M.; Loge, J.H.; Edvardsen, H.; Wist, E.; Fosså, S.D. Predictors and course of chronic fatigue in long-term breast cancer survivors. J. Cancer Surviv. 2010, 4, 405–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Schmitz, K.H.; Speck, R.M.; Rye, S.A.; DiSipio, T.; Hayes, S.C. Prevalence of breast cancer treatment sequelae over 6 years of follow-up: The Pulling Through Study. Cancer 2012, 118, 2217–2225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Doege, D.; Thong, M.S.; Koch-Gallenkamp, L.; Bertram, H.; Eberle, A.; Holleczek, B.; Pritzkuleit, R.; Waldeyer-Sauerland, M.; Waldmann, A.; Zeissig, S.R. Health-related quality of life in long-term disease-free breast cancer survivors versus female population controls in Germany. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2019, 175, 499–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Klein, D.; Mercier, M.; Abeilard, E.; Puyraveau, M.; Danzon, A.; Dalstein, V.; Pozet, A.; Guizard, A.; Henry-Amar, M.; Velten, M. Long-term quality of life after breast cancer: A French registry-based controlled study. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2011, 129, 125–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Mandelblatt, J.S.; Zhai, W.; Ahn, J.; Small, B.J.; Ahles, T.A.; Carroll, J.E.; Denduluri, N.; Dilawari, A.; Extermann, M.; Graham, D. Symptom burden among older breast cancer survivors: The Thinking and Living With Cancer (TLC) study. Cancer 2019, 126, 1183–1192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Hinz, A.; Weis, J.; Brähler, E.; Härter, M.; Geue, K.; Ernst, J. Fatigue in cancer patients: Comparison with the general population and prognostic factors. Supportive Care Cancer 2020, 28, 4517–4526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Hagen, K.B.; Aas, T.; Kvaløy, J.T.; Eriksen, H.R.; Søiland, H.; Lind, R. Fatigue, anxiety and depression overrule the role of oncological treatment in predicting self-reported health complaints in women with breast cancer compared to healthy controls. Breast 2016, 28, 100–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Bower, J.E.; Wiley, J.; Petersen, L.; Irwin, M.R.; Cole, S.W.; Ganz, P.A. Fatigue after breast cancer treatment: Biobehavioral predictors of fatigue trajectories. Health Psychol. 2018, 37, 1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Lin, J.S.; Brimmer, D.J.; Maloney, E.M.; Nyarko, E.; BeLue, R.; Reeves, W.C. Further validation of the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory in a US adult population sample. Popul. Health Metr. 2009, 7, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  40. Bower, J.E. Cancer-related fatigue—Mechanisms, risk factors, and treatments. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2014, 11, 597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Marcu, C.B.; Beek, A.M.; van Rossum, A.C. Clinical applications of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. CMAJ 2006, 175, 911–917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Bellenger, N.G.; Burgess, M.I.; Ray, S.G.; Lahiri, A.; Coats, A.J.; Cleland, J.G.; Pennell, D.J. Comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes in heart failure by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Are they interchangeable? Eur. Heart J. 2000, 21, 1387–1396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Meneses-Echávez, J.F.; González-Jiménez, E.; Ramírez-Vélez, R. Effects of supervised exercise on cancer-related fatigue in breast cancer survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 2015, 15, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Mitchell, A.J.; Chan, M.; Bhatti, H.; Halton, M.; Grassi, L.; Johansen, C.; Meader, N. Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and adjustment disorder in oncological, haematological, and palliative-care settings: A meta-analysis of 94 interview-based studies. Lancet Oncol. 2011, 12, 160–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Sun, H.; Huang, H.; Ji, S.; Chen, X.; Xu, Y.; Zhu, F.; Wu, J. The efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy to treat depression and anxiety and improve quality of life among early-stage breast cancer patients. Integr. Cancer Ther. 2019, 18, 1534735419829573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Table 1. Characteristics of breast cancer survivors and a reference population at the time of assessment [21,22].
Table 1. Characteristics of breast cancer survivors and a reference population at the time of assessment [21,22].
Breast Cancer Survivors *****
(n = 350)
Controls
(n = 350)
Age; years, median (IQR)63 (57–68)63 (57–68)
Time since diagnosis of breast cancer or index date; years, median (IQR)10 (7–14)10 (7–14)
BMI > 30, n (%)69 (19.7%)70 (20%)
n (%)n (%)
Breast cancer stage
Stage 013 (3.7%)
Stage I123 (35.1%)
Stage II161 (46%)
Stage III28 (8%)
Unknown25 (7.1%)
Breast cancer treatment *
Chemotherapy ***175 (50.0%)
Radiotherapy ****295 (84.3%)
Hormonal therapy146 (41.7%)
Variables
LVEF < 54%52 (15.3%)24 (7.0%)
CVD ≥ 154 (15.4%)31 (8.9%)
Cardiac risk factor ** 139 (39.7%)135 (38.6%)
HADS-D ≥ 837 (10.6%)17 (4.9%)
HADS-A ≥ 865 (18.6%)57 (16.3%)
* as registered in the hospital and general practitioners’ files. IQR = interquartile range; BMI = body mass index; LVEF = left ventricle ejection fraction; CVD = cardiovascular diseases; HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. ** Cardiac risk factors: diabetes, hypertension, or dyslipidemia. *** Including breast cancer survivors who have received chemo- and radiotherapy n = 120 (68.6%), and breast cancer survivors who have received chemotherapy and hormonal therapy n = 109 (62.3%). **** Including breast cancer survivors who have received radiotherapy and hormonal therapy, n = 37 (21.1%). ***** Including 22 breast cancer survivors ≥ 5 years after a local/locoregional recurrence.
Table 2. Scores on fatigue amongst breast cancer survivors (n = 350) in comparison to a reference population (n = 350), measured with the MFI-20 questionnaire.
Table 2. Scores on fatigue amongst breast cancer survivors (n = 350) in comparison to a reference population (n = 350), measured with the MFI-20 questionnaire.
Breast Cancer Survivors
n = 350
Reference Population
n = 350
Univariate Analyses
OR (95%CI) *
Multivariable Analyses **
OR (95%CI)
Multidimensional fatigue
All women (n = 350)
Sum score >60, n (%)
Sum score, mean (SD) ****

93 (26.6%)
49.0 (17.9)

54 (15.4%)
42.7 (15.7)

2.0 (1.4–2.9)
 

1.7 (1.1–2.6)
 
Time since diagnosis < 10 yrs (n = 161)
Sum score, mean (SD)
Age: median 61 (IQR 55–67) years
FU: median 7 (IQR 6–8) years
47 (29.2%)
50.9 (19.1)
 
 
22 (13.7%)
41.3 (14.6)
 
 
2.6 (1.5–4.5)
 
 
 
2.0 (1.0–3.7)
 
 
 
Time since diagnosis ≥ 10 yrs (n = 189)
Sum score, mean (SD)
Age: median 65 (IQR 58–69) years
FU: median 14 (IQR 11–17) years
46 (24.3%)
47.3 (16.8)
 
 
32 (16.9%)
43.8 (16.5)
 
 
1.6 (0.95–2.6)
 
 
 
1.5 (0.8–2.7)
 
 
 
Severe multidimensional fatigue
All 5 subtypes scores >12, n (%)23 (6.6%)6 (1.7%)4.0 (1.6–10.1)3.1 (1.2–8.3)
Fatigue, subtypes
General fatigue
Median (25–75%)
n (% >12) ***
11 (7–15)
142 (40.7%)
9 (5–13)
89 (25.4%)

2.0 (1.5–2.8)

1.9 (1.4–2.8)
Physical fatigue
Median (25–75%)
n (% >12)
10 (6–14)
114 (32.6%)
10 (6–14)
73 (20.9%)

1.8 (1.3–2.6)

1.6 (1.1–2.3)
Reduced activity
Median (25–75%)
n (% >12)
9 (6–12)
84 (24.0%)
9 (6–12)
49 (14.0%)

1.9 (1.3–2.9)

1.7 (1.1–2.6)
Reduced motivation
Median (25–75%)
n (% >12)
8 (5–11.5)
62 (17.8%)
8 (5–11.5)
41 (11.7%)

1.6 (1.1–2.5)

1.3 (0.8–2.1)
Mental fatigue
Median (25–75%)
n (% >12)
8 (5–13)
92 (26.3%)
8 (5–13)
50 (14.3%)

2.1 (1.5–3.1)

2.0 (1.3–3.1)
* Significant results are in bold. MFI = Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory; IQR = interquartile range; FU = follow-up; BMI = body mass index; LVEF = left ventricle ejection fraction; CVD = cardiovascular diseases; HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence intervals. ** Multivariable analysis for breast cancer adjusted for time since diagnosis ≥10 years, BMI > 30, LVEF > 54%, CVD ≥ 1, HADS-D ≥ 8, HADS-A ≥ 8. *** Definitions: fatigue, subtype score >12; multidimensional fatigue, overall score >60; severe multidimensional fatigue, all subtypes score >12. **** Tested with the independent-samples t-test, significant p < 0.05.
Table 3. Comparison of breast cancer survivors with (n = 93) and without (n = 257) multidimensional fatigue **.
Table 3. Comparison of breast cancer survivors with (n = 93) and without (n = 257) multidimensional fatigue **.
Survivors with Multidimensional Fatigue
n = 93
Survivors without Multidimensional Fatigue
n = 257
Univariate AnalysesMultivariable Analyses a
n (%)n (%)OR (95%CI) *OR (95%CI)
Age at time of assessment >65 yearsNo
Yes
54 (58.1%)
39 (41.9%)
162 (63.0%)
95 (37.0%)
1
1.2 (0.8–2.0)
1
1.2 (0.6–2.2)
Time since diagnosis breast cancer ≥10 yearsNo
Yes
47 (50.5%)
46 (49.5%)
114 (44.4%)
143 (55.6%)
1
0.8 (0.5–1.3)
1
0.8 (0.5–1.5)
BMI > 30No
Yes
80 (86.0%)
13 (14.0%)
201 (78.2%)
56 (21.8%)
1
0.6 (0.3–1.1)
1
0.5 (0.2–1.2)
CT (+/−RT)No
Yes
44 (47.3%)
49 (52.7%)
131 (51.0%)
126 (49.0%)
1
1.2 (0.7–1.9)
1
1.0 (0.6–2.0)
Hormonal therapyNo
Yes
47 (50.5%)
46 (49.5%)
152 (59.1%)
105 (40.9%)
1
1.4 (0.9–2.3)
1
1.3 (0.7–2.4)
LVEF < 54%No
Yes
72 (77.4%)
16 (17.2%)
215 (83.7%)
36 (14.0%)
1
1.3 (0.7–2.5)
1
0.9 (0.4–1.9)
CVD ≥ 1No
Yes
73 (78.5%)
18 (19.4%)
223 (86.8%)
34 (13.2%)
1
1.8 (0.97–3.3)
1
1.9 (0.9–4.0)
HADS-Depression ≥ 8No
Yes
63 (67.7%)
30 (32.3%)
250 (97.3%)
7 (2.7%)
1
17.0 (7.1–40.5)
1
8.9 (3.4–23.5)
HADS-Anxiety ≥ 8No
Yes
54 (58.1%)
39 (41.9%)
231 (89.9%)
26 (10.1%)
1
6.4 (3.6–11.4)
1
3.7 (1.9–7.3)
* Significant results are in bold. a Adjusted for: age at the time of assessment > 65 years, time since diagnosis ≥10 years, BMI > 30, treatment (chemo- and or radiotherapy), hormonal therapy, LVEF > 54%, a diagnosis of CVD, HADS-D ≥ 8, HADS-A ≥ 8. BMI = body mass index; RT = radiotherapy; CT = chemotherapy; LVEF = left ventricle ejection fraction; CVD = cardiovascular diseases; HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence intervals. ** Definition: multidimensional fatigue, overall score >60.
Table 4. Fatigue among breast cancer survivors (n = 350) overall and stratified for women with symptoms of depression (n = 37) or anxiety (n = 65).
Table 4. Fatigue among breast cancer survivors (n = 350) overall and stratified for women with symptoms of depression (n = 37) or anxiety (n = 65).
All Breast Cancer Survivors n = 350HADS-Depression ≥ 8
n = 37
HADS-Anxiety ≥ 8
n = 65
n (%; 95%CI’s) *n (%)n (%)
Multidimensional fatigue93 (26.6%; 22.0–31.5)30 (81.1%)39 (60.0%)
Severe multidimensional fatigue23 (6.6%; 4.2–9.7)10 (27.8%)13 (20.3%)
Fatigue, subtypes
General fatigue142 (40.7%; 35.4–45.9%)30 (83.3%)45 (70.3%)
Physical fatigue114 (32.6%; 27.7–37.8)28 (75.7%)39 (60.0%)
Mental fatigue92 (26.3%; 21.7–31.2)27 (73.0%)44 (67.7%)
Reduced activity84 (24.0%; 19.6–28.8)22 (59.5%)28 (43.1%)
Reduced motivation62 (17.8%; 13.9–22.1)23 (62.2%)26 (40.0%)
HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; CI = confidence intervals. * Bold if the percentage with fatigue is higher than the upper bound of the 95%CI for the group ‘All breast cancer survivors’.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Maass, S.W.M.C.; Brandenbarg, D.; Boerman, L.M.; Verhaak, P.F.M.; de Bock, G.H.; Berendsen, A.J. Fatigue among Long-Term Breast Cancer Survivors: A Controlled Cross-Sectional Study. Cancers 2021, 13, 1301. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13061301

AMA Style

Maass SWMC, Brandenbarg D, Boerman LM, Verhaak PFM, de Bock GH, Berendsen AJ. Fatigue among Long-Term Breast Cancer Survivors: A Controlled Cross-Sectional Study. Cancers. 2021; 13(6):1301. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13061301

Chicago/Turabian Style

Maass, Saskia W. M. C., Daan Brandenbarg, Liselotte M. Boerman, Peter F. M. Verhaak, Geertruida H. de Bock, and Annette J. Berendsen. 2021. "Fatigue among Long-Term Breast Cancer Survivors: A Controlled Cross-Sectional Study" Cancers 13, no. 6: 1301. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13061301

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop