4.4 Article

Long-Term Lung Cancer Survivors Have Permanently Decreased Quality of Life After Surgery

Journal

CLINICAL LUNG CANCER
Volume 16, Issue 1, Pages 40-45

Publisher

CIG MEDIA GROUP, LP
DOI: 10.1016/j.cllc.2014.08.004

Keywords

15D; EORTC QLQ-C30; Health-related quality of life; Lung cancer; NSCLC; Surgery

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study assessed the very long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among operated nonesmall-cell lung cancer patients. We compared the data of 230 patients to that of the general population. The patients scored lower on total HRQoL and especially on the dimensions mobility and breathing. HRQoL should also be considered because of longer life expectancy of operated lung cancer patients. Background: Retrospective evaluation of the long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among survivors after nonesmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgery. Patients and Methods: A total of 586 patients underwent surgery for NSCLC in Helsinki University Central Hospital between January 2000 and June 2009. Two validated quality-of-life questionnaires, the 15D and the EORTC QLQ-C30 with its lung cancerespecific module, QLQ-LC13, were sent to the 276 patients alive in June 2011. Response rate was 83.3%. Results of the 15D were compared with those of an age-and gender-standardized general population. Results: Median follow-up was 5 years. Compared with a general population, our patients had a significantly lower 15D total score, representing their total HRQoL and scores for dimensions of mobility, breathing, usual activities, depression, distress, and vitality. The patients, however, scored significantly higher on vision, hearing, and mental function. Conclusions: NSCLC survivors may suffer postoperatively from permanently reduced long-term HRQoL compared to an age-and gender-matched general population. This is essential patient information as more patients are surviving longer. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available