Dyadic effects of fear of recurrence on the quality of life of cancer survivors and their caregivers
Although the 5 years cancer survival rate has increased to 66%, fear of cancer recurrence (FOR) continues to be a major concern for both cancer survivors and their family caregivers. It remains unknown, however, to what extent cancer severity is associated with the level of FOR reported by each individual in the survivor–caregiver dyad, which, in turn, is also associated with their quality of life (QOL).
A total of 455 cancer survivor–caregiver dyads, who participated in national surveys targeting 2 years post-diagnosis, provided complete data for variables studied.
Results of the Actor Partner Interdependence Model suggested that higher cancer severity was related to greater levels of FOR among both survivors and caregivers, which, in turn, was related to poorer QOL. Caregivers’ FOR was related to survivors’ poorer physical health. The associations between FOR and QOL were significant, above and beyond those of general anxiety.
Findings suggest that as expected, cancer severity was significantly related to individuals’ FOR, which, in turn, played a key role in their mental health. Caregivers’ FOR was also related to survivors’ physical health, which suggests that programs aimed to manage FOR effectively should be provided not only to survivors but also caregivers, thereby improving the QOL of each person.
KeywordsFear of recurrence Quality of life Dyadic adjustment Caregivers Anxiety Cancer
This study was funded by the American Cancer Society National Home Office, intramural research. We appreciate Corinne Crammer for her assistance with manuscript preparation and we extend our appreciation to all the families who participated in this investigation. The first author dedicates this research to the memory of Heekyoung Kim.
- 1.American Cancer Society. (2010). Cancer facts and figures, 2010. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society.Google Scholar
- 3.Ashing-Giwa, K. T., Padilla, G., Tejero, J., Kraemer, J., Wright, K., Coscarelli, A., et al. (2004). Understanding the breast cancer experience of women: A qualitative study of African American, Asian American, Latina and Caucasian cancer survivors. Psycho-Oncology, 13, 408–428.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Leventhal, H., Meyer, D., & Nerenz, D. R. (1980). The common-sense representation of illness danger. In S. Rachman (Ed.), Medical psychology (pp. 7–30). New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
- 24.Ries, L., Melbert, D., Krapcho, M., Mariotto, A., Miller, B. A., Feuer, E. J. et al. (2007). SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2004. National Cancer Institute [On-line]. Available: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/.
- 25.Golden-Kreutz, D. M., Thornton, L. M., Wells-Di, G. S., Frierson, G. M., Jim, H. S., Carpenter, K. M., et al. (2005). Traumatic stress, perceived global stress, and life events: Prospectively predicting quality of life in breast cancer patients. Health Psychology, 24, 288–296.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 31.Manne, S. L., Ostroff, J., Sherman, M., Glassman, M., Ross, S., Goldstein, L., et al. (2003). Buffering effects of family and friend support on associations between partner unsupportive behaviors and coping among women with breast cancer. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 20, 771–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Kim, Y., Kashy, D. A., Wellisch, D. K., Spillers, R. L., Kaw, C., & Smith, T. (2008). Quality of life of couples dealing with cancer: Dyadic and individual adjustment among breast and prostate cancer survivors and their spousal caregivers. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 35, 230–238.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.Curtis, R. E., Freedman, D. M., Ron, E., Ries, L. A. G., Hacker, D. G., Edwards, B. K. et al. (2006). New malignancies among cancer survivors: SEER cancer registries, 1973–2000. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, NIH Publ. No. 05–5302.Google Scholar
- 38.Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. (1994). SF-36 physical and mental health summary scales: A user’s manual (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Health Institute, New England Medical Center.Google Scholar
- 40.Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- 41.Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (2005). Amos users’ guide, version 6.0. Chicago: SmallWaters Corporation.Google Scholar
- 42.Bollen, K. A., & Stine, R. A. (1993). Bootstrapping goodness-of-fit measures in structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 111–135). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar