Development of the functional social network index for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors

Exploring Social Support Networks and Interactions of Young Adult and LGBTQIA+ Cancer Survivors and Care Partners

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to describe the social support networks and daily support interactions of cancer-affected individuals, including young adult (YA) and LGBTQIA+ survivors and care partners.

Methods

Participants were recruited at two United States cancer centers and via social media for a pilot study testing a novel online method for collecting prospective, daily social support interaction data (N=28). All participants were aged 18+; survivors had a current or recent cancer diagnosis and were engaged in treatment and/or services; care partners were identified by the survivors. Enrollment also purposefully targeted YA and LGBTQIA+ survivors. Social network data (up to 10 members) were assessed at baseline. Daily online surveys assessed support interactions between participants and specific network members over 14 days. Descriptive statistics summarized data and explored between-group (YA/non-YA, LGBTQIA+/non-LGBTQIA+) differences in social network characteristics (size, heterogeneity, density, centralization, cohesion) and support interactions (support source and type).

Results

There were no significant differences between YA and non-YA participants on any measures. LGBTQIA+ participants’ support networks were less dense (Mdn=0.69 vs. 0.82, p=.02), less cohesive (Mdn=0.85 vs. 0.91,.02), more centered on the participant (Mdn=0.40 vs. 0.24, p=.047), and included more LGBTQIA+ members (Mdn=0.35 vs. 0.00, p<.001). LGBTQIA+ participants reported having more interactions with LGBTQIA+ network members (Mdn=14.0 vs. Mdn=0.00, p<.001) and received significantly more of all types of support from LGBTQIA+ vs. non-LGBTQIA+ members. LGBTQIA+ participants also reported receiving more appraisal support than non-LGBTQIA+ (Mdn 21.64 vs. 9.12, p=.008) including more appraisal support from relatives (Mdn=11.73 vs 6.0, p+.037).

Conclusions

Important information related to support access, engagement, and needs is embedded within the everyday contexts of the social networks of cancer-affected people. Individualized, accessible, and prospective assessment could help illuminate how their “real world” support systems are working and identify specific strengths and unmet needs. These insights would inform the development of more culturally competent and tailored interventions to help people understand and leverage their unique support systems. This is particularly critical for groups like YA and LGBTQIA+ survivors and care partners that are underserved by formal support services and underrepresented in cancer, caregiving, and social support research.

Online Platform to Assess Complex Social Relationships and Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE

Social integration and relationship issues have been understudied among adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors. This study compared social relationships (social networks, support, and isolation) between AYA cancer survivors and noncancer controls, and identified social integration mechanisms through which the cancer experience influences patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred two AYA cancer survivors and 102 age, sex, and race-matched noncancer controls from a national Internet panel completed an online survey to identify up to 25 of closest friends and relatives whom they have contacted within the past 2 years. Participants' interpersonal connections were used to create a social network index. The Duke-UNC Functional Social Support Questionnaire, UCLA Loneliness Scale, and PROMIS-29 Profile were used to measure social support, perceived isolation or loneliness, and PROs (physical functioning, pain interference, fatigue, anxiety, and depression domains), respectively. Path analysis tested effects of cancer experience on PROs using serial social relationship variables as mediators.

RESULTS

Compared with controls, survivors of lymphoma, leukemia, and solid tumor had better social networks; however, survivors of solid tumor and central nervous system malignancies had higher perceived loneliness (all P values < .05). Cancer experience was directly associated with poor PROs (P values < .05 for all domains except fatigue) and indirectly associated through the social network-support-loneliness pathway (all P values < .05). Survivors with higher loneliness had lower physical functioning and higher pain interference, fatigue, anxiety, and depression versus controls with lower loneliness (all P values < .05).

CONCLUSION

Compared with controls, survivors were more socially connected but experienced greater loneliness, which was associated with poorer PROs. Screening social integration issues during follow-up care and providing appropriate interventions are warranted.