Introduction to special section on: current topics in cancer survivorship and work

Non-medical interventions to enhance return to work for people with cancer

BACKGROUND

People with cancer are 1.4 times more likely to be unemployed than people without a cancer diagnosis. Therefore, it is important to investigate whether programmes to enhance the return-to-work (RTW) process for people who have been diagnosed with cancer are effective. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011 and updated in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of non-medical interventions aimed at enhancing return to work (RTW) in people with cancer compared to alternative programmes including usual care or no intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and three trial registers up to 18 August 2021. We also examined the reference lists of included studies and selected reviews, and contacted authors of relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs on the effectiveness of psycho-educational, vocational, physical or multidisciplinary interventions enhancing RTW in people with cancer. The primary outcome was RTW measured as either RTW rate or sick leave duration measured at 12 months' follow-up. The secondary outcome was quality of life (QoL).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed RCTs for inclusion, extracted data and rated certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We pooled study results judged to be clinically homogeneous in different comparisons reporting risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for RTW and mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs for QoL.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 RCTs involving 1477 people with cancer with 19 evaluations because of multiple treatment groups. In this update, we added eight new RCTs and excluded seven RCTs from the previous versions of this review that were aimed at medical interventions. All included RCTs were conducted in high-income countries, and most were aimed at people with breast cancer (nine RCTs) or prostate cancer (two RCTs). Risk of bias We judged nine RCTs at low risk of bias and six at high risk of bias. The most common type of bias was a lack of blinding (9/15 RCTs). Psycho-educational interventions We found four RCTs comparing psycho-educational interventions including patient education and patient counselling versus care as usual. Psycho-educational interventions probably result in little to no difference in RTW compared to care as usual (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.24; 4 RCTs, 512 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This means that in the intervention and control groups, approximately 625 per 1000 participants may have returned to work. The psycho-educational interventions may result in little to no difference in QoL compared to care as usual (MD 1.47, 95% CI -2.38 to 5.32; 1 RCT, 124 participants; low-certainty evidence). Vocational interventions We found one RCT comparing vocational intervention versus care as usual. The evidence was very uncertain about the effect of a vocational intervention on RTW compared to care as usual (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13; 1 RCT, 34 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report QoL. Physical interventions Four RCTs compared a physical intervention programme versus care as usual. These physical intervention programmes included walking, yoga or physical exercise. Physical interventions likely increase RTW compared to care as usual (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.39; 4 RCTs, 434 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This means that in the intervention group probably 677 to 871 per 1000 participants RTW compared to 627 per 1000 in the control group (thus, 50 to 244 participants more RTW). Physical interventions may result in little to no difference in QoL compared to care as usual (SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.32; 1 RCT, 173 participants; low-certainty evidence). The SMD translates back to a 1.8-point difference (95% CI -7.54 to 3.97) on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Multidisciplinary interventions Six RCTs compared multidisciplinary interventions (vocational counselling, patient education, patient counselling, physical exercises) to care as usual. Multidisciplinary interventions likely increase RTW compared to care as usual (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.33; 6 RCTs, 497 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This means that in the intervention group probably 694 to 844 per 1000 participants RTW compared to 625 per 1000 in the control group (thus, 69 to 217 participants more RTW). Multidisciplinary interventions may result in little to no difference in QoL compared to care as usual (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.28; 3 RCTs, 378 participants; low-certainty evidence). The SMD translates back to a 1.4-point difference (95% CI -2.58 to 5.36) on the EORTC QLQ-C30.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Physical interventions (four RCTs) and multidisciplinary interventions (six RCTs) likely increase RTW of people with cancer. Psycho-educational interventions (four RCTs) probably result in little to no difference in RTW, while the evidence from vocational interventions (one RCT) is very uncertain. Psycho-educational, physical or multidisciplinary interventions may result in little to no difference in QoL. Future research on enhancing RTW in people with cancer involving multidisciplinary interventions encompassing a physical, psycho-educational and vocational component is needed, and be preferably tailored to the needs of the patient.

Modèle de survie au cancer appliqué aux soins holistiques et à la recherche

Les progrès réalisés dans la lutte contre le cancer ont augmenté les taux de survie, entraînant un tel changement de paradigme que le cancer est maintenant considéré comme une maladie chronique; il nous faut donc évaluer notre connaissance de la survie au cancer (SC). C’est dans cette optique que les auteurs ont procédé à une recension exhaustive des écrits dans les référentiels CINAHL, MEDLINE et PUBMED de 2000 et 2021. En s’appuyant sur les concepts étudiés dans la littérature, ils ont répertorié les principaux facteurs qui influencent la survie au cancer dans l’ensemble des populations atteintes et ont proposé un modèle. Le présent article décrit ce modèle de survie au cancer (MSC). Le MSC prend en compte les facteurs prédisposant à la survie ainsi que les facteurs d’influence en jeu dans les trois phases de survie (aiguë, prolongée et permanente), à savoir le traitement et le traitement d’entretien (soins médicaux et psychosociaux), le bien-être, et d’autres éléments d’influence (expériences entraînant de profonds changements, incertitude, établissement de priorités, gestion du bien-être et conséquences indirectes) de même que les facteurs liés aux relations sociales qui jouent sur le fardeau des symptômes des survivants ainsi que l’expérience globale de la survie (état de santé et qualité de vie). Une étude de cas a d’ailleurs montré l’utilité du MSC. L’application du modèle est prometteuse pour l’avenir, tant pour améliorer la qualité de la survivance que pour guider la recherche et la pratique clinique en vue de favoriser et d’optimiser la bonne santé des survivants à long terme.

A cancer survivorship model for holistic cancer care and research

Advancements in cancer have increased survival rates leading to a paradigm shift such that cancer is considered a chronic disease, necessitating an evaluation of our understanding of cancer survivorship (CS). For this purpose, a comprehensive literature search was performed, using CINAHL, MEDLINE, and PUBMED from 2000-2021. Drawing from the concepts in the literature, salient factors that affect CS across cancer populations were identified and a proposed model was developed. This paper describes the Cancer Survivorship Model (CSM). The CSM represents predisposing factors for survivors and survivorship's acute, extended, and long-term phases, influencing factors: treatment and maintenance (medical/ psychosocial care), well-being, influencing aspects (life-changing experience, uncertainty, prioritizing life, wellness management, and collateral damage), and social relationship factors that impact survivors' symptom burdens and overall survivorship experience (health outcomes and quality of life). A case study demonstrates the CSM utility. Future application of the model holds promise for improving the quality of survivorship and informing research and clinical practice to promote and optimize survivors' outcomes throughout the evolving survivorship.

Characterizing Cancer and Work Disparities Using Electronic Health Records

Advancements in cancer diagnosis and treatment have resulted in improvements in survivor outcomes; however, cancer survivors are more likely to experience adverse employment outcomes such as job loss, reduced working hours, and early retirement. The purpose of this study was to examine employment disparities among cancer survivors. Our study collected data from 29,136 cancer survivors (ages 18-65) between 2015 and 2021 using electronic health records (EHR) and linked to cancer registry data. Of those with employment information (n = 7296), differences in employment status were explored by race, ethnicity, sex, geography, marital status, education, age, and cancer site. Of the patients with employment status available, 61% were employed, 28% were not employed, 9% were disabled, 2% were retired. Logistic regression results revealed adjusted effects: a positive association between employment and marriage, while racial and ethnic minority adults, rurality, and certain age categories were less likely to be employed. Unadjusted results showed a positive association between employment and education. These results contribute to an emerging body of literature showing adverse employment outcomes for cancer survivors.

Measuring Phases of Employment Decision-Making and the Need for Vocational Services as a Social Determinant of the Health of Employed People Living with HIV

(1) Background: Secure employment has been recognized as a social determinant of health for people living with HIV (PLHIV), but limited research has been conducted to understand the employment needs and vocational decision-making process of those who are employed. The purpose of this study is to examine the applicability of the client-focused considering-work model to assess the employment outcomes and employment decision-making phases of a sample of employed PLHIV. (2) Methods: This study analyzed data of 244 employed PLHIV who completed National Working Positive Coalition's Employment Needs Survey which included a 20-item Considering Work Scale-Employed version (CWS-Employed) and a single-item Classification of Employment Status Scale (CESS). Factor analysis was used to evaluate the CWS-Employed. Chi-square tests of homogeneity of proportions were conducted to assess the domain-specific needs of individuals in each phase of employment decision-making. (3) Results: Our findings revealed high rates of insecure employment and diverse vocational service needs among research participants. Additionally, the CWS-Employed accurately predicted 71% of the self-reported classification of phases of employment decision-making. (4) Conclusions: When investigating the role of employment as a social determinant of health, more research is needed to better understand the vocational needs and outcomes of PLHIV who are working. Improving the measurement of the phases of employment decision-making is needed to better identify appropriate vocational interventions that can lead to improved employment and related health outcomes for this population.

Evaluation of Usability and Satisfaction of Two Online Tools to Guide Return to Work for Cancer Survivors on the Cancer and Work Website

Prompt services and work-focused support systems are needed to aid cancer survivors returning to work or finding work. Purpose This knowledge translation and implementation project focused on the knowledge users' experience and need for refinement of three work-focused tools to support return to work and maintain work following cancer through their participation in a hands-on workshop. The tools assessed for their utility are a Job Analysis Tool (JAT), a Return to Work (RTW) tool, and a bilingual Canadian website on Cancer and Work. Methods Four workshops took place in three Canadian cities. Participants included cancer survivors, healthcare professionals, and employer representatives. Following an overview of the website and tools, workshop participants (N = 28) completed qualitative and quantitative satisfaction and usability questionnaires using the System Usability Scale and open-ended questions. Qualitative data was analyzed using content analyses from the think-aloud data and from the four open-ended questions collected during the users' use of the tools and website. Results Overall, most study participants reported high satisfaction with the JAT and RTW tools, the Cancer and work website and the workshop. Good usability scores were reported for the RTW planner (73.65 ± 12.61) and the website (74.83 ± 12.36), and only acceptable usability scores for the JAT (68.53 ± 11.90). Conclusion Overall, the study documented the value of the tools and the website to support the RTW process as assessed by several key knowledge user groups. The JAT is considered a helpful procedure to identify job demands in order to guide job accommodations. Given participants' responses that the tool is useful, the next steps are to implement the recommendations for improvement and knowledge dissemination to increase its uptake and the use of job analysis overall.

A sequential explanatory study of the employment experiences of population-based breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors

PURPOSE

Cancer treatment often leads to work disruptions including loss of income, resulting in long-term financial instability for cancer survivors and their informal caregivers.

METHODS

In this sequential explanatory study, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of employment experiences among ethnically diverse, working-age individuals diagnosed with breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer. Following the survey, we conducted semi-structured interviews with cancer survivors and informal caregivers to explore changes in employment status and coping techniques to manage these changes.

RESULTS

Among employed survivors (n = 333), cancer caused numerous work disruptions including issues with physical tasks (53.8%), mental tasks (46.5%) and productivity (76.0%) in the workplace. Prostate cancer survivors reported fewer work disruptions than female breast and male and female colorectal cancer survivors. Paid time off and flexible work schedules were work accommodations reported by 52.6% and 36.3% of survivors, respectively. In an adjusted regression analysis, household income was positively associated with having received a work accommodation. From the qualitative component of the study (survivors n = 17; caregivers n = 11), three key themes emerged: work disruptions, work accommodations, and coping mechanisms to address the disruptions. Survivors and caregivers shared concerns about lack of support at work and resources to navigate issues caused by changes in employment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study characterized employment changes among a diverse group of cancer survivors. Work accommodations were identified as a specific unmet need, particularly among low-income cancer survivors. Addressing changes in employment among specific groups of cancer survivors and caregivers is critical to mitigate potential long-term consequences of cancer.

A randomised feasibility trial of an employer-based intervention for enhancing successful return to work of cancer survivors (MiLES intervention)

BACKGROUND

Employers express a need for support during sickness absence and return to work (RTW) of cancer survivors. Therefore, a web-based intervention (MiLES) targeted at employers with the objective of enhancing cancer survivors' successful RTW has been developed. This study aimed to assess feasibility of a future definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention. Also preliminary results on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention were obtained.

METHODS

A randomised feasibility trial of 6 months was undertaken with cancer survivors aged 18-63 years, diagnosed with cancer < 2 years earlier, currently in paid employment, and sick-listed < 1 year. Participants were randomised to an intervention group, with their employer receiving the MiLES intervention, or to a waiting-list control group (2:1). Feasibility of a future definitive RCT was determined on the basis of predefined criteria related to method and protocol-related uncertainties (e.g. reach, retention, appropriateness). The primary effect measure (i.e. successful RTW) and secondary effect measures (e.g. quality of working life) were assessed at baseline and 3 and 6 months thereafter.

RESULTS

Thirty-five cancer survivors were included via medical specialists (4% of the initially invited group) and open invitations, and thereafter randomised to the intervention (n = 24) or control group (n = 11). Most participants were female (97%) with breast cancer (80%) and a permanent employment contract (94%). All predefined criteria for feasibility of a future definitive RCT were achieved, except that concerning the study's reach (90 participants). After 6 months, 92% of the intervention group and 100% of the control group returned to work (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.81-1.03); no difference were found with regard to secondary effect measures.

CONCLUSIONS

With the current design a future definitive RCT on the effectiveness of the MiLES intervention on successful RTW of cancer survivors is not feasible, since recruitment of survivors fell short of the predefined minimum for feasibility. There was selection bias towards survivors at low risk of adverse work outcomes, which reduced generalisability of the outcomes. An alternative study design is needed to study effectiveness of the MiLES intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study has been registered in the Dutch Trial Register ( NL6758/NTR7627 ).

Loss of Paid Employment up to 4 Years after Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis-A Nationwide Register-Based Study with a Population-Based Reference Group

Simple Summary

Previous research indicated that cancer survivors have a higher risk of loss of paid employment. This is unfortunate as work is important for cancer survivors because it contributes to financial independency and quality of life. Not much work has been done on patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer while it is one of the most common cancers in the working population. We compared a group of 12,007 colorectal cancer survivors up to four years after diagnosis with the general population. We found that colorectal cancer survivors had a 56% higher risk of loss of paid employment, mainly due to work disability. Within the group of colorectal cancer survivors, those being younger, having a higher cancer stage and receiving radiotherapy, had a higher risk of loss of paid employment. Colorectal cancer survivors at high risk of loss of paid employment may benefit from work support interventions as part of cancer survivorship care.

Abstract

Cancer survivors consider work as a key aspect of cancer survivorship while previous research indicated that cancer survivors have a higher risk of unemployment. The objectives were to assess: (1) whether colorectal cancer survivors less often have paid employment at diagnosis compared to a population-based reference group, (2) whether colorectal cancer survivors with paid work have a higher risk of loss of employment up to 4 years after diagnosis compared to a population-based reference group and (3) which colorectal cancer survivors are at highest risk of loss of paid employment. In a nationwide register-based study, persons diagnosed with colorectal cancer (N = 12,007) as registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry, were compared on loss of paid employment with a sex and age-matched population-based reference group (N = 48,028) from Statistics Netherlands. Cox regression analyses were conducted. Colorectal cancer survivors had a higher risk of loss of paid employment (HR 1.56 [1.42, 1.71]). Within the group of colorectal cancer survivors, risk of loss of paid employment was lower for older survivors (>60 vs. 45–55) (HR 0.64 [0.51, 0.81]) and higher for those with a more advanced cancer stage (IV vs. I) (HR 1.89 [1.33, 2.70]) and those receiving radiotherapy (HR 1.37 [1.15, 1.63]). Colorectal cancer survivors at high risk of loss of paid employment may benefit from work support interventions as part of cancer survivorship.

The associations between late effects of cancer treatment, work ability and job resources: a systematic review

Objective

The aim of this review is to evaluate associations between possible late effects of cancer treatment (i.e. physical complaints, fatigue, or cognitive complaints) and work ability among workers beyond 2 years after cancer diagnosis who returned to work. The role of job resources (social support, autonomy, leadership style, coaching, and organizational culture) is also evaluated.

Methods

The search for studies was conducted in PsycINFO, Medline, Business Source Premier, ABI/Inform, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. A quality assessment was used to clarify the quality across studies.

Results

The searches included 2303 records. Finally, 36 studies were included. Work ability seemed to decline shortly after cancer treatment and recover in the first 2 years after diagnosis, although it might still be lower than among healthy workers. No data were available on the course of work ability beyond the first 2 years. Late physical complaints, fatigue and cognitive complaints were negatively related with work ability across all relevant studies. Furthermore, social support and autonomy were associated with higher work ability, but no data were available on a possible buffering effect of these job resources on the relationship between late effects and work ability. As far as reported, most research was carried out among salaried workers.

Conclusion

It is unknown if late effects of cancer treatment diminish work ability beyond two years after being diagnosed with cancer. Therefore, more longitudinal research into the associations between possible late effects of cancer treatment and work ability needs to be carried out. Moreover, research is needed on the buffering effect of job resources, both for salaried and self-employed workers.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00420-020-01567-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.