Article

Racial/ethnic differences in job loss for women with breast cancer

Division of Epidemiology, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Journal of Cancer Survivorship (Impact Factor: 3.29). 10/2010; 5(1):102-11. DOI: 10.1007/s11764-010-0152-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We examined race/ethnic differences in treatment-related job loss and the financial impact of treatment-related job loss, in a population-based sample of women diagnosed with breast cancer.
Three thousand two hundred fifty two women with non-metastatic breast cancer diagnosed (August 2005-February 2007) within the Los Angeles County and Detroit Metropolitan Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registries, were identified and asked to complete a survey (mean time from diagnosis = 8.9 months). Latina and African American women were over-sampled (n = 2268, eligible response rate 72.1%).
One thousand one hundred eleven women (69.6%) of working age (<65 years) were working for pay at time of diagnosis. Of these women, 10.4% (24.1% Latina, 10.1% African American, 6.9% White, p < 0.001) reported that they lost or quit their job since diagnosis due to breast cancer or its treatment (defined as job loss). Latina women were more likely to experience job loss compared to White women (OR = 2.0, p = 0.013)), independent of sociodemographic factors. There were no significant differences in job loss between African American and White women, independent of sociodemographic factors. Additional adjustments for clinical and treatment factors revealed a significant interaction between race/ethnicity and chemotherapy (p = 0.007). Among women who received chemotherapy, Latina women were more likely to lose their job compared to White women (OR = 3.2, p < 0.001), however, there were no significant differences between Latina and White women among those who did not receive chemotherapy. Women who lost their job were more likely to experience financial strain (e.g. difficulty paying bills 27% vs. 11%, p < 0.001).
Job loss is a serious consequence of treatment for women with breast cancer. Clinicians and staff need to be aware of aspects of treatment course that place women at higher risk for job loss, especially ethnic minorities receiving chemotherapy.

Full-text

Available from: Ann S Hamilton, May 28, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
116 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the patient-borne financial cost of common, adverse breast cancer treatment-associated effects, comparing cost across women with or without these side effects. Two hundred eighty-seven Australian women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer were prospectively followed starting at 6 months post-surgery for 12 months, with three monthly assessments of detailed treatment-related side effects and their direct and indirect patient costs attributable to breast cancer. Bootstrapping statistics were used to analyze cost data, and adjusted logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between costs and adverse events from breast cancer. Costs were inflated and converted from 2002 Australian to 2014 US dollars. More than 90 % of women experienced at least one adverse effect (i.e., post-surgical issue, reaction to radiotherapy, upper-body symptoms or reduced function, lymphedema, fatigue, or weight gain). On average, women paid $5,636 (95 % confidence interval (CI), $4,694, $6,577) in total costs. Women with any one of the following symptoms (fatigue, reduced upper-body function, upper-body symptoms) or women who report ≥4 adverse treatment-related effects, have 1.5 to nearly 4 times the odds of having higher healthcare costs than women who do not report these complaints (p < 0.05). Women face substantial economic burden due to a range of treatment-related health problems, which may persist beyond the treatment period. Improving breast cancer care by incorporating prospective surveillance of treatment-related side effects and strategies for prevention and treatment of concerns (e.g., exercise) has real potential for reducing patient-borne costs.
    Supportive Care Cancer 12/2014; 23(6). DOI:10.1007/s00520-014-2539-y · 2.50 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND Current literature suggests that racial/ethnic minority survivors may be more likely than whites to experience economic hardship after a cancer diagnosis; however, little is known about such hardship.METHODS Patients with lung cancer (LC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) participating in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) Consortium were surveyed approximately 4 months (baseline) and 12 months (follow-up) after diagnosis. Economic hardship at follow-up was present if participants 1) indicated difficulty living on household income; and/or 2) for the following 2 months, anticipated experiencing hardships (inadequate housing, food, or medical attention) or reducing living standards to the bare necessities of life. The authors tested whether African Americans (AAs) and Hispanics were more likely than whites to experience economic hardship controlling for sex, age, education, marital status, cancer stage, treatment, and economic status at baseline (income, prescription drug coverage).RESULTSOf 3432 survivors (39.7% with LC, 60.3% with CRC), 14% were AA, 7% were Hispanic, and 79% were white. AAs and Hispanics had lower education and income than whites. Approximately 68% of AAs, 58% of Hispanics, and 44.5% of whites reported economic hardship. In LC survivors, the Hispanic-white disparity was not significant in unadjusted or adjusted analyses, and the AA-white disparity was explained by baseline economic status. In CRC survivors, the Hispanic-white disparity was explained by baseline economic status, and the AA-white disparity was not explained by the variables that were included in the model.CONCLUSIONS Economic hardship was evident in almost 1 in 2 cancer survivors 1 year after diagnosis, especially AAs. Research should evaluate and address risk factors and their impact on survival and survivorship outcomes. Cancer 2015. © 2015 American Cancer Society.
    Cancer 01/2015; DOI:10.1002/cncr.29206 · 4.90 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: La réduction des inégalités face à la maladie est un des attendus majeurs du troisième Plan cancer 2014-2019, qui préconise de « diminuer l’impact du cancer sur la vie personnelle » afin d’éviter la « double peine » (maladie et exclusion du marché du travail). Dans ce contexte, nous évaluons l’impact de un à cinq ans d’un primo-enregistrement en Affection de longue durée (ALD) caractérisant le cancer sur la situation professionnelle et la durée passée en emploi, maladie et chômage de salariés du secteur privé. Nous utilisons la base de données administratives Hygie, recensant la carrière professionnelle et les épisodes de maladie d’un échantillon de salariés affiliés au régime général de la Sécurité sociale. L’évaluation de l’impact de la survenue du cancer s’appuie sur une méthode de double différence avec appariement exact pour comparer les salariés malades aux salariés sans aucune ALD. La première année après le diagnostic correspond au temps des traitements caractérisé par une augmentation du nombre de trimestres d’arrêts de travail pour maladie de 1,7 pour les femmes et de 1,2 pour les hommes. L’âge joue également un rôle sur les absences liées à la maladie. Par ailleurs, l’employabilité des travailleurs atteints du cancer diminue avec le temps. La proportion de femmes et d’hommes employés au moins un trimestre, baisse respectivement de 8 et 7 points de pourcentage dans l’année suivant la survenue du cancer et jusqu’à treize points de pourcentage cinq ans plus tard. Cette distance à l’emploi se renforce lorsque les salariés malades sont plus âgés. L’effet de la maladie à cinq ans est respectivement de 15 et 19 points de pourcentage pour les hommes de plus de 51 ans et pour les femmes de plus de 48 ans. Ces différences de genre et d’âge peuvent traduire des différences de localisation et de sévérité des cancers, d’une part, de séquelles des cancers et de difficultés de réinsertion sur le marché du travail plus importantes avec l’avancée en âge, d’autre part.