PosterPDF Available

Cross-sectional study examining the impact of ageing on the psychosocial experiences of patients with lymphoma EHA 21

Authors:

Abstract

Patients with lymphoma face various emotional consequences as a result of their diagnosis and treatment. Progress in providing high-quality care for the psychosocial impacts of lymphoma has not matched the advances in lymphoma detection and treatment. Patients in different life stages may experience different psychosocial issues or varying intensities of psychosocial issues because of their lymphoma. This analysis revealed that compared to the mid to oldest patient groups, younger patients with lymphoma are disproportionately affected by psychosocial issues resulting from their disease and treatment. These psychosocial issues can negatively impact quality of life. Psychosocial assessment and intervention should be high priority for all patients with lymphoma; however, younger patients may require additional attention and support. In the future, LC would like to explore how demographic differences may have confounded results.
INTRODUCTION
Patients with lymphoma face various emotional consequences as a result of their diagnosis
and treatment. Progress in providing high-quality care for the psychosocial impacts of
lymphoma has not matched the advances in lymphoma detection and treatment. Patients
in different life stages may experience different psychosocial issues or varying intensities of
psychosocial issues because of their lymphoma.
RESULTS CONT.
Patients who reported experiencing symptoms of lymphoma/CLL were asked how these
symptoms impacted their life (table 4). The lowest prevalence for each of these impact
categories was observed in the oldest age group (70+). The highest prevalence for each
impact, except for social life, was observed in the youngest age group (18-29).
Table 4. Impacts of lymphoma/CLL symptoms on day-to-day life of patients
*Chi square values calculated based on the inclusion of all question response options
Patients who reported experiencing treatment-related side effects were asked how these
side effects impacted their life (table 5). The lowest prevalence for each of these impact
categories was observed in the oldest age group (70+). In all cases, the greatest
prevalence of each impact was observed in the youngest age groups (18-29 and 30-39),
with the prevalence of each issue decreasing with increasing age.
Table 5. Impacts of treatment side effects on day-to-day life of patients
*Chi square values calculated based on the inclusion of all question response options
RESULTS CONT.
Table 2. Demographic comparison of patient age groups
*CLL/SLL chronic lymphocytic leukaemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma; MALT/MZ mucosa-associated lymphoid
tissue/marginal zone; WM/LPL Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia/lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma
Patients were asked which psychosocial issues they had experienced over the last 12
months because of their lymphoma diagnosis. The oldest age group (70+) reported the
lowest prevalence of every psychosocial issue listed (table 3). The oldest age group
(70+) also reported the highest prevalence of experiencing no psychosocial issues
(‘none’)(39%). In all cases, each psychosocial issue was most prevalent in the youngest
age groups (18-29 and 30-39), with prevalence decreasing with increasing age (table 3).
Table 3. Psychosocial issues that patients reported experiencing over the past 12 months
METHOD(S)
Study Design
This study is a sub-analysis of the LC 2020 GPS, which is a biennial online global survey
The LC 2020 GPS was hosted on a third-party portal from January-March 2020 in 19
languages
Respondents
Globally, there were 11,878 respondents from 90+ countries, including 9,179 patients
and 2,699 caregivers
9,078 patients who self-identified their age were included in this study; these patients
were grouped into five age groups for analysis (table 1)
Table 1. Age group breakdown of patient respondents
Statistical Analysis
Raw data was entered, merged, and cleaned in IBM SPSS v27
Demographics of the five age groups were compared
Descriptive statistics were performed for all questions relating to psychosocial issues
CONCLUSION(S)
This analysis revealed that compared to the mid to oldest patient groups, younger
patients with lymphoma are disproportionately affected by psychosocial issues resulting
from their disease and treatment. These psychosocial issues can negatively impact quality
of life.
Psychosocial assessment and intervention should be high priority for all patients with
lymphoma; however, younger patients may require additional attention and support. In
the future, LC would like to explore how demographic differences may have confounded
results.
OBJECTIVE(S)
Using data from the Lymphoma Coalition (LC) 2020 Global Patient Survey (GPS) on
Lymphomas and CLL, this study examines the impact of ageing on the psychosocial
experiences of patients with lymphoma.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Please direct any queries to the Research Manager at Lymphoma Coalition.
Tel +1 905 990 0609 natalie@lymphomacoalition.org
A cross-sectional study examining the impact of ageing on the
psychosocial experiences of patients with lymphoma
N. DREN 1, L. WARWICK2and O. BAMIGBOLA 1/1. Lymphoma Coalition, Research, Mississauga, ON Canada | 2. Lymphoma Coalition, Management, Mississauga, ON Canada
Age Group
Number of Patients (n=1)
18
-29 638
30
-39 1,196
40
-59 3,261
60
-69 2,216
70+
1,767
Total
9,078
Prevalence of Issues by Age Group
Psychosocial Issues
18-
29
%30-
39
%40-
59
%
60
-
69
%
70+
%X2 (p-value)
Loss of self
-esteem 43 38 25 14 7
Concerns about body image
51 45 28 20 14
Changes in relationships
34 30 19 11 8
Isolation
29 24 20 15 10
Depression
48 39 33 24 17
Anxiety
51 51 37 24 14
Fear of cancer relapse
68 69 56 41 29
Fear of lymphoma progression
39 42 41 41 31
None
9 9 15 24 39
Prevalence of Impacts by Age Group
How lymphoma/CLL symptoms affected day
-
to
-
day life (those who strongly agree or agree)
18
-
29
%
30
-
39
%
40
-
59
%
60
-
69
%
70+
% X2 (p-value)*
Negative impact on everyday activities
60 53 56 53 47
146.49 (p< 0.001)
Unable to work/change job or working pattern
50 49 48 38 18
632.39 (p< 0.001)
Negative impact on social life
50 49 51 43 33
254.50 (p< 0.001)
Created problems with partner, friends,
relatives
44 43 37 23 14
574.02 (p< 0.001)
Prevalence of Impacts by Age Group
How treatment
-related side effects affected
day
-to-day life (those who strongly agree or
agree)
18
-
29
%
30
-
39
%
40
-
59
%
60
-
69
%
70+
% X2 (p-value)*
Negative impact on everyday activities
68 66 63 56 49
212.17 (p< 0.001
Unable to work/change job or working pattern
59 57 53 38 16
781.49 (p< 0.001)
Negative impact on social life
59 61 54 45 34
353.27 (p< 0.001)
Created problems with partner, friends,
relatives
43 45 34 21 13
537.56 (p< 0.001)
18-29
Count (%)
30-39
Count
(%) 40-59
Count
(%) 60-69
Count
(%)
70+ X2 (p-value)
Count
(%)
Subtype
3328.07 (p< 0.001)
CLL/SLL
14 (2) 34 (3) 543 (17) 651 (29) 498 (28)
Burkitt’s
17 (3) 32 (3) 36 (1) 6 (0) 0(0)
Diffuse large B
-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) 94 (15) 167 (14) 367 (11) 191 (9) 120 (7)
DLBCL germinal centre B
-cell (GCB) 24 (4) 44 (4) 93 (3) 16 (1) 6 (0)
DLBCL activated B
-cell (ABC) 35 (5) 67 (6) 136 (4) 31 (1) 20 (1)
Follicular
15 (2) 162 (14) 733 (22) 391 (18) 207 (12)
Hodgkin
310 (49)
422 (35) 424 (13) 87 (4) 58 (3)
MALT/MZ
4 (1) 24 (2) 110 (3) 44 (2) 26 (1)
Mantle cell
1 (0) 12 (1) 85 (3) 65 (3) 57 (3)
Peripheral T
-cell 6 (1) 18 (2) 62 (2) 23 (1) 9 (1)
Anaplastic
20 (3) 27 (2) 23 (1) 10 (0) 5(0)
Extranodal natural killer T
-cell 24 (4) 48 (4) 49 (2) 6 (0) 2(0)
Transformed
4 (1) 8 (1) 61 (2) 31 (1) 23 (1)
WM/LPL
1 (0) 5 (0) 161 (5) 336 (15) 443 (25)
Other indolent
9 (1) 21 (2) 96 (3) 89 (4) 99 (6)
Other aggressive
30 (5) 49 (4) 76 (2) 48 (2) 39 (2)
Don’t know
11 (2) 19 (2) 46 (1) 38 (2) 56 (3)
Cutaneous
4 (1) 7 (1) 34 (1) 19 (1) 13 (1)
Mycosis fungoides
15 (2) 30 (3) 117 (4) 109 (5) 81 (5)
Sézary syndrome
0 (0) 0 (0) 9(0) 25 (1) 5 (0)
Sex
210.37 (p< 0.001)
Male
229 (36)
397 (33)
1288 (39)
993 (45) 989 (56)
Female
406 (64)
798 (67)
1969 (60)
1220 (55) 776 (44)
Intersex
0(0) 0(0) 0 (0) 1 (0) 0 (0)
Prefer not to say
3 (0) 1 (0) 4 (0) 2 (0) 2 (0)
Residence
257.06 (p< 0.001)
Urban
385 (60)
751 (63)
1778 (55)
963 (43) 730 (41)
Suburban
93 (15) 170 (14) 714 (22) 609 (27) 539 (31)
Rural
160 (25)
275 (23) 769 (24) 644 (29) 498 (28)
RESULTS
The five age groups differed significantly (p< 0.001) in all the demographic categories
examined, which included lymphoma subtype, sex, area of residence, education level, and
employment and household status. The breakdowns for subtype, sex, and area of
residence are shown in table 2.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.