Impact of era of diagnosis on cause-specific late mortality among 77 423 five-year European survivors of childhood and adolescent cancer: The PanCareSurFup consortium.

Late mortality of European 5-year survivors of childhood or adolescent cancer has dropped over the last 60 years, but excess mortality persists. There is little information concerning secular trends in cause-specific mortality among older European survivors. PanCareSurFup pooled data from 12 cancer registries and clinics in 11 European countries from 77 423 five-year survivors of cancer diagnosed before age 21 between 1940 and 2008 followed for an average age of 21 years and a total of 1.27 million person-years to determine their risk of death using cumulative mortality, standardized mortality ratios (SMR), absolute excess risks (AER), and multivariable proportional hazards regression analyses. At the end of follow-up 9166 survivors (11.8%) had died compared to 927 expected (SMR 9.89, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 9.69-10.09), AER 6.47 per 1000 person-years, (95% CI 6.32-6.62). At 60 to 68 years of attained age all-cause mortality was still higher than expected (SMR = 2.41, 95% CI 1.90-3.02). Overall cumulative mortality at 25 years from diagnosis dropped from 18.4% (95% CI 16.5-20.4) to 7.3% (95% CI 6.7-8.0) over the observation period. Compared to the diagnosis period 1960 to 1969, the mortality hazard ratio declined for first neoplasms (P for trend <.0001) and for infections (P < .0001); declines in relative mortality from second neoplasms and cardiovascular causes were less pronounced (P = .1105 and P = .0829, respectively). PanCareSurFup is the largest study with the longest follow-up of late mortality among European childhood and adolescent cancer 5-year survivors, and documents significant mortality declines among European survivors into modern eras. However, continuing excess mortality highlights survivors' long-term care needs.

Returning to work in lung cancer survivors-a multi-center cross-sectional study in Germany.

PURPOSE: To investigate the work situation of lung cancer survivors and to identify the factors associated with their returning to work. METHODS: Descriptive analysis and logistic regression were used to evaluate study population characteristics and independent factors of subsequently returning to work. To analyze time to return to work, Cox regression was used. RESULTS: The study sample included 232 lung cancer survivors of working age from 717 enrolled participants in the multi-center cross-sectional LARIS (Quality of Life and Psychosocial Rehabilitation in Lung Cancer Survivors) study. About 67% of the survivors were not employed during the survey. More than 51% of the survivors who were employed before their illness did not return to their work. The survivors who had returned to their careers were younger, associated with higher household income, lower fatigue score, and stable relationship and vocational training. Patients who received social service counseling showed a higher chance of regaining their career. CONCLUSIONS: Lung cancer survivors were found to be associated with a high risk of unemployment and very low professional reintegration after interruption due to illness. More comprehensive studies are needed to support lung cancer survivors and targeting of patients in need of special attention in rehabilitation that would benefit from the findings in the present study.