Skip to main content
NCBI home page
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2018 Dec 19;13(12):e0208573. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208573

Factors associated with self-reported falls, balance or walking difficulty in older survivors of breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer: Results from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare Health Outcomes Survey linkage

Min H Huang 1,*, Jennifer Blackwood 1,#, Monica Godoshian 2,#, Lucinda Pfalzer 1,#
Editor: Mary Bowen3
PMCID: PMC6300321  PMID: 30566443

Abstract

Background

Cancer and its treatment affect body systems that are important in preventing falls and controlling balance/walking. This study examined factors associated with self-reported falls and balance/walking difficulty in the past 12 months in older survivors of four major cancers.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study analyzing population-based data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare Health Outcomes Survey (SEER-MHOS). Data from cohorts 9 to 14 (January 2006 to December 2013) were extracted. Inclusion criteria were: age ≥65 years at cancer diagnosis, first MHOS completed during years 1–5 post-cancer diagnosis, first primary breast (n = 2725), colorectal (n = 1646), lung (n = 752), and prostate (n = 4245) cancer, and availability of cancer staging information. Primary outcomes were self-reported falls and balance/walking difficulty in the past 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression was constructed for each cancer type to examine independent factors associated with falls and balance/walking difficulty.

Results

In all cancer types, advancing age at cancer diagnosis and dependence in activities of daily living were significant independent factors associated with increased odds of reporting falls and balance/walking difficulty in the past 12 months. Additionally, depression was independently associated with falls and sensory impairment in feet was independently linked to balance/walking difficulty in all cancer types. Other independent factors of falls and balance/walking difficulty varied across cancer types. In breast cancer only, localized or regional cancer stage was significantly associated with increased odds of reporting falls and balance/walking difficulty, whereas treatment with radiation decreased the odds of falling. No association between falls and balance/walking difficulty with time since cancer diagnosis, cancer stage, or cancer treatment was found in colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer.

Conclusion

There exists some heterogeneity in factors associated with self-reported falls and balance/walking difficulty between different cancer types. Future research is necessary to ascertain factors predictive of falls and balance/walking difficulty in older cancer survivors, particularly factors related to cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Introduction

Falls and balance/walking difficulty are significant concerns in older adults. Nearly one in four adults aged ≥65 years fall annually [1]. Among those who fall, 20%-30% sustain serious injuries [2]. While falls are multifactorial, balance and gait disorders are major risk factors [3]. Falls and balance/walking difficulty precipitate institutionalization, functional declines, activity restrictions, fears of falling, and recurrent falls [2,4–7].

A cancer survivor is a person from the time of cancer diagnosis until death [8]. Approximately 50% of new cancers each year are diagnosed in people aged ≥65 years [9]. Research suggests that fall rates are higher in older cancer survivors than non-cancer individuals (33% vs. 30% in a community-dwelling sample [10] and 26% vs. 22% among Medicare beneficiaries [11]). In a study of cancer survivors in outpatient setting, balance/walking difficulty (19.4%-23.9%) was identified as the leading functional problem [12]. Older women post-cancer diagnosis <5 years were more likely to report “unable to walk a half mile” than non-cancer controls (ORs = 1.34–1.92) [13]. In older cancer survivors, faster walking speed predicted lower mortality [14]. Walking likely reflects function of physiologic systems that may be affected by cancer.

In older cancer survivors, falls and balance/walking difficulty are linked to poor quality of life [15,16]. Common risk factors for falls in older adults, including age, gender, polypharmacy, and opioid use are not predictive of falls in older cancer survivors [17,18]. A history of falls, impaired cognition or vision, psychotropic drugs, comorbidity, and balance/walking disorders are associated with falls in cancer survivors [17,19–23]. Balance/walking difficulty in survivors were primary examined in the context related to cancer treatment. Breast cancer survivors had reduced balance after Taxane chemotherapy [24]. Prostate cancer survivors receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) had greater declines in balance over 3 years than survivors without ADT or non-cancer controls [25]. Research about factors linked to balance/walking difficulty in cancer survivors is sparse.

Sequelae associated with cancer and cancer treatments vary widely across cancer types [26–28]. As such, investigating factors linked to falls and balance/walking difficulty in each cancer is necessary. Using population-based data, this study aimed to identify factors linked to self-reported falls and balance/walking difficulty in the past 12 months in older survivors of breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer.

Methods

Design and data

This observational, cross-sectional study was approved by Institute Review Board of University of Michigan-Flint. SEER includes cancer-related information, such as cancer diagnosis, cancer stage, time of diagnosis, histology, and cancer treatment, except for chemotherapy and hormonal therapy [29]. MHOS collects demographics and patient-reported outcomes in health, function, symptoms, and quality of life [29,30]. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services administers MHOS to randomly selected beneficiaries of Medicare Advantage Organizations each year, and participants are resurveyed 2 years later [29,30].

Participants

We extracted data from cohorts 9–14 (January 2006-December 2014) from SEER-MHOS linkage. Inclusion criteria were: age at cancer diagnosis ≥65 years, first primary breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer, first MHOS completed from each participant during years 1–5 post-cancer diagnosis, and availability of cancer staging information. Applying these criteria resulted in 9,540 survivors (breast = 2,725, colorectal = 1,646, lung = 752, and prostate cancer = 4,245). These four cancer diagnoses were chosen because they are the most prevalent cancer types in adults aged 65 years and over [31]. Additionally, previous research has indicated that the prevalence of falls and balance/walking difficulty increased from pre- to post-cancer diagnosis in older breast, lung, and prostate cancer survivors [32]. Fig 1 shows sample flowchart.

Fig 1. Flowchart of study sample.

Fig 1

Open in a new tab

Primary outcomes

Falls and balance/walking difficulty were determined by two MHOS questions: (1) “A fall is when your body goes to the ground without being pushed. Did you fall in the past 12 months?” (2) “In the past 12 months, have you had a problem with balance or walking?” Responses were “no” (coded as 1) or “yes” (coded as 2).

Variables

Table 1 provides detailed descriptions of variables. Demographics included gender, race, and marital status. Health-related variables included number of comorbidities (arthritis, osteoporosis, angina, congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, hypertension, emphysema/asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, low back pain, and obesity), limitation in moderate activities, number of activities of daily living (ADL) dependence, fatigue, depression, urinary incontinence, visual, hearing, or sensory impairments, and pain interfering with work. Cancer-related variables included age at cancer diagnosis, time since cancer diagnosis, cancer type, stage, surgery, and radiation. The time since cancer diagnosis was from the time of cancer diagnosis to the time when a participant completed the MHOS.

Table 1. List of variables, detailed definition, and coding.

Variable Definition Coding
Gender Survey reported gender. 1 = Men
2 = Women
Race Race from enrollment data base maintained by Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. 1 = White
2 = Black or other race
Marital status Survey reported marital status. 1 = Married
2 = Divorced, separated, widowed, or never married
Limitation in moderate physical activity Health limiting one in moderate activities during a typical day, such as moving a table, pushing a vacuum cleaner, bowling, or playing golf. 1 = Not limited or limited a little
2 = Yes limited a lot
Activities of daily living (ADL) dependence Difficulty doing six ADL without special equipment or help from another person (bathing, dressing, eating, getting in or out of chairs, walking, and using toilet). 1 = Independent (no difficulty)
2 = Dependence in one or more ADL (have difficulty or unable to perform the activity)
Fatigue Fatigue during the past 4 weeks. 1 = No fatigue
2 = Yes fatigue
Urinary incontinence Accidentally leaked urine in the last 6 months. 1 = No
2 = Yes
Vision problem Able to see well enough to read newspaper print (with glasses or contacts if that’s how one sees best). 1 = Yes
2 = No
Hearing problem Able to hear most of the things people say (with a hearing aid if that’s how one hears best). 1 = Yes
2 = No
Sensory impairment in feet Numbness or loss of feeling in feet, tingling or burning sensation in feet especially at night, decreased ability to feel hot or cold with feet during the past 4 weeks. 1 = Not impaired
2 = Yes impaired
Pain interfering with work Pain in the past 4 week interferes with normal work (including both work outside the home and housework) 1 = Not interfering with work
2 = Yes interfering with work
Cancer stage Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) summary stage 2000, derived from Collaborative Stage (CS) 1 = In situ
2 = Localized
3 = Regional
4 = Distant
Radiation Radiation therapy performed as part of the first course of cancer treatment. 1 = No radiation
2 = Yes, with radiation
Surgery Surgery of primary site that removes and/or destroys tissue of the primary site performed as part of the initial work-up or first course of therapy. 1 = No surgery
2 = Yes, with surgery
Open in a new tab

Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using IBM-SPSS 24 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Analyses were conducted relating to each primary outcome separately for each cancer. Descriptive statistics were calculated for sample characteristics. Univariable logistic regression was performed to examine associations of each factor with primary outcomes. Subsequently, all demographic, health- and cancer-related variables were entered into multivariable logistic regression models to identify independent factors linked to each of the primary outcomes. Multicollinearity was determined by variance inflation factor ≥4 [33]. Model fit was assessed by Hosmer and Lemeshow test [34]. Two-sided significance level was p<0.05.

Results

Sample characteristics

Average age at MHOS administration was 76.8 (6.3) years for breast, 78.5 (6.7) years for colorectal, 77.1 (5.8) years for lung, and 76.0 (5.6) years for prostate cancer. Average time post-diagnosis was 35.0 (13.7) months for breast, 35.3 (13.8) months for colorectal, 31.2 (13.5) months for lung, and 35.9 (13.8) months for prostate cancer. Percentages of survivors reporting falls in the past 12 months were 25.6% in breast, 23.3% in colorectal, 25.3% in lung, and 19.7% in prostate cancer. Balance/walking difficulty in the past 12 months was reported in 38.4% of breast, 35.3% of colorectal, 45.4% of lung, and 27.5% of prostate cancer survivors.

Univariable analyses

As shown in Tables 2–5, in breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer, being white and unmarried were associated with increased odds of falls. In colorectal cancer, women were more likely to report falls than men. In all cancer types, all health-related factors were associated with increased falls. Except for lung cancer, advancing age at cancer diagnosis was associated with increased falls. In breath cancer, local or regional cancer stage was associated with increased risk of falls, whereas radiotherapy was associated with decreased falls. On the other hand, surgery in prostate cancer were associated with decreased falls.

Table 2. Crude and adjusted odds ratios for self-reported falls and balance/walking difficulty in the past 12 months by demographic, health- and cancer-related factors in breast cancer.

Variables Falls Balance or Walking Difficulty
No (n = 1852) Yes (n = 637) Crude OR
(95% CI)		 Adjusted OR
(95% CI)		 No (n = 1529) Yes (n = 953) Crude OR
(95% CI)		 Adjusted OR
(95% CI)
Race
    White 1390 510 1.0 1.0 1179 721 1.0 1.0
    Other 458 125 0.74 (0.60–0.93)b 0.65 (0.48–0.87)b 347 229 1.08 (0.89–1.31) 0.91 (0.66–1.25)
Marital status
    Married 773 234 1.0 1.0 684 318 1.0 1.0
    Not married 1067 391 1.21 (1.00–1.46)a 1.04 (0.82–1.32) 833 623 1.61 (1.36–1.90)c 0.99 (0.76–1.56)
Comorbidity 2.8 (1.7) 3.6 (1.9) 1.26 (1.19–1.33)c 1.09 (1.02–1.17)a 2.5 (1.6) 3.9 (1.8) 1.61 (1.52–1.71)c 1.19 (1.09–1.29)c
Moderate physical activity
    Not limited 1463 383 1.0 1.0 1329 514 1.0 1.0
    Limited a lot 352 245 2.66 (2.09–3.47)c 1.11 (0.82–1.51) 169 425 6.50 (5.30–7.98)c 1.10 (0.78–1.56)
ADL dependency
    None 1179 234 1.0 1.0 1200 214 1.0 1.0
    1–2 ADL 431 180 2.10 (1.68–2.63)c 1.34 (0.98–1.81) 235 372 8.88 (7.13–11.04)c 4.92 (3.62-.6.69)c
    3+ ADL 170 193 5.72 (4.46–7.34)c 1.97 (1.32–2.93)b 46 316 38.52 (27.37–54.22)c 12.55 (7.65–20.60)c
Fatigue
    No 1449 368 1.0 1.0 1307 504 1.0 1.0
    Yes 361 251 2.74 (2.25–3.34)c 1.11 (0.83–1.49) 186 425 5.93 (4.85–7.24)c 1.69 (1.22–2.34)b
Depression
    No 1248 283 1.0 1.0 1104 427 1.0 1.0
    Yes 398 280 3.10 (2.54–3.80)c 2.07 (1.61–2.66)c 256 418 4.22 (3.49–5.11)c 2.20 (1.65–2.93)c
Urinary incontinence
    No 1029 228 1.0 1.0 908 345 1.0 1.0
    Yes 796 399 2.26 (1.88–2.73)c 1.63 (1.29–2.05)c 599 593 2.61 (2.20–3.08)c 1.64 (1.26–2.13)c
Vision problem
    No 1746 556 1.0 1.0 1463 831 1.0 1.0
    Yes 90 67 2.34 (1.68–3.25)c 1.03 (0.78–1.36) 48 108 3.96 (2.79–5.62)c 1.98 (1.09–3.57)a
Hearing problem
    No 1599 503 1.0 1.0 1343 750 1.0 1.0
    Yes 185 114 1.96 (1.52–2.53)c 1.09 (0.77–1.53) 130 169 2.33 (1.82–2.98)c 1.05 (0.70–1.58)
Sensory impairment
    No 1457 429 1.0 1.0 1283 598 1.0 1.0
    Yes 202 138 2.32 (1.82–2.96)c 1.15 (0.84–1.57) 90 248 5.91 (4.56–7.67)c 1.86 (1.09–1.29)b
Pain interfering with work
    No 1091 242 1.0 1.0 1052 284 1.0 1.0
    Moderate or Severe 732 386 2.38 (1.97–2.86)c 1.03 (0.78–1.36) 455 653 5.32 (4.45–6.35)c 1.08 (0.80–1.45)
Age at diagnosis, y 72.8 (5.9) 74.7 (6.8) 1.05 (1.03–1.06)c 1.03 (1.01–1.05)b 72.5 (5.7) 74.7 (6.7) 1.06 (1.05–1.08)c 1.02 (1.00–1.05)a
Survival time since cancer diagnosis, m 34.7 (13.7) 35.8 (14.0) 1.01 (0.99–1.01) 1.01 (1.00–1.02) 34.8 (13.8) 35.6 (13.6) 1.00 (1.00–1.01) 1.00 (0.99–1.01)
Cancer stage
    In situ 342 85 1.0 1.0 280 144 1.0 1.0
    Localized 1096 399 1.47 (1.13–1.91)b 1.88 (1.29–2.70)b 928 563 1.18 (0.94–1.48) 1.42 (0.99–2.04)
    Regional 381 144 1.52 (1.12–2.06)b 1.74 (1.14–2.64)a 300 224 1.45 (1.11–1.89)b 1.58 (1.04–2.40)a
    Distant 33 9 1.10 (0.51–2.38) 1.15 (0.39–3.34) 21 22 2.04 (1.08–3.83)a 1.20 (0.42–3.44)
Surgery
    No 44 21 1.0 1.0 28 38 1.0 1.0
    Yes 1804 616 0.72 (0.42–1.21) 0.89 (0.39–2.06) 1498 914 0.45 (0.27–0.74)b 0.55 (0.21–1.43)
Radiation
    No 820 344 1.0 1.0 640 520 1.0 1.0
    Yes 994 287 0.69 (0.57–0.83)c 0.75 (0.59–0.96)a 855 423 0.61 (0.52–0.72)c 0.80 (0.61–1.04)
Open in a new tab

Abbreviation: ADL, activities of daily living.

Values show are number, mean (SD), or ORs (95%CI).

Statistically significant ORs are marked in bold text with numerical superscripts indicating the level of significance.

a p-value <0.05,

b p-value <0.05, and

c p-value <0.05.

Table 5. Crude and adjusted odds ratios for self-reported falls and balance/walking difficulty in the past 12 months by demographic, health- and cancer-related factors in prostate cancer.

Variables Falls Balance or Walking Difficulty
No (n = 3094) Yes (n = 759) Crude OR
(95% CI)		 Adjusted OR
(95% CI)		 No (n = 3085) Yes (n = 1148) Crude OR
(95% CI)		 Adjusted OR
(95% CI)
Race
    White 2305 604 1.0 1.0 2102 796 1.0 1.0
    Other 707 135 0.73 (0.59–0.89)b 0.67 (0.51-.0.87)b 613 229 0.99 (0.83–1.17) 0.86 (0.67–1.11)
Marital status
    Married 2677 489 1.0 10 2064 695 1.0 1.0
    Not married 375 256 1.54 (1.30–1.83)c 1.29 (1.04–1.60)a 676 341 1.50 (1.28–1.75)c 1.09 (0.87–1.36)
Comorbidity 2.3 (1.7) 3.3 (2.0) 1.33 (1.27–1.40)c 1.11 (1.05–1.18)b 2.1 (1.6) 3.5 (1.9) 1.53 (1.46–1.60)c 1.14 (1.07–1.21)c
Moderate physical activity
    Not limited 1463 383 1.0 1.0 2515 646 1.0 1.0
    Limited a lot 352 245 3.74 (3.10–4.50)c 1.41 (1.07–1.86)a 235 389 6.44 (5.36–7.74)c 1.46 (1.10–1.94)b
ADL dependency
    None 2255 286 1.0 1.0 2242 297 1.0 1.0
    1–2 ADL 526 204 3.06 (2.50–3.75)c 1.95 (1.49–2.54)c 361 364 7.61 (6.30–9.20)c 3.32 (2.60–4.24)c
    3+ ADL 230 243 8.33 (6.70–10.36)c 3.73 (2.69–5.19)c 115 355 23.30 (18.28–29.70)c 6.12 (4.40–8.51)c
Fatigue
    No 2533 465 1.0 1.0 2411 583 1.0 1.0
    Yes 503 281 3.04 (2.44–3.63)c 1.09 (0.83–1.42) 323 453 5.80 (4.90–6.87)c 1.48 (1.14–1.92)b
Depression
    No 2305 426 1.0 1.0 2158 569 1.0 1.0
    Yes 554 264 2.51 (1.75–3.59)c 1.28 (1.01–1.62)a 424 390 3.49 (2.96–4.12)c 1.21 (0.95–1.54)
Urinary incontinence
    No 1822 304 1.0 1.0 1699 425 1.0 1.0
    Yes 1228 442 2.16 (1.83–2.54)c 1.54 (1.25–1.88)c 1045 615 2.35 (2.03–2.72)c 1.64 (1.34–2.01)c
Vision problem
    No 2895 668 1.0 1.0 2644 908 1.0 1.0
    Yes 174 81 2.02 (1.53–2.66)c 0.91 (0.61–1.34) 117 136 3.39 (2.61–4.38)c 1.74 (1.17–2.59)b
Hearing problem
    No 2524 563 1.0 1.0 2327 750 1.0 1.0
    Yes 478 177 1.66 (1.37–2.02)c 1.03 (0.79–1.33) 375 279 2.31 (31.94–2.75)c 1.07 (0.82–1.39)
Sensory impairment
    No 2566 532 1.0 1.0 2401 690 1.0 1.0
    Yes 295 156 2.55 (2.06–3.16)c 1.26 (0.95–1.66) 186 263 4.92 (4.00–6.05)c 1.84 (1.39–2.45)c
Pain interfering with work
    No 2089 310 1.0 1.0 2055 341 1.0 1.0
    Moderate or Severe 970 432 3.00 (2.55–3.54)c 1.07 (0.84–1.38) 698 697 6.02 (5.15–7.03)c 1.80 (1.43–2.28)c
Age at diagnosis, y 72.1 (5.2) 74.1 (6.3) 1.06 (1.05–1.08)c 1.04 (1.02–1.06)c 71.8 (5.1) 74.1 (6.2) 1.08 (1.06–1.09)c 1.05 (1.04–1.07)c
Survival time since cancer diagnosis, m 35.8 (13.8) 36.1 (13.7) 1.00 (1.00–1.01) 1.00 (0.99–1.01) 35.8 (13.8) 36.0 (13.8) 2.35 (1.98–2.78)c 1.00 (0.94–1.01)
Cancer stage
    In situ 0d 0d 0d 0d
    Localized 3048 736 1.0 1.0 2750 1023 1.0 1.0
    Regional 326 53 0.81 (0.55–1.19) 0.81 (0.55–1.19) 290 89 0.83 (0.64–1.06) 1.15 (0.79–1.67)
    Distant 55 26 1.36 (0.74–2.48) 1.36 (0.74–2.48) 45 36 2.15 (1.38–3.35)b 0.85 (.0.44–1.63)
Surgery 2164 570
    No 900 182 1.0 1.0 1917 806 1.0 1.0
    Yes 0.77 (0.64–0.92)b 1.11 (0.84–1.47) 846 236 0.66 (0.56–0.78)c 0.89 (0.67–1.18)
Radiation 1637 423
    No 1402 325 1.0 1.0 1452 599 1.0 1.0
    Yes 2164 570 0.90 (0.76–1.05) 1.19 (0.93–1.50) 1286 438 0.83 (0.72–0.95)b 0.93 (0.73–1.18)
Open in a new tab

Abbreviation: ADL, activities of daily living.

Values show are number, mean (SD), or ORs (95%CI).

Statistically significant ORs are marked in bold text with numerical superscripts indicating the level of significance.

a p-value <0.05,

b p-value <0.05, and

c p-value <0.05.

d There were no survivors with the stage “in situ”.

Table 3. Crude and adjusted odds ratios for self-reported falls and balance/walking difficulty in the past 12 months by demographic, health- and cancer-related factors in colorectal cancer.

Variables Falls Balance or Walking Difficulty
No (n = 1189) Yes (n = 361) Crude OR
(95% CI)		 No (n = 996) Yes (n = 544) No (n = 996) Crude OR
(95% CI)		 Adjusted OR
(95% CI)
Gender
    Men 576 148 1.0 1.0 495 224 1.0 1.0
    Women 604 204 1.31 (1.03–1.67)a 1.23 (0.88–1.73) 490 313 1.41 (1.14–1.75)b 1.09 (0.77–1.56)
Race
    White 576 148 1.0 1.0 753 435 1.0 1.0
    Other 604 204 0.73 (0.54–0.99)a 0.69 (0.46–1.02) 233 106 0.79 (0.61–1.02) 0.57 (0.38–0.87)b
Marital status
    Married 612 159 1.0 1.0 535 227 1.0 1.0
    Not married 557 193 1.33 (1.05–1.69)a 0.98 (0.70–1.38) 443 306 1.63 (1.32–2.01)c 1.13 (0.79–1.62)
Comorbidity 2.5 (1.8) 3.4 (2.0) 1.25 (1.17–1.34)c 1.13 (1.03–1.23)b 2.2 (1.6) 3.7 (1.9) 1.54 (1.43–1.66)c 1.23 (1.12–1.36)c
Moderate physical activity
    Not limited 926 208 1.0 1.0 850 273 1.0 1.0
    Limited a lot 245 148 2.67 (1.87–3.80)c 0.92 (0.61–1.38) 130 265 6.35 (4.94–8.15)c 1.58 (1.05–2.38)a
ADL dependency
    None 791 128 1.0 1.0 787 130 1.0 1.0
    1–2 ADL 246 104 2.61 (1.94–3.51)c 1.86 (1.26–2.76)b 145 201 8.39 (6.32–11.14)c 4.63 (3.18–6.76)c
    3+ ADL 120 106 5.46 (3.96–7.53)c 3.37 (2.02–5.62)c 43 182 25.62 (17.51–37.49)c 6.39 (3.73–10.92)c
Fatigue
    No 916 199 1.0 1.0 833 272 1.0 1.0
    Yes 245 153 2.88 (2.23–3.70)c 1.35 (0.92–1.98) 141 257 5.58 (4.36–7.15)c 1.34 (0.90–1.99)
Depression
    No 810 192 1.0 1.0 732 261 1.0 1.0
    Yes 264 138 2.97 (2.46–3.60)c 1.63 (1.16–2.28)b 180 220 3.43 (2.69–4.37)c 1.52 (1.06–2.19)a
Urinary incontinence
    No 761 178 1.0 1.0 687 247 1.0 1.0
    Yes 397 174 1.87 (1.47–2.39)c 1.06 (0.77–1.46) 290 275 2.64 (2.12–3.29)c 1.10 (0.79–1.54)
Vision problem
    No 1082 312 1.0 1.0 926 458 1.0 1.0
    Yes 89 45 1.75 (1.20–2.56)b 0.99 (0.59–1.65) 59 76 2.60 (1.82–3.73)c 1.55 (0.88–2.71)
Hearing problem
    No 961 275 1.0 1.0 839 385 1.0 1.0
    Yes 174 81 1.63 (1.21–2.19)b 0.86 (0.57–1.30) 125 131 2.28 (1.74–3.00)c 0.96 (0.62–1.48)
Sensory impairment
    No 941 232 1.0 1.0 827 341 1.0 1.0
    Yes 146 101 2.81 (2.10–3.76)c 1.73 (1.18–2.52)b 87 155 4.32 (3.23–5.78)c 2.64 (1.73–4.04)c
Pain interfering with work
    No 752 156 1.0 1.0 723 178 1.0 1.0
    Moderate or Severe 425 198 2.25 (1.76–2.86)c 0.89 (0.61–1.30) 264 356 5.48 (4.36–6.88)c 1.39 (0.79–1.54)
Age at diagnosis, y 74.4 (6.6) 76.8 (6.9) 1.05 (1.04–1.07)c 1.04 (1.01–1.06)b 73.9 (6.4) 77.1 (6.8) 1.08 (1.06–1.09)c 1.04 (1.02–1.07)b
Survival time since cancer diagnosis, m 35.2 (13.6) 35.4 (14.2) 1.00 (0.99–1.01) 1.00 (0.99–1.01) 35.0 (13.8) 35.5 (13.8) 1.00 (1.00–1.01) 1.01 (0.99–1.02)
Cancer stage
    In situ 79 26 1.0 1.0 71 43 1.0 1.0
    Localized 649 172 0.87 (0.55–1.37) 0.76 (0.41–1.38) 566 292 0.85 (0.57–1.28) 1.08 (0.55–2.12)
    Regional 448 160 1.15 (0.72–1.84) 1.18 (0.64–2.20) 380 220 0.96 (0.63–1.45) 1.36 (0.68–2.71)
    Distant 54 10 0.60 (0.27–1.33) 0.39 (0.14–1.11) 39 25 1.06 (0.56–1.99) 1.24 (0.44–3.44)
Surgery
    No 27 11 1.0 1.0 24 13 1.0 1.0
    Yes 1160 349 0.74 (0.36–1.50) 1.06 (0.47–3.05) 969 531 1.01 (0.51–2.00) 1.57 (0.49–5.03)
Radiation
    No 1067 323 1.0 1.0 891 493 1.0 1.0
    Yes 114 34 0.99 (0.66–1.47) 1.08 (0.65–1.82) 100 44 0.80 (0.55–1.15) 0.70 (0.40–1.23)
Open in a new tab

Abbreviation: ADL, activities of daily living.

Values show are number, mean (SD), or ORs (95%CI).

Statistically significant ORs are marked in bold text with numerical superscripts indicating the level of significance.

a p-value <0.05,

b p-value <0.05, and

c p-value <0.05.

Table 4. Crude and adjusted odds ratios for self-reported falls and balance/walking difficulty in the past 12 months by demographic, health- and cancer-related factors in lung cancer.

Variables Falls Balance or Walking Difficulty
No (n = 571) Yes (n = 175) Crude OR
(95% CI)		 Adjusted OR
(95% CI)		 No (n = 377) Yes (n = 314) Crude OR
(95% CI)		 Adjusted OR
(95% CI)
Gender
    Men 255 77 1.0 1.0 185 146 1.0 1.0
    Women 254 98 1.28 (0.91–1.81) 1.22 (0.74–2.03) 188 165 1.11 (0.82–1.50) 0.69 (0.42–1.14)
Race
    White 411 146 1.0 1.0 306 251 1.0 1.0
    Other 106 29 0.77 (0.49–1.21) 0.81 (0.43–1.53) 71 63 1.08 (0.74–1.58) 1.27 (0.70–2.31)
Marital status
    Married 294 95 1.0 1.0 213 174 1.0 1.0
    Not married 214 79 1.14 (0.81–1.62) 0.73 (0.45–1.21) 159 135 1.04 (0.77–1.41) 1.05 (0.64–1.72)
Comorbidity 3.2 (1.9) 3.7 (2.0) 1.14 (1.03–1.26)c 0.91 (0.79–1.04) 2.9 (1.8) 3.9 (1.9) 1.34 (1.22–1.47) 1.07 (0.93–1.23)
Moderate physical activity
    Not limited 330 71 1.0 1.0 270 129 1.0 1.0
    Limited a lot 176 101 2.67 (1.88–3.80)c 1.04 (0.60–1.82) 99 179 3.78 (2.74–5.23)c 1.12 (0.66–1.92)
ADL dependency
    None 282 40 1.0 1.0 258 63 1.0 1.0
    1–2 ADL 141 55 2.75 (1.75–4.33)c 1.70 (0.94–3.07) 82 115 5.74 (3.87–8.53)c 3.39 (2.00–5.72)c
    3+ ADL 84 72 6.04 (3.83–9.54)c 4.13 (2.02–8.42)c 31 124 16.38 (10.13–26.48)c 7.14 (3.44–14.80)c
Fatigue
    No 305 74 1.0 1.0 254 125 1.0 1.0
    Yes 198 96 2.00 (1.41–2.84)c 1.17 (0.68–1.99) 113 181 3.26 (2.37–4.47)c 1.36 (0.81–2.28)
Depression
    No 313 69 1.0 1.0 254 129 1.0 1.0
    Yes 157 87 2.24 (1.74–2.88)c 1.87 (1.12–3.10)a 93 149 3.16 (2.26–4.41)c 1.70 (1.03–2.81)a
Urinary incontinence
    No 348 81 1.0 1.0 265 163 1.0 1.0
    Yes 163 89 2.35 (1.65–3.34)c 1.85 (1.16–2.96)a 107 144 2.19 (1.59–3.01)c 1.23 (0.77–1.98)
Vision problem
    No 471 146 1.0 1.0 351 266 1.0 1.0
    Yes 42 26 2.00 (1.18–3.37)a 1.06 (0.49–2.27) 23 45 2.58 (1.52–4.37)c 1.55 (0.67–3.56)
Hearing problem
    No 426 134 1.0 1.0 320 241 1.0 1.0
    Yes 72 38 1.68 (1.08–2.60)a 0.83 (0.45–1.53) 46 63 1.82 (1.20–2.76)b 0.91 (0.50–1.67)
Sensory impairment
    No 391 104 1.0 1.0 313 182 1.0 1.0
    Yes 81 50 2.32 (1.54–3.51)c 1.74 (1.02–2.98)a 37 94 4.37 (2.87–6.66)c 2.84 (1.56–5.17)b
Pain interfering with work
    No 256 52 1.0 1.0 222 83 1.0 1.0
    Moderate or Severe 255 117 2.26 (1.56–3.27)c 1.34 (0.78–2.31) 148 226 4.08 (2.95–5.66)c 1.57 (0.98–2.52)
Age at diagnosis, y 73.7 (5.6) 74.4 (6.0) 1.02 (0.99–1.05) 1.05 (1.01–1.09)a 73.2 (5.4) 74.8 (6.1) 1.05 (1.02–1.07)c 1.06 (1.01–1.11)b
Survival time since cancer diagnosis, m 31.4 (13.5) 31.7 (13.7) 1.00 (0.99–1.01) 1.01 (0.99–1.02) 31.4 (13.4) 31.5 (13.7) 1.00 (0.99–1.01) 1.01 (0.99–1.03)
Cancer stage
    In situ 0d 0d 0d 0d
    Localized 261 84 1.0 1.0 197 147 1.0 1.0
    Regional 209 68 1.01 (0.70–1.46) 0.65 (0.38–1.11) 159 119 1.00 (0.73–1.38) 0.76 (0.45–1.28)
    Distant 98 32 1.02 (0.64–1.62) 1.24 (0.61–2.53) 65 64 1.32 (0.88–1.98) 1.19 (0.58–2.46)
Surgery
    No 203 80 1.0 1.0 137 146 1.0 1.0
    Yes 313 95 0.77 (0.55–1.09) 1.34 (0.70–2.56) 239 168 0.66 (0.49–0.90)b 0.95 (0.50–1.79)
Radiation
    No 363 121 1.0 1.0 268 215 1.0 1.0
    Yes 149 53 1.07 (0.73–1.55) 1.52 (0.81–2.86) 106 96 1.13 (0.81–1.57) 0.87 (0.47–1.64)
Open in a new tab

Abbreviation: ADL, activities of daily living.

Values show are number, mean (SD), or ORs (95%CI).

Statistically significant ORs are marked in bold text with numerical superscripts indicating the level of significance.

a p-value <0.05,

b p-value <0.05, and

c p-value <0.05.

d There were no survivors with the stage “in situ”.

Tables 2–5 also present the results from univariable analyses of factors linked to balance or walking difficulty. In colorectal cancer, women were more likely to report balance/walking difficulty than men. Being unmarried was associated with balance/walking difficulty in breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer. All health-related factors and advancing age at cancer diagnosis were associated with balance/walking difficulty in all cancer types. Regional or distance cancer stage in breast cancer and distance cancer stage in prostate cancer were associated with difficulty in balance/walking. In both breast and prostate cancer, treatment with surgery and radiation was associated with reduced odds of balance/walking difficulty. Surgery also was associated with reduced balance/walking difficulty in lung cancer.

Multivariable analyses

Multivariable regression revealed that ADL dependence and advancing age at cancer diagnosis were independent factors for falls and balance/walking difficulty in all cancer types (Tables 2–5). Comorbidity was another significant independent factor linked to falls and balance/walking difficulty in breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer. Additionally, in all cancer types, depression was independently associated with falls, whereas sensory impairment was independently associated with balance/walking difficulty. Urinary incontinence was significantly associated with falls in breast, lung, and prostate cancer. In breast cancer, localized or regional cancer stage was an independent factor for increased falls and regional cancer stage was linked to balance/walking difficulty. Radiation was associated with reduced falls in breast cancer.

Discussion

The impact of falls and balance/walking difficulty on health outcomes may be under-recognized in older cancer survivors. Only 10% of survivors with a recent fall had their falls documented by oncology clinicians [35]. Balance/walking difficulty is rarely recorded in outpatient oncology settings [12]. Current findings bring important insight about factors related to falls and balance/walking difficulty within each of four major cancers in older survivors based on population-based data. This study suggests significant factors that may be integrated into clinical screening algorithms to identify older breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer survivors at risk of falling or developing balance and walking difficulty. In order to optimize function and reduce long-term disability, fall prevention in cancer survivors has been recommended as the top priorities by key stakeholders, including National Cancer Institute, National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research, and American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine [36,37]. Screening is an essential first step in preventing falls and improving balance or walking ability after cancer diagnosis.

We found that among older survivors who were one to five years after the diagnosis of breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer, 20%-26% reported falls and 28%-45% reported having balance/walking difficulty in the past 12 months. Analyses of Medicare/Medicaid beneficiaries showed that 26%-33% of older cancer survivors had falls [10,11]. Methods for measuring falls in previous studies were unclear [10,11]. MHOS collects information of falls by asking about the occurrence of falls in the past 12 months [29]. Recall bias and underreporting of falls [38] likely contributed to lower fall rates in MOHS data. Previous research reported that 46% of Medicare beneficiaries had mild-severe limitation in walking as determined by four questions about difficulty, assistive devices, and need for assistance during walking [39]. This study determined balance/walking difficulty based on one MHOS question, which may not reflect the full spectrum of balance skills and walking ability.

In this study, univariable analyses showed that a majority of factors associated with falls and balance/walking difficulty are similar across four cancer types. However, after multivariable analyses, independent factors of falls and balance/walking difficulty that are unique to each cancer type emerged. Additionally, within each cancer types, not all independent factors of falls were linked to balance/walking difficulty and vice versus. Cancer sequelae are specific to each cancer type [40] and therefore, likely have different impacts on body functions that are important in preventing falls and controlling balance and walking. Falls and balance/walking difficulty may have some common determinants, but each has a different construct. The control of balance skills and walking requires postural alignment, muscle strength, perceived stability limit, sensory integration, anticipatory and reactive postural reactions, and cognition [41]. While impairment in balance and walking is a major risk factor of fall, the causes of falls is multifactorial and involve other factors, such as prior falls, age, race, gender, medications, use of assistive devices, comorbidities, depression, and environmental hazards [3,17]. Research of the general geriatric population has demonstrated that the relationship between falls and walking ability as measured by gait speed is not linear [42]. Older adults with higher and slower gait speed were more likely to fall than those with normal gait speed [42]. Taken together, risk factor profiles of falls and balance/walking difficulty in older survivors likely differ within each cancer type. Falls and balance/walking difficulty may need to be examined as major health outcomes separately.

White race was independently associated with falls in breast and prostate cancer. Race was not an independent factor of balance/walking difficulty in any cancer type. Previous research of older cancer survivors did not find fall rates to differ between white race vs. others [19,43]. In cancer survivors treated with chemotherapy, white race was associated with increased risk of injurious falls [44]. A U.S. population-based study revealed that the percentages of older adults with falls in the past 3 months were 27.8% in American Indian, 17.4% in Hispanic, 13% in black/Asian/pacific islanders, and 15.8% in white [45]. This low fall rate in whites in the general geriatric population was in contrast to current findings of an increased odd of falls in white survivors. In early stage breast cancer, racial disparities in treatments have been reported, with black less likely to received standard care than white [46]. Recent population-based research with a larger sample size reported that in late stage breast cancer, racial difference in cancer treatment was not observed [47]. Additionally, non-significant borderline associations indicated that white women were more likely to receive chemotherapy and had worse mortality rate in comparison with black women [47]. Whether the interplay between race and cancer treatment affects the outcomes of falls and balance/walking difficulty was not examined in this study, and warrant further research.

In prostate cancer only, married prostate cancer survivors were less likely to report falls than those who were unmarried. Marital status, however, was not linked to balance/walking difficulty. In older men with prostate cancer, marriage was found to protect against inflammation [48] and promote behaviors in seeking healthcare [49]. In comparison with those who were not married, married prostate cancer survivors might have received more care and support to reduce fall risk, such as using assistive device, checking footwear, and modifying home environment for safety. Supportive care to reduce fall risk may be pertinent in older, unmarried prostate cancer survivors.

In older adults, female gender is a significant predictor of falls [3], while risk factors for falls differ between genders [50]. Among older cancer survivors treated with neurotoxic chemotherapy, women were more likely to fall than men [44]. We did not find gender to be independently associated with falls or balance/walking difficulty in colorectal or lung cancer.

Similar to prior studies [10,19,22,44,51,52], we found significant associations of health-related factors with falls and balance/walking difficulty. ADL dependence was the only independently factor linked to both falls and balance/walking difficulty in breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer. In all four cancer types, depression was an independent factor of falls whereas sensory impairment was an independent factor of balance/walking difficulty. Other health-related factors linked to falls or balance/walking difficulty differed across cancer types. Current findings underscore the need to manage impairments, functional deficits, and burden from comorbidity that may be associated with falling in older cancer survivors. Research suggested integrating comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) into oncology practice to guide cancer treatments and survivorship care [53–55]. CGA identifies comorbidity and functional impairments that may increase fall risk and warrant referrals for rehabilitation [19,56].

Except for lung cancer, comorbidity was an independent factor of both falls and balance/walking difficulty in other cancer types. Lung cancer survivors are more likely to be diagnosed at advanced stages and receive aggressive cancer treatments resulting in a multitude of side effects [40]. It is possible that disease burden and symptoms from lung cancer itself has a larger impact on overall body function than other comorbidity. Findings from current and prior studies of cancer survivors showed that with each additional comorbidity, the odds of reporting falls increased by 10%-20% [19]. In the general geriatric population, comorbidity is also an important risk factor of falls [3] and walking difficulty [39]. Impairment from some chronic conditions, such as arthritis and stroke, increases fall risk [19,57]. This study only examined the total number rather than the type of chronic conditions with relaiton to fall or balance/walking difficulty. Previous research of the SEER-MHOS data reported that after a cancer diagnosis, older cancer survivors developed different types of chronic conditions depending on the cancer type [58]. For example, in prostate cancer, musculoskeletal, major depression, gastrointestinal and pulmonary coditions were the most prevalent conditions. In breast cancer, the prevalence of diabetes and high blood pressure were the highest [58]. Future research is necessary to elucidate the impact of newly developed chronic conditions after a cancer diagnosis on falls and balance/walking difficulty within each cancer type.

We found that ADL dependence was independently linked to falls and balance/walking difficulty in all cancer types. Compared to those without ADL dependence, survivors with ADL dependence had two- to four-fold increase in fall risk. Additionally, ADL dependence increased the risk for balance/walking difficulty by three to thirteen times. In older adults, both improvement and deterioration in ADL over 6 years had been linked to falls [59]. In older cancer survivors of mixed cancer types, balance/walking difficulty was significantly associated with distress in managing household activities [16]. Individuals with improved ADL may be exposed to higher fall risk due to better mobility and function [59]. Incorporate ADL training into fall-prevention and balance/walking intervention programs may need to be considered in older cancer survivors.

Depression was independently associated with falls in all cancer types, and with balance/walking difficulty in breast, colorectal, and lung cancer. Depression is associated with decreased physical activity, sleep disorder, cognitive impairment, and use of antidepressant, which collectively increase fall risk in older adults [60]. Individuals with depression had impaired balance response, which may be related to deficits in integration of visual and proprioceptive inputs to control posture [61,62]. Previous research of older survivors of mixed cancer types reported that depression increased the odds of falling [63]. However, in older cancer survivors who were receiving chemotherapy, depression was not associated with falls [56]. Because the SEER-MHOS linkage does not include chemotherapy data, this study could not determine whether the impact of depression varies by cancer treatment. No other study has examined the relationship between depression and balance/walking difficulty in older cancer survivors. Urinary incontinence was independently associated with falls in breast, lung, and prostate cancer. In breast and prostate cancer, urinary incontinence was also an independent factor of balance/walking difficulty. Previous research identified urinary incontinence as a risk factor for falls in older survivors with mixed cancer diagnoses [51] or advanced cancer [23]. Urinary incontinence is a complication of prostate cancer treatment [64]. Prevalence of urinary incontinence is higher in breast and prostate cancer survivors compared to non-cancer controls [65] Urinary incontinence is recognized as a geriatric syndrome that often co-exists with other chronic conditions [66].

In all cancer types, sensory impairment was an independent factors of balance/walking difficulty. In colorectal and lung cancer only, sensory impaired was independently linked to falls. We defined sensory impairment as numbness, tingling, burning, loss of decreased ability to feel in the feet in the previous 4 months. Sensory impairment is a common complication of neurotoxic chemotherapy and contributes to balance and walking problems [67]. In breast cancer survivors, poor performance in balance and walking was attributed to impaired ability to integrate sensory information from visual, vestibular, and somatosensory systems [24]. SEER-MHOS does not provide the information about chemotherapy. As such, whether sensory impairment observed in this study was related to chemotherapy or other conditions, such as peripheral neuropathy from diabetes [68,69], cannot be acertained.

The extent of pain interfering with work was not associated with falls in all cancer types. A study of older cancer survivors showed that pain measured by Visual Analog Scale was linked to falls [52]. Cancer-related pain is an important factor associated with falls in survivors with advanced cancer [23]. We determined pain based on one MHOS question asking how often in the past 4 weeks, pain interfered with normal work. The question did not identify the location or nature of the pain. A comprehensive questionnaire specific to cancer, such as Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain, may elucidate the relationship between pain and falls in cancer survivors [23]. This study found that pain was an independent factor of balance/walking difficulty in prostate cancer only. In localized prostate cancer survivors, 69.6% reported pain in the past 3 months [70]. Additionally, 72.5% of pain was located at back, lower abdomen, lower extremity, or hip.69 Older prostate cancer survivors may encounter more difficulty in balance and walking because pain is prevalent and primarily involves the lower body in this population.

In this study, age at cancer diagnosis was the only cancer-related independent factor associated with falls and balance/walking difficulty in all cancer types. Age is a risk factor for falling in older adults [3]. We found that the odds for reporting falls and balance/walking difficulty increased by 3%-11% and by 2%-6%, respectively, with each additional year of age at cancer diagnosis. In survivors with advanced cancer or chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy, age did not predict falls [23,67]. Age, specifically chronological age as measured in this study, is unlikely the key driver of falls and balance/walking difficulty in older cancer survivors. Research of SEER-MHOS linkage reported that older cancer survivors had greater declines in physical function over time than age-matched controls [71]. Cancer treatment has long-lasting impact on non-tumor cells. Vulnerabilities of genome instability, epigenetic changes, and cellular senescence likely interact with age, leading to accelerated aging observed in cancer survivors [72].

In breast cancer only, localized or regional cancer stage was independently associated with increased odds of falls and balance/walking difficulty. Previous research reported no associations between falls with cancer stage, cancer type, or time post-cancer diagnosis in older survivors of mixed cancer types [10], and in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors [73]. Treatments for advanced breast cancer, particularly neurotoxic chemotherapy, cause a wide variety of side effects affecting body systems. Medications prescribed to manage symptoms in advanced cancer, such as anticonvulsants, antidepressants, and antipsychotics [23,74], are known to increase fall risk and affect physical function in older adults [75]. Cancer symptoms and treatment complications specific to each cancer types likely influence the associations of cancer stage with falls and balance/walking.

In breast cancer only, radiation was independently associated with reduced odds of falls, but not balance/walking difficulty. Radiotherapy is the local treatment of choice in breast cancer. Radiotherapy improved long-term outcomes and survival by reducing breast cancer recurrence and mortality [76,77]. This study confirmed additional benefit of radiation by reducing fall risk in breast cancer. Reasons for omitting radiotherapy, such as cultural beliefs, limited access to healthcare, previous breast irradiation, inability to lie flat or abduct the arm, or having collagen vascular disease [78,79] were not available from SEER-MHOS linkage [29].

This study has limitations. First, because of cross-sectional design, associations between factors with falls and balance/walking difficulty cannot be construed as causal relationships. Second, SEER-MHOS does not include information about chemotherapy or hormonal therapy [29]. Third, the time when a condition or impairment developed cannot be identified from SEER-MHOS data. Fourth, primary outcomes were obtained by self-report and subject to recall bias [38]. Lastly, MHOS randomly surveyed Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, which have more risk factors and lower function than other Medicare beneficiaries [80].

Conclusion

Each of the four cancer types being examined in this study has unique patterns of demographics, health- and cancer-related factors that are independently linked to falls and balance/walking difficulty. In breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer, ADL dependence and age at cancer diagnosis were common independent factors linked to both falls and balance/walking difficulty. In all four cancer types, depression was an independent factor of falls whereas sensory impairment in feet was an independent factor of balance/walking difficulty. These findings have important implications in screening for older cancer survivors at risk of falls and balance/walking difficulty.

Data Availability

Data are available from the National Cancer Institute Healthcare Delivery Research Program for researchers who meet the criteria for access to the dataset. Access to the de-identified SEER-MHOS dataset requires the approval from National Cancer Institute. The application to access the SEER-MHOS dataset can be found at https://healthcaredelivery.cancer.gov/seer-mhos/.

Funding Statement

University of Michigan-Flint Office of Research & Sponsored Programs and Physical Therapy Department funded this project.

References

  • 1.Stevens JA, Ballesteros MF, Mack KA, Rudd RA, DeCaro E, Adler G. Gender differences in seeking care for falls in the aged Medicare population. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43(1):59–62. 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.03.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Tinetti ME, Speechley M, Ginter SF. Risk Factors for Falls among Elderly Persons Living in the Community. N Engl J Med 1988;319(26):1701–7. 10.1056/NEJM198812293192604 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Summary of the Updated American Geriatrics Society/British Geriatrics Society clinical practice guideline for prevention of falls in older persons. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011;59(1):148–57 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03234.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Tinetti ME, Williams CS. Falls, injuries due to falls, and the risk of admission to a nursing home. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(18):1279–84. 10.1056/NEJM199710303371806 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Friedman SM, Munoz B, West SK, Rubin GS, Fried LP. Falls and fear of falling: which comes first? A longitudinal prediction model suggests strategies for primary and secondary prevention. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002;50(8):1329–35. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Nevitt MC, Cummings SR, Hudes ES. Risk factors for injurious falls: a prospective study. J Gerontol. 1991;46(5):M164–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Sheppard KD, Sawyer P, Ritchie CS, Allman RM, Brown CJ. Life-space mobility predicts nursing home admission over 6 years. J Aging Health. 2013;25(6):907–20. 10.1177/0898264313497507 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.National Cancer Institute. NCI Dictionary of Cancer Terms [cited 2017 April 4]. Available from: https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms?cdrid=450125.
  • 9.National Cancer Institute. SEER Cancer Statistics Factsheets [cited 2017 April 4]. Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/all.html.
  • 10.Spoelstra SL, Given BA, Schutte DL, Sikorskii A, You M, Given CW. Do older adults with cancer fall more often? A comparative analysis of falls in those with and without cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2013;40(2):E69–78. 10.1188/13.ONF.E69-E78 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Mohile SG, Fan L, Reeve E, Jean-Pierre P, Mustian K, Peppone L, et al. Association of cancer with geriatric syndromes in older Medicare beneficiaries. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(11):1458–64. 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.6695 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Cheville AL, Beck LA, Petersen TL, Marks RS, Gamble GL. The detection and treatment of cancer-related functional problems in an outpatient setting. Support Care Cancer. 2009;17(1):61–7. 10.1007/s00520-008-0461-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Sweeney C, Schmitz KH, Lazovich D, Virnig BA, Wallace RB, Folsom AR. Functional limitations in elderly female cancer survivors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(8):521–9. 10.1093/jnci/djj130 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Brown JC, Harhay MO, Harhay MN. Physical function as a prognostic biomarker among cancer survivors. Br J Cancer. 2015;112(1):194–8. 10.1038/bjc.2014.568 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Pandya C, Magnuson A, Dale W, Lowenstein L, Fung C, Mohile SG. Association of falls with health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in older cancer survivors: A population based study. J Geriatr Oncol. 2016;7(3):201–10. 10.1016/j.jgo.2016.01.007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Schlairet MC, Benton MJ. Quality of life and perceived educational needs among older cancer survivors. J Cancer Educ. 2012;27(1):21–6. 10.1007/s13187-011-0279-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Wildes TM, Dua P, Fowler SA, Miller JP, Carpenter CR, Avidan MS, et al. Systematic review of falls in older adults with cancer. J Geriatr Oncol. 2015;6(1):70–83. 10.1016/j.jgo.2014.10.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Huang MH, Shilling T, Miller KA, Smith K, LaVictoire K. History of falls, gait, balance, and fall risks in older cancer survivors living in the community. Clin Interv Aging. 2015;10:1497–503. 10.2147/CIA.S89067 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Williams GR, Deal AM, Nyrop KA, Pergolotti M, Guerard EJ, Jolly TA, et al. Geriatric assessment as an aide to understanding falls in older adults with cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2015;23(8):2273–80. 10.1007/s00520-014-2598-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Sattar S, Alibhai SM, Spoelstra SL, Fazelzad R, Puts MT. Falls in older adults with cancer: a systematic review of prevalence, injurious falls, and impact on cancer treatment. Support Care Cancer. 2016;24(10):4459–69. 10.1007/s00520-016-3342-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Kuriya M, Yennurajalingam S, de la Cruz MG, Wei W, Palla S, Bruera E. Frequency and factors associated with falls in patients with advanced cancer presenting to an outpatient supportive care clinic. Palliat Support Care. 2014;13(2):1–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Bylow K, Dale W, Mustian K, Stadler WM, Rodin M, Hall W, et al. Falls and physical performance deficits in older patients with prostate cancer undergoing androgen deprivation therapy. Urology. 2008;72(2):422–7. 10.1016/j.urology.2008.03.032 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Stone CA, Lawlor PG, Savva GM, Bennett K, Kenny RA. Prospective study of falls and risk factors for falls in adults with advanced cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(17):2128–33. 10.1200/JCO.2011.40.7791 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Wampler MA, Topp KS, Miaskowski C, Byl NN, Rugo HS, Hamel K. Quantitative and clinical description of postural instability in women with breast cancer treated with taxane chemotherapy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(8):1002–8. 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.05.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Alibhai SMH, Breunis H, Timilshina N, Naglie G, Tannock I, Krahn M, et al. Long-term impact of androgen-deprivation therapy on physical function and quality of life. Cancer. 2015;121(14):2350–7. 10.1002/cncr.29355 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Rao AV, Demark-Wahnefried W. The older cancer survivor. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2006;60(2):131–43. 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2006.06.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Schmitz KH, Courneya KS, Matthews C, Demark-Wahnefried W, Galvao DA, Pinto BM, et al. American College of Sports Medicine roundtable on exercise guidelines for cancer survivors. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2010;42(7):1409–26. 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181e0c112 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Schootman M, Aft R, Jeffe DB. An evaluation of lower-body functional limitations among long-term survivors of 11 different types of cancers. Cancer. 2009;115(22):5329–38. 10.1002/cncr.24606 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Ambs A, Warren JL, Bellizzi KM, Topor M, Haffer SC, Clauser SB. Overview of the SEER—Medicare Health Outcomes Survey linked dataset. Health Care Financ Rev. 2008;29(4):5–21. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Kent EE, Ambs A, Mitchell SA, Clauser SB, Smith AW, Hays RD. Health-related quality of life in older adult survivors of selected cancers: Data from the SEER-MHOS linkage. Cancer. 2015;121(5):758–65. 10.1002/cncr.29119 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Surveillance Epidemiology, and Edn Results Program. Fast Stats [cited 2018 March 18]. Available from: https://seer.cancer.gov/faststats.
  • 32.Huang MH, Blackwood J, Godoshian M, Pfalzer L. Prevalence of self-reported falls, balance or walking problems in older cancer survivors from Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare Health Outcomes Survey. J Geriatr Oncol. 2017;8(4):255–61. 10.1016/j.jgo.2017.05.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Belsley DA, Kuh E, Welsch RE. Regression diagnostics: identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York: Wiley; 1980. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S, Sturdivant RX. Applied logistic regression. 3rd ed Hoboken: Wiley; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Guerard EJ, Deal AM, Williams GR, Jolly TA, Nyrop KA, Muss HB. Falls in older adults with Cancer: Evaluation by oncology providers. J Oncol Pract. 2015;11(6):470–4. 10.1200/JOP.2014.003517 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Stout NL, Silver JK, Raj VS, Rowland J, Gerber L, Cheville A, et al. Toward a national initiative in cancer rehabilitation: Recommendations from a subject matter expert group. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97(11):2006–15. 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.05.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Lyons KD, Radomski MV, Alfano CM, Finkelstein M, Sleight AG, Marshall TF, et al. A Delphi study to determine rehabilitation research priorities for older adults with cancer. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;98(5):904–14. 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.11.015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Freiberger E, de Vreede P. Falls recall—limitations of the most used inclusion criteria. Eur Rev Aging Phys Act. 2011;8(2):105–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Shumway-Cook A, Ciol MA, Yorkston KM, Hoffman JM, Chan L. Mobility limitations in the Medicare population: Prevalence and sociodemographic and clinical correlates. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53(7):1217–21. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53372.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.DeSantis CE, Lin CC, Mariotto AB, Siegel RL, Stein KD, Kramer JL, et al. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2014. CA. 2014;64(4):252–71. 10.3322/caac.21235 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Horak FB, Wrisley DM, Frank J. The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) to differentiate balance deficits. Phys Ther. 2009;89(5):484–98. 10.2522/ptj.20080071 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Quach L, Galica AM, Jones RN, Procter-Gray E, Manor B, Hannan MT, et al. The nonlinear relationship between gait speed and falls: The maintenance of balance, independent living, intellect, and zest in the elderly of Boston study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011;59(6):1069–73. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03408.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Chen T-Y, Janke MC. Predictors of falls among community-dwelling older adults with cancer: results from the health and retirement study. Support Care Cancer. 2014;22(2):479–85. 10.1007/s00520-013-2000-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Ward PR, Wong MD, Moore R, Naeim A. Fall-related injuries in elderly cancer patients treated with neurotoxic chemotherapy: A retrospective cohort study. J Geriatric Oncol. 2014;5(1):57–64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Stevens JA, Mack KA, Paulozzi LJ, Ballesteros MF. Self-Reported Falls and Fall-Related Injuries Among Persons Aged ≥65 Years–United States, 2006. J Safety Res. 2008;39(3):345–9. 10.1016/j.jsr.2008.05.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Keating NL, Kouri E, He Y, Weeks JC, Winer EP. Racial differences in definitive breast cancer therapy in older women: are they explained by the hospitals where patients undergo surgery? Med Care. 2009;47(7):765–73. 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31819e1fe7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Enewold L, Penn DC, Stevens JL, Harlan LC. Black/white differences in treatment and survival among women with stage IIIB-IV breast cancer at diagnosis: a US population-based study. Cancer Causes Control. 2018;29(7):657–65. 10.1007/s10552-018-1045-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Sbarra DA. Marriage protects men from clinically meaningful elevations in C-reactive protein: results from the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project (NSHAP). Psychosom Med. 2009;71(8):828–35. 10.1097/PSY.0b013e3181b4c4f2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Forbat L, Place M, Hubbard G, Leung H, Kelly D. The role of interpersonal relationships in men's attendance in primary care: qualitative findings in a cohort of men with prostate cancer. Suppor Care Cancer. 2014;22(2):409–15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Gale CR, Cooper C, Aihie Sayer A. Prevalence and risk factors for falls in older men and women: The English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Age Ageing. 2016;45(6):789–94. 10.1093/ageing/afw129 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Spoelstra S, Given B, von Eye A, Given C. Falls in the community-dwelling elderly with a history of cancer. Cancer Nurs. 2010;33(2):149–55. 10.1097/NCC.0b013e3181bbbe8a [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Vande Walle N, Kenis C, Heeren P, Van Puyvelde K, Decoster L, Beyer I, et al. Fall predictors in older cancer patients: a multicenter prospective study. BMC Geriatr. 2014;14:135 10.1186/1471-2318-14-135 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Hurria A, Lichtman SM, Gardes J, Li D, Limaye S, Patil S, et al. Identifying vulnerable older adults with cancer: integrating geriatric assessment into oncology practice. Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55(10):1604–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Whittle AK, Kalsi T, Babic-Illman G, Wang Y, Fields P, Ross PJ, et al. A comprehensive geriatric assessment screening questionnaire (CGA-GOLD) for older people undergoing treatment for cancer. Eur J Cancer Care. 2017;26(5):e12509. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Antonio M, Saldana J, Carmona-Bayonas A, Navarro V, Tebe C, Nadal M, et al. Geriatric assessment predicts survival and competing mortality in elderly patients with early colorectal cancer: Can it help in adjuvant therapy decision-making? Oncologist. 2017;22(8):934–43. 10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0462 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Overcash JA, Beckstead J. Predicting falls in older patients using components of a comprehensive geriatric assessment. C lin J Oncol Nurs. 2008;12(6):941–9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Walsh ME, Horgan NF, Walsh CD, Galvin R. Systematic review of risk prediction models for falls after stroke. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2016;70(5):513–9. 10.1136/jech-2015-206475 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Kenzik KM, Kent EE, Martin MY, Bhatia S, Pisu M. Chronic condition clusters and functional impairment in older cancer survivors: a population-based study. J Cancer Surviv. 2016:1–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Stenhagen M, Ekstrom H, Nordell E, Elmstahl S. Both deterioration and improvement in activities of daily living are related to falls: a 6-year follow-up of the general elderly population study Good Aging in Skane. Clin Interv Aging. 2014;9:1839–46. 10.2147/CIA.S70075 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Anstey KJ, Burns R, von Sanden C, Luszcz MA. Psychological well-being is an independent predictor of falling in an 8-year follow-up of older adults. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2008;63(4):P249–p57. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Deschamps T, Thomas-Ollivier V, Sauvaget A, Bulteau S, Fortes-Bourbousson M, Vachon H. Balance characteristics in patients with major depression after a two-month walking exercise program: A pilot study. Gait Posture. 2015;42(4):590–3. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.07.057 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Bolbecker AR, Hong SL, Kent JS, Klaunig MJ, O'Donnell BF, Hetrick WP. Postural control in bipolar disorder: increased sway area and decreased dynamical complexity. PLoS One. 2011;6(5):e19824 10.1371/journal.pone.0019824 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Capone L, Albert N Bena J, Tang A. Predictors of a fall event in hospitalized patients with cancer. Oncology Nursing Forum. 2012;39(5):E407–15. 10.1188/12.ONF.E407-E415 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Michaelson MD, Cotter SE, Gargollo PC, Zietman AL, Dahl DM, Smith MR. Management of complications of prostate cancer treatment. CA. 2008;58(4):196–213. 10.3322/CA.2008.0002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.White AJ, Reeve BB, Chen RC, Stover AM, Irwin DE. Urinary incontinence and health-related quality of life among older Americans with and without cancer: a cross-sectional study. BMC Cancer. 2013;13:377 10.1186/1471-2407-13-377 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Lee PG, Cigolle C, Blaum C. The co-occurrence of chronic diseases and geriatric syndromes: the health and retirement study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009;57(3):511–6. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02150.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Tofthagen C, Overcash J, Kip K. Falls in persons with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. Support Care Cancer. 2012;20(3):583–9. 10.1007/s00520-011-1127-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Timar B, Timar R, Gaita L, Oancea C, Levai C, Lungeanu D. The impact of diabetic neuropathy on balance and on the risk of falls in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2016;11(4):e0154654 10.1371/journal.pone.0154654 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Yokomoto-Umakoshi M, Kanazawa I, Kondo S, Sugimoto T. Association between the risk of falls and osteoporotic fractures in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Endocrine. 2017;64(7):727–34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Gerbershagen HJ, Ozgur E, Straub K, Dagtekin O, Gerbershagen K, Petzke F, et al. Prevalence, severity, and chronicity of pain and general health-related quality of life in patients with localized prostate cancer. Eur J Pain. 2008;12(3):339–50. 10.1016/j.ejpain.2007.07.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Leach CR, Bellizzi KM, Hurria A, Reeve BB. Is it my cancer or am I just getting older?: Impact of cancer on age-related health conditions of older cancer survivors. Cancer. 2016;122(12):1946–53. 10.1002/cncr.29914 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Chang L, Weiner LS, Hartman SJ, Horvath S, Jeste D, Mischel PS, et al. Breast cancer treatment and its effects on aging. J Geriatr Oncol. 2018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Winters-Stone KM, Torgrimson B, Horak F, Eisner A, Nail L, Leo MC, et al. Identifying factors associated with falls in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors: A multi-disciplinary approach. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(4):646–52. 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.10.039 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Ng CG, Boks MP, Smeets HM, Zainal NZ, de Wit NJ. Prescription patterns for psychotropic drugs in cancer patients; a large population study in the Netherlands. Psychooncology. 2013;22(4):762–7. 10.1002/pon.3056 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Hartikainen S, Lonnroos E, Louhivuori K. Medication as a risk factor for falls: critical systematic review. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007;62(10):1172–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Darby S, McGale P, Correa C, Taylor C, Arriagada R, Clarke M, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery on 10-year recurrence and 15-year breast cancer death: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 10,801 women in 17 randomised trials. Lancet. 2011;378(9804):1707–16. 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61629-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.McGale P, Taylor C, Correa C, Cutter D, Duane F, Ewertz M, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after mastectomy and axillary surgery on 10-year recurrence and 20-year breast cancer mortality: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 8135 women in 22 randomised trials. Lancet. 2014;383(9935):2127–35. 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60488-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Wo J, Taghian A. Radiotherapy in setting of collagen vascular disease. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;69(5):1347–53. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.07.2357 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Giordano SH, Hortobagyi GN, Kau SW, Theriault RL, Bondy ML. Breast cancer treatment guidelines in older women. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(4):783–91. 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.175 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Riley G. Two-year changes in health and functional status among elderly Medicare beneficiaries in HMOs and fee-for-service. Health Serv Res. 2000;35(5 Pt 3):44–59. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available from the National Cancer Institute Healthcare Delivery Research Program for researchers who meet the criteria for access to the dataset. Access to the de-identified SEER-MHOS dataset requires the approval from National Cancer Institute. The application to access the SEER-MHOS dataset can be found at https://healthcaredelivery.cancer.gov/seer-mhos/.

Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

RESOURCES