Abstract
Objective:
This study clarifies the relationship between resilience and anxiety and depression, quality of life (QOL), and other related factors that influence colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.
Methods:
This cross-sectional study focused on outpatients with colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy. A questionnaire including the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the MOS 12-item Short-Form Health Survey, and items based on a literature review was administered between August 2019 and August 2020. SPSS version 26 was used for data analysis. Correlation analysis and t-test were applied. In addition, Amos version 26 was used and structural equation modeling was applied to create a causal model.
Results:
A total of 121 participants (94.5%) were included in the study. The goodness of fit (GFI) of the causal model was GFI = 0.94, adjusted GFI = 0.906, comparative fit index = 0.997, and root mean square error of approximation = 0.011. Resilience had a negative effect on anxiety and depression and a positive effect on QOL. Depression had a negative effect on QOL.
Conclusions:
The results of this study indicate that resilience is a predictor of anxiety, depression, and QOL in colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Therefore, I believe that it is important to enhance resilience in order to maintain and improve patients’ mental health and QOL. In addition, since resilience was affected by cancer metastasis and the presence of metastasis was a predictor of resilience, it is a challenge to explore interventions to enhance resilience, especially in patients with metastasis.
Keywords: Anxiety, chemotherapy, colorectal cancer, depression, quality of life, resilience
Introduction
The prevalence of colorectal cancer is the third highest worldwide among all cancer types.[1] In Japan, its prevalence is the highest among all cancer types.[2] This occurrence rate of colorectal cancer has been increasing along with the rise in population and aging. The response rate to treatment for colorectal cancer has been improving along with the development of new anticancer drugs, and colorectal cancer can be cured with tumor resection and adjuvant chemotherapy, improving the 5-year survival rate.[3] Even if conditions of patients worsen and they suffer unresectable recurrent colorectal cancer, chemotherapy has further prolonged the survival rate.[4,5] These conditions have increased the length of treatment periods as well as the number of colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.
It has been reported that patients with colorectal cancer, undergoing chemotherapy, experience peripheral neuropathy, a side effect known to be difficult to control[6] and face difficulties in adjusting their lifestyles to prevent worsening of symptoms due to side effects.[7] Previous studies found that patients with colorectal cancer, undergoing chemotherapy, experienced higher levels of anxiety and depression than those not administered for chemotherapy.[8,9] Studies have noted declining treatment adherence[10] and quality of life (QOL) in patients with stronger feelings of anxiety and depression.[11,12] This highlights the importance of reducing anxiety and depression among such patients for the continuance of treatment and maintenance or improvement of QOL.
Recent studies have shown that anxiety and depression are low in cancer patients with high resilience,[13,14] and that mental health is related to resilience. This suggests that resilience is an important concept for maintaining mental health in cancer patients. Resilience is the mental strength to return to the original state and is a factor when people face difficult situations in life. Resilience is considered to be acquired throughout life,[15] suggesting that resilience may be a key element in maintaining the mental health and QOL of patients with colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy.
Previous studies have shown the relationship between resilience and psychological distress,[13,16,17] resilience and QOL,[18,19] and resilience and social support[20,21] in cancer patients. However, no study has been found to clarify the relationship between cancer patients’ resilience and anxiety and depression, QOL, and the factors that affect them. No studies on colorectal cancer have been conducted yet, except for those involving patients with terminal illnesses or permanent stomas.[22,23] It can be assumed that the number of colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy will increase; thus, it is important to explore support for maintaining their mental health and QOL. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between resilience and anxiety and depression, QOL, and related factors in colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.
Research framework
The research framework adopted by the study is illustrated in Figure 1. This framework was created based on a systematic review conducted by the present researchers[24] and that by Eicher.[25] Resilience is defined to be related to anxiety/depression, and QOL, and anxiety and depression are related to QOL. As previous studies have reported that personal factors and disease-related factors are related to resilience,[26,27] and that resilience is also related to anxiety and depression in patients with colorectal cancer,[28] resilience in this study is regarded also to be related to depression. Further, it has been reported that the QOL of patients with colorectal cancer is related to anxiety/depression,[29,30] age, and fatigue.[31] Thus, the present study considers that personal and disease-related factors are also related to QOL [Figure 1].
Figure 1.
Research framework
Hypothesis
High resilience in a colorectal cancer patient undergoing chemotherapy will cause lower anxiety and depression and a better QOL
The higher the anxiety and depression in the patient, the lower the QOL
Individual and disease-related factors affect patients’ resilience, anxiety and depression, and QOL.
Methods
Research setting and population
This study is a cross-sectional study. Colorectal cancer patients undergoing outpatient chemotherapy at university hospitals and general hospitals in the Kinki region of Japan, who participated in the study, after signing their consent. Inclusion criteria for the subjects were as follows: persons of age 20 years or above, those who have been informed of the diagnosis of primary or recurrent colorectal cancer at least 6 weeks in advance, and those who have completed one course of chemotherapy before participation in the study. Patients who were only administered oral anticancer drugs, who were diagnosed to suffer from strong anxiety and depressive symptoms, have been diagnosed with mental illness, display cognitive decline, and those who were evaluated to be Performance Status 3 or higher of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group were excluded from the study.
Participant recruitment process
A convenient sampling method was used for this study. The researcher asked the physician in charge to select the patients – based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria – who visited the chemotherapy facility of the hospital during the study period. The researchers explained the outline of the study and ethical considerations to the selected patients in writing. Questionnaires were distributed to the patients who agreed to participate.
Sample size
For calculating the sample size, GPower 3.1 (Heinrich-Heine-Universitaet Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany) was used for the correlation coefficient, and previous studies for the covariance structure analysis. With the correlation coefficient, the calculation by a two-sided test, and effect size of 0.3, α = 0.05, 1−β = 0.8, yielded a sample size of 82.
For the performing structural equation modeling, a few studies have reported a sample size of 92,[32] whereas others have reported that at least 100 were required.[33,34,35] Based on these sizes, it was decided to set the sample size to 120 or more. Data were collected until the number of valid responses reached 120.
Research instrument
Resilience
The Japanese version of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC) was used for this study. The CD-RISC consists of 25 items with four-point scale questions, assigning 0 for “not applicable at all” to 4 for “almost always applicable,” with the maximum total score being 100 points. A higher score is considered to express better resilience. The reliability and validity of CD-RISC have been established with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.93 and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.86.[36]
Anxiety and depression
The Japanese version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was also used. The HADS was developed by Zigmond and Snaith to measure anxiety and depression in patients with physical symptoms.[37] The reliability and validity of HADS have been established for Japanese outpatients of gastroenterology clinics. The HADS consisted of 14 items (7 items for anxiety and 7 items for depression); the scores of all the items were then summed. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were 0.8 or higher for anxiety and 0.7 or higher for depression.[38]
Quality of life
The QOL was measured with the Japanese version of the MOS 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12),[39,40] covering three areas, “physical health,” “mental health,” and “role-social health,” as well as an inquiry of the health status of the past month. The higher the score, the better the QOL. As there is a national standard value established for the SF-12 and it is possible to convert this from the raw MOS score, the present study used the national standard value. The reliability by the parallel test method was 0.88–0.91.
Related factors
Factors identified through literature as being related to resilience were classified into personal and disease-related factors. While the former included age, gender, living with family, with a spouse, with children, financial difficulties, educational background, type of social support (mental, evaluation, instrument, and information),[41] and self-disclosure of cancer, the latter included the cancer stage, metastasis, length of time after the diagnosis of cancer, physical symptoms, details of the physical symptoms, comorbidities, and surgical treatment.
Date management and analysis
The data were analyzed using SPSS version 26 (International Business Machines Corporation, New York, USA). Correlation coefficients were calculated to identify the relationships between the resilience of patients with colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy and the reported scores of anxiety and depression and QOL. Furthermore, t-tests were utilized to interpret the relationship between patient resilience, anxiety and depression, and QOL as dependent variables and personal factors and disease-related factors as independent variables. In order to identify the relationship between patient resilience, anxiety and depression, QOL, and personal and disease-related factors that showed significant trends through t-test and ANOVA, a causal model using Amos version 26 (International Business Machines Corporation, New York, USA) was created; the analysis utilized structural equation modeling.
Ethical approval
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Osaka Medical College (Approval No. Nurse-126 [2743]) and the Ethical Review Board established at the Saiju Moriguchi-Keijinkai Hospital. The participants were informed of the research plan and provided with assurances that their participation was voluntary and that their personal information would be kept confidential during and after the project. Participants provided written informed consent.
Results
Participant characteristics
The researchers handed out questionnaires to a total of 128 patients, of which 7 did not respond; thus, 121 responses were analyzed (94.5%). The demographic characteristics of the participants were as follows: the mean age was 63.8 years (standard deviation [SD]: 10.7), 71 were male (58.7%) and 50 were female (41.3%), and 29 patients (24.0%) had no metastasis and 92 (76.0%) had metastasis [Table 1].
Table 1.
Demographics and Clinical information of the participants (n=121)
| Demogaraphics | n | % |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | ||
| Average 68.8 (SD10.72) 35-83 | ||
| <65 | 58 | 52.0 |
| >=65 | 63 | 48.0 |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 71 | 58.7 |
| Female | 50 | 41.3 |
| Education | ||
| High school or lower | 56 | 46.3 |
| Undergraduate or higher | 65 | 53.7 |
| Financial situation at home | ||
| Not trouble | 76 | 62.8 |
| In trouble | 45 | 37.2 |
| Employment | ||
| Employed | 62 | 51.2 |
| Unemployed | 59 | 48.8 |
| Living together | ||
| Yes | 102 | 47.9 |
| No | 19 | 45.6 |
| Social Support | ||
| Mental support | ||
| Yes | 111 | 92.0 |
| No | 10 | 8.0 |
| Evaluation support | ||
| Yes | 113 | 93.0 |
| No | 8 | 7.0 |
| Instrument support | ||
| Yes | 107 | 88.0 |
| No | 14 | 12.0 |
| Information support | ||
| Yes | 85 | 70.0 |
| No | 36 | 30.0 |
| Self-disclosure | ||
| Yes | 94 | 78.0 |
| No | 27 | 22.0 |
| Clinical Information | ||
| Stage | ||
| I | 0 | 0.0 |
| II | 11 | 9.1 |
| III | 18 | 14.9 |
| IV | 92 | 76.0 |
| Performance status | ||
| 0 | 69 | 57.0 |
| 1 | 52 | 43.0 |
| Time since diagnosis | ||
| 2-12 months | 51 | 42.0 |
| 13-24 months | 32 | 27.0 |
| 25 months or longer | 38 | 31.0 |
| Urinary incontinence | ||
| Yes | 94 | 78.0 |
| No | 27 | 22.0 |
| Constipation | ||
| Yes | 66 | 55.0 |
| No | 55 | 45.0 |
Relationship between resilience and anxiety/depression and quality of life
The mean score for CD-RISC was 60.7 (SD: 16.4). Other mean values are shown in Table 2.
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics for Resilience, anxiety/depression, and QOL (n=121)
| CD-RISC | HADS Resilience | SF-12 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anxiety | Depression | Physical health | Mental health | Role-social health | ||
| Average | 60.70 | 4.60 | 5.32 | 45.90 | 52.90 | 45.90 |
| SD | 16.40 | 2.90 | 3.40 | 10.70 | 8.90 | 8.60 |
| Min | 14.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 8.80 | 28.70 | 22.10 |
| Max | 100.00 | 15.00 | 17.00 | 64.30 | 77.40 | 67.00 |
Resilience average score: 80.7 points (general peaple); CD-RISC: Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale; HADS: Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale; SF-12: The MOS 12 Item Short-Form Health Survey; HADS 0-7: No anxiety or depression, 8 -10: Anxiety or depression suspected; 11 or higher: Clear diagnosis of anxiety or depression; QOL average score: Physical health 53.86, mental health 51.60, Role-social health 50.44
The correlations between resilience, anxiety and depression, and the QOL subscales of physical health, mental health, and role-social health were as follows: resilience and anxiety (r = −0.224, P < 0.05) and depression (r = −0.340, P < 0.01) had significant negative correlations, and higher resilience scores were associated with lower anxiety and depression scores. In addition, resilience and QOL had a significant positive correlation only for the subscale mental health (r = 0.459, P < 0.01), and higher resilience scores were also higher mental health scores.
Factors related to resilience, anxiety/depression, and quality of life
Tables 3 and 4 show the results of the t-test as factors related to resilience, anxiety and depression, and QOL. Resilience was shown to be related to education level (P = 0.046), metastasis (P = 0.041), and surgery (P = 0.047). Anxiety was related to financial difficulties (P = 0.004), self-disclosure of cancer (P = 0.021), poor concentration (P < 0.001), and pain (P = 0.048). Depression was related to gender (P =0.005), education level (P = 0.010), financial difficulties (P = 0.001), number of types of social support (P = 0.015), and fatigue (P < 0.001).Physical health, a subscale of QOL, was significantly related to fatigue (P = 0.004) and pain (P = 0.003). Mental health was substantially dependent on education level (P = 0.006) and poor appetite (P = 0.018). Furthermore, role-social health was related to financial difficulties (P = 0.008) and poor appetite (P = 0.010).
Table 3.
Personal factors related to resilience, anxiety/depression, and QOL
| Factors | n | CD-RISC | HADS | SF-12 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resilience | P | Anxiety | P | Depression | P | Physical health | P | Mental health | P | Role/social health | P | ||
| Age (years) | |||||||||||||
| <65 | 58 | 58.36 | 0.136 | 4.47 | 0.698 | 5.48 | 0.771 | 45.05 | 0.030 | 52.34 | 0.493 | 45.07 | 0.294 |
| ≧65 | 63 | 62.83 | 4.67 | 5.30 | 40.83 | 53.46 | 46.71 | ||||||
| Gender | |||||||||||||
| Male | 71 | 59.38 | 0.300 | 4.67 | 0.675 | 6.11 | 0.005 | 42.64 | 0.792 | 52.12 | 0.239 | 45.79 | 0.841 |
| Female | 50 | 62.54 | 4.44 | 4.36 | 43.16 | 54.07 | 46.11 | ||||||
| Education level | |||||||||||||
| Vocational school, junior college or higher | 56 | 63.89 | 0.046 | 4.13 | 0.116 | 4.54 | 0.010 | 44.30 | 0.164 | 55.29 | 0.006 | 46.14 | 0.799 |
| High school or lower | 65 | 57.92 | 4.96 | 6.12 | 41.61 | 50.89 | 45.74 | ||||||
| Financial difficulties | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 45 | 57.31 | 0.082 | 5.56 | 0.004 | 6.73 | 0.001 | 40.18 | 0.034 | 50.56 | 0.038 | 43.28 | 0.008 |
| No | 76 | 62.68 | 3.99 | 4.59 | 44.44 | 54.32 | 47.49 | ||||||
| Marital status | |||||||||||||
| Married | 84 | 61.24 | 0.580 | 4.67 | 0.593 | 5.23 | 0.432 | 43.43 | 0.377 | 52.36 | 0.218 | 45.77 | 0.765 |
| Single | 37 | 59.43 | 4.36 | 5.76 | 41.55 | 54.20 | 46.28 | ||||||
| Living with family | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 102 | 61.07 | 0.555 | 4.70 | 0.269 | 5.18 | 0.113 | 43.24 | 0.365 | 52.79 | 0.710 | 45.55 | 0.268 |
| No | 19 | 58.63 | 3.89 | 6.53 | 40.80 | 53.63 | 47.93 | ||||||
| Child (ren) | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 96 | 61.26 | 0.454 | 4.35 | 0.105 | 5.08 | 0.053 | 43.23 | 0.451 | 53.20 | 0.505 | 46.59 | 0.095 |
| No | 25 | 58.48 | 5.41 | 6.56 | 41.41 | 51.86 | 43.38 | ||||||
| Employment | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 62 | 62.95 | 0.121 | 4.46 | 0.653 | 5.05 | 0.262 | 44.11 | 0.188 | 54.28 | 0.086 | 45.47 | 0.552 |
| No | 59 | 58.31 | 4.69 | 5.75 | 41.54 | 51.49 | 46.40 | ||||||
| Self-disclosure | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 94 | 61.71 | 0.201 | 4.25 | 0.021 | 4.97 | 0.011 | 42.96 | 0.841 | 53.59 | 0.126 | 45.91 | 0.978 |
| No | 27 | 57.11 | 5.70 | 6.85 | 42.49 | 50.60 | 45.97 | ||||||
| Number of types of support available | |||||||||||||
| 0-1 | 9 | 55.00 | 0.379 | 4.11 | 0.183 | 7.78 | 0.015 | 40.38 | 0.444 | 53.51 | 0.129 | 46.91 | 0.937 |
| 2-3 | 33 | 59.00 | 5.36 | 6.12 | 41.39 | 50.25 | 45.78 | ||||||
| 4 | 79 | 62.04 | 4.29 | 4.81 | 43.75 | 53.97 | 45.88 | ||||||
CD-RISC: Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale; HADS: Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale; SF-12: The MOS 12 Item Short-Form Health Survey
Table 4.
Disease-related factors related to resilience, anxiety/depression, and QOL (n=121)
| Factors | n | CD-RISC | HADS | SF-12 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resilience | P | Anxiety | P | Depression | P | Physical health | P | Menta healthl | P | Role-social health | P | ||
| Metastasis | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 92 | 58.98 | 0.041 | 4.69 | 0.439 | 5.76 | 0.032 | 42.15 | 0.201 | 52.25 | 0.140 | 45.63 | 0.499 |
| No | 29 | 66.10 | 4.21 | 4.21 | 45.08 | 55.06 | 46.87 | ||||||
| Surgery | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 81 | 58.60 | 0.047 | 4.66 | 0.648 | 5.57 | 0.412 | 42.94 | 0.906 | 52.59 | 0.556 | 45.58 | 0.524 |
| No | 40 | 64.90 | 4.40 | 5.03 | 42.69 | 53.61 | 46.64 | ||||||
| Comorbidity | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 53 | 60.81 | 0.941 | 4.82 | 0.416 | 5.68 | 0.409 | 41.23 | 0.142 | 52.19 | 0.430 | 46.89 | 0.277 |
| No | 68 | 60.59 | 4.38 | 5.16 | 44.12 | 53.49 | 45.18 | ||||||
| Number of regimen changes | |||||||||||||
| 0 | 70 | 60.86 | 0.985 | 4.42 | 0.627 | 5.10 | 0.468 | 43.34 | 0.343 | 53.95 | 0.327 | 46.10 | 0.847 |
| 1 | 32 | 60.25 | 5.00 | 6.00 | 40.63 | 51.29 | 46.18 | ||||||
| 2 or more | 19 | 60.79 | 4.42 | 5.42 | 44.82 | 51.89 | 44.88 | ||||||
| Symptoms | |||||||||||||
| Poor appetite | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 64 | 58.48 | 0.119 | 5.06 | 0.048 | 5.94 | 0.060 | 41.18 | 0.068 | 51.12 | 0.018 | 44.04 | 0.010 |
| No | 57 | 63.16 | 4.02 | 4.77 | 44.74 | 54.95 | 48.04 | ||||||
| Nausea | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 46 | 59.04 | 0.392 | 5.11 | 0.112 | 5.80 | 0.295 | 41.56 | 0.301 | 50.34 | 0.012 | 44.22 | 0.085 |
| No | 75 | 61.69 | 4.24 | 5.13 | 43.65 | 54.51 | 46.98 | ||||||
| Hair loss | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 39 | 59.92 | 0.726 | 4.34 | 0.546 | 5.15 | 0.603 | 39.81 | 0.030 | 53.56 | 0.588 | 46.41 | 0.671 |
| No | 82 | 61.05 | 4.68 | 5.50 | 44.30 | 52.62 | 45.70 | ||||||
| Peripheral neuropathy | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 84 | 60.42 | 0.787 | 4.67 | 0.593 | 5.60 | 0.316 | 41.76 | 0.090 | 52.66 | 0.630 | 45.24 | 0.185 |
| No | 37 | 61.30 | 4.36 | 4.92 | 45.35 | 53.52 | 47.48 | ||||||
| Poor concentration | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 58 | 59.41 | 0.412 | 5.54 | <0.001 | 6.36 | 0.002 | 40.67 | 0.031 | 50.33 | 0.002 | 43.93 | 0.013 |
| No | 63 | 61.86 | 3.68 | 4.49 | 44.86 | 55.31 | 47.76 | ||||||
| Pain | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 76 | 58.74 | 0.090 | 4.97 | 0.048 | 5.93 | 0.021 | 40.63 | 0.003 | 51.23 | 0.006 | 46.02 | 0.880 |
| No | 45 | 63.98 | 3.89 | 4.47 | 46.62 | 55.78 | 45.77 | ||||||
| Fatigue | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 93 | 58.44 | 0.006 | 4.95 | 0.009 | 5.98 | <0.001 | 41.34 | 0.004 | 51.31 | <0.001 | 45.29 | 0.137 |
| No | 28 | 68.14 | 3.33 | 3.43 | 47.88 | 58.27 | 48.04 | ||||||
| Abdominal fullness | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 63 | 59.76 | 0.521 | 4.83 | 0.320 | 6.00 | 0.039 | 40.94 | 0.040 | 51.25 | 0.031 | 45.97 | 0.951 |
| No | 58 | 61.69 | 4.30 | 4.72 | 44.93 | 54.74 | 45.88 | ||||||
| Diarrhea | |||||||||||||
| Yes | 80 | 60.43 | 0.808 | 4.59 | 0.923 | 5.55 | 0.468 | 42.78 | 0.910 | 52.55 | 0.523 | 45.00 | 0.098 |
| No | 41 | 61.20 | 4.54 | 5.07 | 43.01 | 53.65 | 47.73 | ||||||
CD-RISC: Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale; HADS: Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale; SF-12: The MOS 12 Item Short-Form Health Survey
Creation of a causal model
Based on the correlation of resilience with anxiety and depression and QOL, as well as the results of the t-tests [Tables 3 and 4], a causal model was created using the factors that exhibited relationships [Figure 2].
Figure 2.
Resilience model for patients with colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy. χ2 = 50.706, df = 50, goodness of fit = 0.94, adjusted goodness of fit = 0.906, comparative fit index = 0.997, root mean square error of approximation = 0.011. Arrows indicate the direction of influence. *P < 0.05, †P < 0.01, ‡P < 0.001. e1–e6: Error variable
The goodness of fit (GFI) of the model was GFI = 0.94, adjusted GFI = 0.906, comparative fit index = 0.997, and root mean square error of approximation = 0.011. Significant differences were found in all pass coefficients [Table 5]. Resilience had a negative effect on anxiety (β = −0.18, P = 0.032) and depression (β = −0.16, P = 0.024). It also had a positive effect on mental health (β = 0.32, P < 0.001). Anxiety had a positive effect on depression (β = 0.48, P < 0.001). Depression had a negative effect on physical health (β = −0.18, P = 0.04), mental health (β = −0.41, P < 0.001), and role-social health (β = −0.28, P = 0.001).
Table 5.
Path factor of the specified model (Fig. 3)
| Non-standardized coefficients | Standardized cofficients | Standard errors | P | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resilience | <--- | Metastasis | -7.125 | -0.186 | 3.439 | 0.038 |
| Anxiety | <--- | Self-disclosure | 1.395 | -0.202 | 0.572 | 0.015 |
| Anxiety | <--- | Resilience | -0.031 | -0.178 | 0.015 | 0.032 |
| Anxiety | <--- | Poor concentration | 1.824 | 0.317 | 0.477 | ‡ |
| Depression | <--- | Resilience | -0.032 | -0.159 | 0.014 | 0.024 |
| Depression | <--- | Anxiety | 0.548 | 0.481 | 0.082 | ‡ |
| Depression | <--- | Gender | -1.477 | -0.222 | 0.461 | 0.001 |
| Depression | <--- | Social support | -0.872 | -0.167 | 0.363 | 0.016 |
| Depression | <--- | Fatigue | 1.309 | 0.169 | 0.545 | 0.016 |
| Mental Health | <--- | Depression | -1.094 | -0.411 | 0.204 | ‡ |
| Role-social Health | <--- | Depression | -0.734 | -0.283 | 0.227 | 0.001 |
| Physical Health | <--- | Depression | -0.599 | -0.184 | 0.291 | 0.04 |
| Mental Health | <--- | Resilience | 0.172 | 0.324 | 0.041 | ‡ |
| Physical Health | <--- | Fatigue | -5.004 | -0.198 | 2.262 | 0.027 |
**P<0.05, †P<0.01, ‡P<0.001
Influencing factors included in the model were cancer metastasis, gender, number of types of social support, self-disclosure of having cancer, fatigue, and poor concentration.
Resilience was negatively affected by cancer metastasis (β = −0.19, P = 0.038), and resilience scores were lower when metastasis was present. Anxiety was negatively affected by self-disclosure of cancer (β = −0.20, P = 0.015) and positively affected by poor concentration (β = 0.32, P < 0.001). Anxiety scores were significantly lower when cancer self-disclosure was possible and significantly higher when poor concentration was present. Depression was influenced by gender, number of types of support, and fatigue (fatigue). Males had significantly higher depression scores than females (β = −0.22, P = 0.001). The presence of more types of social support in terms of instrumental/emotional/informational/evaluative support had a negative impact on depression (β = −0.17, P = 0.016). In addition, fatigue had a positive effect on depression (β = 0.17, P = 0.016), and depression scores were significantly higher when fatigue was present.
Discussion
This study clarified the causal relationship between resilience and anxiety and depression and QOL in colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. It also developed a causal model that included individual and disease-related factors affecting the three main variables (i.e., resilience, anxiety/depression, and QOL).
Relationship between resilience and anxiety/depression, and quality of life, and factors affecting resilience
The results of this study showed that resilience negatively affected anxiety and depression, and depression negatively affected QOL in colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. As shown in Figure 2, the causal relationship between resilience and anxiety and depression and QOL was identified, and resilience was found to be a predictor of mental health on the anxiety and depression and QOL subscales. Therefore, it can be said that resilience plays an important role as a predictor of mental health and QOL in colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Moreover, since previous studies have only reported that resilience is a predictor of anxiety, depression, and QOL in patients with illnesses such as breast, lung, or gastric cancer,[21,42,43,44] the findings of this study are unique. These findings suggest that it is important to enhance resilience in order to improve and maintain the mental health and QOL of colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.
The mean resilience score of the participants in this study was 60.7 (SD: 16.4). Previous studies reported that resilience scores of the general population, when CD-RISC was used, was 80.7,[36] and a meta-analysis of resilience scores using CD-RISC for cancer patients was 72.0.[24]
Resilience of the participants in this study was negatively affected by the presence of metastases. Cancer patients with metastasis have to undergo chemotherapy for a long period of time, until treatment is successful, which negatively affects their motivation to seek treatment. Moreover, patients with metastatic cancer experience high levels of physical and mental distress due to the prolonged side effects and symptoms associated with the disease and continued chemotherapy.[45,46] On the other hand, patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy combined with surgery perceive the treatment positively. For this reason, I believe that differences in the pathology and course of treatment affected the resilience. Therefore, nurses are required to anticipate and intervene in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer who have metastases and are undergoing chemotherapy. Therefore, by focusing on patients with metastatic colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy and clarifying the relationship between resilience and anxieties, depression, and quality of life, as well as the factors that influence these relationships, we can identify predictors that are characteristic of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and suggest specific assistance. I believe that this study will be useful in identifying predictive factors characteristic of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and in suggesting specific assistance.
Factors affecting anxiety/depression and quality of life
The anxiety of the participants in this study was negatively affected by self-disclosure of cancer and the findings of this study are unique. Self-disclosure of cancer helps them gain new support, reduce loneliness, and feel closer to acquaintance by sharing their experience with cancer diagnosis and treatment.[47] Therefore, this study’s findings suggest that cancer patients can mitigate their anxiety by self-disclosure of cancer. In addition, anxiety was positively affected by poor concentration, which is known to be caused by chemo brain and fatigue, which are side effects of chemotherapy.[48] Patients’ perception of changes between, before, and after treatment, for example, taking longer to do household chores, compared to before led to increased anxiety.
The participants’ depression was affected by the number of types of social support and fatigue. In previous studies, the amount of social support was found to have a negative effect on depression in breast cancer patients.[49]
In this study, regarding social support, which includes the four functions of instrumental/emotional/informational/evaluative support, it was found that patients who had more of these functions had lower depression. Therefore, not only the amount of support but also the social support from various aspects is important for reducing depression. Previous studies have reported that fatigue is more strongly associated with depression than other physical symptoms.[50] In the present study, fatigue was found to have a positive effect on depression. However, it had a negative effect on physical health, a subscale of q QOL. Since fatigue is considered to be one of the most difficult physical symptoms to control, managing it is the key to preventing or reducing depression and improving physical health.[51]
Strengths and limitations
Resilience, anxiety and depression, and QOL are affected differently by cancer type and treatment method. Therefore, limiting the number of subjects and treatment methods in this study allowed an analysis of the relevant factors suited to the subjects and provided suggestions for detailed assistance. In addition, the inclusion of general as well as university hospitals to the target facilities supplemented the generalization of the results. However, the limitation of this study is that the sample size is smaller than other quantitative studies.
Conclusions
This study shows that resilience in colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy helps alleviate anxiety and depression and improve QOL. This study identified predictors of resilience, anxiety and depression, and QOL. To prevent or reduce anxiety and depression and maintain QOL in colorectal cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, it is important to provide support to enhance resilience. It is also necessary to assess patients’ metastasis, self-disclosure of cancer, types of social support, and physical symptoms before receiving chemotherapy. Subsequently, it is also important to explore the interventions that help increase the resilience of such patients.
Financial support and sponsorship
The work was supported by Grants of the Osaka Cancer Society.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgments
I wish to express our appreciation to the patients and staff of participating hospitals for their cooperation in conducting this study. This study is a part of a doctoral dissertation written by the author at the Graduate School of Nursing, Osaka Medical University, in Japan. I also wish to thank Professor Kumi Suzuki for valuable advice from research planning to writing the dissertation. I further wish to express my appreciation to Associate Professors Yuri Ito and Emiko Kusano, Professor Norito Yasuda for advice on the analysis, and Professor Yuko Tomari of Kansai Medical University for advice on the research planning.
References
- 1.Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration. Fitzmaurice C, Allen C, Barber RM, Barregard L, Bhutta ZA, et al. Global, regional, and national cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life-years for 32 cancer groups, 1990 to 2015: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:524–48. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.5688. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.National Cancer Center. [Last accessed on 2020 Dec 28]. Available from: https://ganjoho.jp/reg_stat/statistics/stat/summary.html .
- 3.Allemani C, Matsuda T, Di Carlo V, Harewood R, Matz M, Nikšić M, et al. Global surveillance of trends in cancer survival: Analysis of individual records for 37,513,025 patients diagnosed with one of 18 cancers during 2000–2014 from 322 population-based registries in 71 countries (CONCORD-3) Lancet. 2018;391:1023–75. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)33326-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Loupakis F, Cremolini C, Masi G, Lonardi S, Zagonel V, Salvatore L, et al. Initial therapy with FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1609–18. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1403108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Yamazaki K, Nagase M, Tamagawa H, Ueda S, Tamura T, Murata K, et al. Randomized phase III study of bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI and bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (WJOG4407G) Ann Oncol. 2016;27:1539–46. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdw206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Bakitas MA. Background noise: The experience of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. Nurs Res. 2007;56:323–31. doi: 10.1097/01.NNR.0000289503.22414.79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Dault R, Rousseau MP, Beaudoin A, Frenette MA, Lemay F, Beauchesne MF. Impact of oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy in patients with colorectal cancer: A prospective evaluation at a single institution. Curr Oncol. 2016;23:e65–9. doi: 10.3747/co.23.2780. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Medeiros M, Oshima CT, Forones NM. Depression and anxiety in colorectal cancer patients. J Gastrointest Cancer. 2010;41:179–84. doi: 10.1007/s12029-010-9132-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Graça Pereira M, Figueiredo AP, Fincham FD. Anxiety, depression, traumatic stress and quality of life in colorectal cancer after different treatments: A study with Portuguese patients and their partners. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2012;16:227–32. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2011.06.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Markovitz LC, Drysdale NJ, Bettencourt BA. The relationship between risk factors and medication adherence among breast cancer survivors: What explanatory role might depression play? Psychooncology. 2017;26:2294–9. doi: 10.1002/pon.4362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Kyranou M, Steven M, Laura BD, Puntillo K, Bradley EA, Abrams G, et al. Differences in depression, anxiety, and quality of life between women with and without breast pain prior to breast cancer surgery. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2013;17:190–5. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2012.06.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Brown Johnson CG, Brodsky JL, Cataldo JK. Lung cancer stigma, anxiety, depression, and quality of life. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2014;32:59–73. doi: 10.1080/07347332.2013.855963. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Ristevska-Dimitrovska G, Stefanovski P, Smichkoska S, Raleva M, Dejanova B. Depression and resilience in breast cancer patients. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2015;3:661. doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2015.119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Harms CA, Cohen L, Pooley JA, Chambers SK, Galvão DA, Newton RU. Quality of life and psychological distress in cancer survivors: The role of psycho‐social resources for resilience. Psychooncology. 2019;28:271–7. doi: 10.1002/pon.4934. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Rutter M. Resilience: Some conceptual considerations. J Adolesc Health. 1993;14:626. doi: 10.1016/1054-139x(93)90196-v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Sharpley CF, Bitsika V, Wootten AC, Christie DR. Predictors of depression in prostate cancer patients: A comparison of psychological resilience versus pre-existing anxiety and depression. J Mens Health. 2014;11:115–20. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Fradelos EC, Papathanasiou IV, Veneti A, Daglas A, Christodoulou E, Zyga S, et al. Psychological distress and resilience in women diagnosed with breast cancer in Greece. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2017;18:2545–50. doi: 10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.9.2545. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Ristevska-Dimitrovska G, Filov I, Rajchanovska D, Stefanovski P, Dejanova B. Resilience and quality of life in breast cancer patients. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2015;3:727. doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2015.128. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Zahid N, Khalid W, Ahmad K, Bhamani SS, Azam I, Asad N, et al. Resilience and quality of life (QoL) of head and neck cancer and brain tumour survivors in Pakistan: An analytical cross-sectional study protocol. BMJ Open. 2019;9:1–6. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029084. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Li MY, Yang YL, Liu L, Wang L. Effects of social support, hope and resilience on quality of life among Chinese bladder cancer patients: A cross-sectional study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14:73. doi: 10.1186/s12955-016-0481-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Zhang H, Zhao Q, Cao P, Ren G. Resilience and quality of life: Exploring the mediator role of social support in patients with breast cancer. Med Sci Monit. 2017;23:5969–79. doi: 10.12659/MSM.907730. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Solano JP, da Silva AG, Soares IA, Ashmawi HA, Vieira JE. Resilience and hope during advanced disease: A pilot study with metastatic colorectal cancer patients. BMC Palliat Care. 2016;15:70. doi: 10.1186/s12904-016-0139-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Dong X, Li G, Liu C, Kong L, Fang Y, Kang X, et al. The mediating role of resilience in the relationship between social support and posttraumatic growth among colorectal cancer survivors with permanent intestinal ostomies: A structural equation model analysis. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2017;29:47–52. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2017.04.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Tamura S, Suzuki K, Ito Y, Fukawa A. Factors related to the resilience and mental health of adult cancer patients: A systematic review. Support Care Cancer. 2021:29. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05943-7. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05943-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Eicher M, Matzka M, Dubey C, White K. Resilience in adult cancer care: An integrative literature review. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2015;42:E13–6. doi: 10.1188/15.ONF.E3-E16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Sharpley CF, Christie DR, Bitsika V, Agnew LL, Andronicos NM, McMillan ME, et al. Limitations in the inverse association between psychological resilience and depression in prostate cancer patients experiencing chronic physiological stress. Psychooncology. 2018;27:223–8. doi: 10.1002/pon.4496. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Hu T, Xiao J, Peng J, Kuang X, He B. Relationship between resilience, social support as Ill as anxiety/depression of lung cancer patients: A cross-sectional observation study. J Cancer Res Ther. 2018;14:72–7. doi: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_849_17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Tsunoda A, Nakao K, Hiratsuka K, Yasuda N, Shibusawa M, Kusano M. Anxiety, depression and quality of life in colorectal cancer patients. Int J Clin Oncol. 2005;10:411–7. doi: 10.1007/s10147-005-0524-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Aminisani N, Nikbakht H, Jafarabadi MA, Shamshirgaran SM. Depression, anxiety, and health related quality of life among colorectal cancer survivors. J Gastrointest oncol. 2017;8:81. doi: 10.21037/jgo.2017.01.12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Mols F, Schoormans D, de Hingh I, Oerlemans S, Husson O. Symptoms of anxiety and depression among colorectal cancer survivors from the population-based, longitudinal PROFILES registry: Prevalence, predictors, and impact on quality of life. Cancer. 2018;124:2621–8. doi: 10.1002/cncr.31369. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Tung HY, Chao TB, Lin YH, Wu SF, Lee HY, Ching CY, et al. Depression, fatigue, and QoL in colorectal cancer patients during and after treatment. Istern J Nurs Res. 2016;38:893–908. doi: 10.1177/0193945916630256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Cohen M, Baziliansky S, Beny A. The association of resilience and age in individuals with colorectal cancer: An exploratory cross-sectional study. J Geriatr Oncol. 2014;5:33–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2013.07.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Loehlin JC, Beaujean AA. New York: Taylor Francis; 2016. Latent Variable Models: An Introduction to Factor, Path, and Structural Equation Analysis. [Google Scholar]
- 34.Siddiqui K. Heuristics for sample size determination in multivariate statistical techniques. World Appl Sci J. 2013;27:285–7. [Google Scholar]
- 35.Structural Equation Modeling Using AMOS An Introduction. [Last accessed on 2020 Nov 03]. Available from: https://stat.utexas.edu/images/SSC/Site/AMOS_Tutorial.pdf .
- 36.Connor KM, Davidson JR. Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor-Davidson resilience scale (CD‐RISC) Depress Anxiety. 2003;18:76–82. doi: 10.1002/da.10113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67:361–70. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Higashi A, Yashiro H, Kiyota K, Inokuchi H, Hatta H, Fujita K, et al. Validation of the hospital anxiety and depression scale in a gastro-intestinal clinic. Nihon Shokakibyo Gakkai Zasshi. 1996;93:884–92. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Ware J, Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-item short-form health survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34:220–33. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Fukuhara S, Suzukamo Y. Manual of SF-36v2 Japanese Version. Kyoto, Japan: iHope International Inc; 2004. p. 2019. [Google Scholar]
- 41.House JS. Work Stress and Social Support. USA: Addison-Isley Series on Occupational Stress; 1983. [Google Scholar]
- 42.Tu PC, Yeh DC, Hsieh HC. Positive psychological changes after breast cancer diagnosis and treatment: The role of trait resilience and coping styles. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2020;38:156–70. doi: 10.1080/07347332.2019.1649337. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Ye ZJ, Qiu HZ, Li PF, Liang MZ, Zhu YF, Zeng Z, et al. Predicting changes in quality of life and emotional distress in Chinese patients with lung, gastric, and colon-rectal cancer diagnoses: The role of psychological resilience. Psychooncology. 2017;26:829–35. doi: 10.1002/pon.4237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Matzka M, Mayer H, Köck-Hódi S, Moses-Passini C, Dubey C, Jahn P, et al. Relationship between resilience, psychological distress and physical activity in cancer patients: A cross-sectional observation study. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0154496. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154496. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Krigel S, Myers J, Befort C, Krebill H, Klemp J. ‘Cancer changes everything!’ Exploring the lived experiences of women with metastatic breast cancer. Int J Palliat Nurs. 2014;20:334–42. doi: 10.12968/ijpn.2014.20.7.334. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Mosher CE, Johnson C, Dickler M, Norton L, Massie MJ, DuHamel K. Living with metastatic breast cancer: A qualitative analysis of physical, psychological, and social sequelae. Breast J. 2013;19:285–92. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Najmabadi KM, Azarkish F, Latifnejadroudsari R, Shandiz FH, Aledavood SA, Kermani AT, et al. Self-disclosure of breast cancer diagnosis by Iranian women to friends and colleagues. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15:2879–82. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.6.2879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Mitchell T, Turton P. ‘Chemobrain’: Concentration and memory effects in people receiving chemotherapy – A descriptive phenomenological study. Eur J Cancer Care. 2011;20:539–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2011.01244.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Thompson T, Pérez M, Kreuter M, Margenthaler J, Colditz G, Jeffe DB. Perceived social support in African American breast cancer patients: Predictors and effects. Soc Sci Med. 2017;192:134–42. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.09.035. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Weber D, O’Brien K. Cancer and cancer-related fatigue and the interrelationships with depression, stress, and inflammation. J Evid Based Complementary Altern Med. 2017;22:502–12. doi: 10.1177/2156587216676122. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.LoBiondo-Wood G, Brown CG, Knobf M, Lyon D, Mallory G, Mitchell SA, et al. Priorities for oncology nursing research: The 2013 national survey. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2014;41:67–76. doi: 10.1188/14.ONF.67-76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]