Cited by 585Cancer survivorship and careChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeWomen's cancer prevention and management

Quality of life among long-term breast cancer survivors: A systematic review

Open access
Mols, Floortje, Vingerhoets, Ad J.J.M., Coebergh, Jan Willem, van de Poll-Franse, Lonneke V.·2005·European Journal of Cancer

Abstract

The aim of this study was to review the literature on quality of life among long-term survivors of breast cancer and identify the specific aspects of quality of life that were affected in these survivors. We also describe predictors of quality of life. Published research reports were included if they described the quality of life of breast cancer survivors diagnosed at least five years earlier. The methodological quality of the 10 selected studies, conducted between 1997 and 2004, was high according to a list of predefined criteria. Most studies reported that long-term survivors of breast cancer experienced good overall quality of life. However, almost all studies reported that breast cancer survivors experienced some specific problems (e.g., a thick and painful arm and problems with sexual functioning). The current medical condition, amount of social support and current income level were strong positive predictors of quality of life, and the use of adjuvant chemotherapy emerged as a negative predictor. More research on the specific medical and psychosocial needs of survivors is needed in order to be able to design appropriate intervention studies. If anything, this review shows that focusing on the long-term effects of breast cancer is important when evaluating the full extent of cancer treatment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejca.2005.05.017

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Diagnosis and treatment of breast and gynaecologic cancers are associated with high rates of often persistent psychological distress and ongoing challenges to quality of life.

    “Diagnosis and treatment of these cancers are associated with high rates of often persistent psychological distress and ongoing challenges to quality of life (QOL) [1,6,9,10,12].”

    From Comparison of the acceptability and benefits of two mindfulness-based interventions in women with breast or gynecologic cancer: a pilot study (2015) · cites this paper as [10]

    Section 3.3 (page unavailable) reports more mild-to-moderate depressive symptoms in some long-term breast cancer survivors than in controls, alongside specific lasting quality-of-life problems. But the review covers breast cancer, not gynaecologic cancers, and says most studies found good overall quality of life; it does not establish high rates of persistent psychological distress across both cancer groups. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using a 14-item standardized checklist.

    “All manuscripts meeting the selection criteria were assessed for their methodological quality, using a 14-item standardized checklist with small modifications as listed in Table 1[9,10].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [9]9. Ashing-Giwa K, Ganz PA, Petersen L. Quality of life of African- American and white long-term breast carcinoma survivors. Cancer 1999, 85, 418-426.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mols, F., Vingerhoets, A. J. J. M., Coebergh, J. W., & van de Poll-Franse, L. V.
Affiliations
  • Tilburg University (NL)
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
Corresponding author
Mols, Floortje
Venue
European Journal of Cancer
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-11
Volume
41
Issue
17
Pages
2613-2619
ISSN
0959-8049 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2127815244
Cited by
585
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 35
FWCI
1.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
Keywords
breast cancer survivors, quality of life, long-term effects of cancer treatment, adjuvant chemotherapy, arm lymphedema, sexual dysfunction, social support, income level, predictors of quality of life
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Survivors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review