Abstract
Background
Aromatase inhibitor (AI)-induced joint pain is a common toxicity of AI treatment. Although many studies have been conducted to examine the occurrence and severity of AI-induced joint pain in breast cancer survivors, none of the studies focused on the Chinese population with breast cancer. Given that the differences in cultural background and the genetic structure between Asians and Caucasians may contribute to different phenotypes of joint pain, this cross-sectional study was therefore conducted to examine the prevalence of AI-induced joint pain among Chinese breast cancer survivors receiving AI treatment and the correlates of pain.
Methods
This cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary hospital in China. Breast cancer survivors undergoing AI treatment were recruited to complete the following questionnaires: a self-designed baseline data form, the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ), the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B). Based on the assessment results of NMQ (if the participant indicated pain in specific body parts), participants were then invited to complete other questionnaires to specifically assess the joint symptoms, including the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ), and the Manchester Foot Pain Disability Questionnaire (MFPDQ). Descriptive analysis was used to analyse participants’ baseline data and the prevalence of pain. Stepwise multiple regression was used to identify the correlates of pain.
Results
Four hundred and ten participants were analysed. According to the NMQ, 71.7% of the participants experienced joint symptoms in at least one joint, and the most frequently mentioned joint was knee (39.0%). The diagram in BPI indicated that 28.0% of the participants had the worst pain around knees. In patients with knee pain, the mean OKS score was 40.46 ± 6.19. The sub-scores of BPI for pain intensity and pain interference were 1.30 ± 1.63 and 1.24 ± 1.79, respectively. Patients’ poorer physical well-being/functioning, previous use of AI treatment, presence of osteoarthritis, and receiving of physiotherapy were identified as four common correlates of greater severity of pain and pain interference (p < 0.05).
Conclusions
Chinese breast cancer survivors can experience joint pain at various locations, particularly knees. In addition to increasing the use of interventions for pain alleviation, a comprehensive assessment of survivors’ conditions such as physical functioning, history of AI treatment, and presence of osteoarthritis should be emphasized to identify survivors who need more attention and tailored interventions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The GLOBOCAN 2020 estimated that female breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer worldwide, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases in 2020 [1]. A similar trend was found in China, where breast cancer is the most common cancer in women, with an incidence of 42.67 per 100,000 [2]. Oestrogen exposure is an important cause of breast cancer, and approximately 60–70% of the patients with breast cancer are oestrogen receptor (ER) positive [3]. Although deaths related to breast cancer have been decreasing due to the advances in screening and treatments, breast cancer survivors still experience a wide range of side effects caused by pharmacological treatment [4]. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are an effective and commonly used drug in treating ER-positive breast cancer [3, 4]. However, AIs can cause many side effects such as joint pain, cardiovascular events, and a decrease in cognition functioning [3]. Of which, joint pain has emerged as a major side effect of AI treatment, and it can impact not only the survivors’ lifestyles but also lead to AI discontinuation [4].
Although a full understanding of the multifactorial biological mechanism underlying AI-induced joint pain is still lacking [5], a consensus regarding the key features of AI-induced joint pain has been achieved: it happens in breast cancer patients who are currently receiving AI treatment, the joint pain happened or worsened since the AI treatment, and the pain can be improved within 2 weeks after interruption of AIs but returns upon resuming AIs [6]. It has been demonstrated that approximately 50% of the breast cancer survivors receiving AI treatment experience joint pain within the first half-year of treatment, and up to 20% of those survivors tend to discontinue due to the joint pain [7,8,9]. Early discontinuation of the AI treatment can further increase the likelihood of recurrence and thus decrease the survival time of survivors [10]. A cohort study indicated that non-adherence to endocrine therapy including AI treatment can increase the risk of recurrence by up to 71% and double the risk of all-cause death [11].
Recent pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics suggested that the genetic and genomic variation at the population level is associated with the drug metabolism of and drug response to AIs, which may contribute to variability in the phenotype (e.g. occurrence, severity) of joint pain [12]. A full understanding of the phenotype and pre-treatment associates of AI-induced joint pain in breast cancer survivors can contribute to enhanced symptom monitoring and management programmes, as well as more tailored and specific healthcare services or interventions [13]. Many studies [14,15,16,17,18] have been conducted to examine the occurrence and severity of AI-induced joint pain, as well as the correlates of AI-induced joint pain in breast cancer survivors. One study [14] on White breast cancer patients reported that 52% of them experienced AI-induced joint pain, and their joint pain was associated with not only treatment-related factors (e.g. duration of AI treatment and history of chemotherapy) but also genetic factors (the nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) rs11648233 within the HSD17B2 gene). None of the studies focused on the Chinese population with breast cancer. Besides, a systematic review [18] reported that some methodological limitations were found in the previous cross-sectional studies, for example, unclear descriptions of the study settings, participants, and statistical methods, which can affect the reliability and generalizability of the study findings in other contexts. Pain is a very complex experience that is associated with different factors, including not only the disease and treatment itself but also individuals’ own characteristics such as their sociocultural background [19]. The genetic structure between Asians and Caucasians is different [20], which may contribute to different phenotypes of joint pain such as the prevalence and the severity of pain. It is therefore inappropriate to develop healthcare services or interventions for Chinese patients that are directly based on the research evidence generated from other ethnicities. Hence, this cross-sectional study was conducted to examine the prevalence and relevant correlates of AI-induced joint pain among Chinese breast cancer survivors undergoing AI treatment.
Methods
Study design
The study was a cross-sectional study conducted in a tertiary hospital in China from April 2019 to January 2021. A pre-print version of this manuscript is available at https://assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-1390711/v1/e6c693d2-e817-4efa-b7fb-4040dd0555bb.pdf?c=1646771430.
Sample and sample size calculation
Inclusion criteria include (1) adult women with a confirmed breast cancer diagnosis at stage I, II, or IIIa; (2) had completed different types of cancer chemotherapy and currently undergoing AI treatment for over three months; (3) have a primary school education or above and are able to communicate in Chinese; and (4) agree to participate in the survey with written informed consent.
Sample size was calculated using the formula of n = (Z2 P (1 − P))/d2 (Z = statistic for a level of confidence, P = expected prevalence, and d = precision) [19]. The expected prevalence of joint pain in breast cancer survivors was estimated based on a previous study, where the prevalence of joint pain was 62% [21]. Therefore, a “P” value of 0.62 was utilized. Considering at least 10% of missing value or non-response, the final sample size was estimated as at least 402.
Instruments
Baseline data assessment form
A self-developed form was used to collect participants’ demographic and clinical characteristics such as age, body mass index (BMI), years since last menstrual period, and cancer stage.
Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) Modified Version
The NMQ is specifically designed for assessing musculoskeletal symptoms with well-documented psychometric properties [22]. The first part of the NMQ modified version presents a figure of human body and highlights nine body areas for pain assessment, while the second part was designed for evaluating the presence of pain in the areas and the impact of pain on daily activities [22]. The validated simplified Chinese version of the NMQ was used in this study [23] and the Cronbach’s alpha for the current sample was 0.81.
Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)
The validated simplified Chinese version of BPI was used in this study, which is a commonly used instrument for pain assessment in cancer population [24]. It has 15 items and mainly assesses the locations of pain, the intensity of pain during the past 24 h, and the impact of pain on daily functions [24]. A higher score indicates more severe pain/interference. In this sample, Cronbach’s alpha of pain intensity and pain interference were 0.89 and 0.95, respectively.
Assessment for joint symptoms identified in particular parts of the body
If participants indicated pain in specific body parts in NMQ, they were then invited to complete the following scales to specifically assess the joint symptoms.
Oxford Knee Score (OKS)
The OKS was specifically developed to assess the pain and function in knees [25]. It has 12 items and has been well validated in Chinese [26]. A higher score indicates a better outcome. In this sample, Cronbach’s alpha was 0.90.
Oxford Hip Score (OHS)
The OHS is a 19-item questionnaire for assessing hip pain [27]. A higher score indicates a better outcome. The simplified Chinese version of the OHS was used in this study, with the Cronbach’s alpha of 0.83 in this sample.
Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ)
The Chinese version of the MHQ has 37 items and six dimensions: overall hand function, activities of daily living (ADL), work, pain, aesthetics, and satisfaction assessing [28]. Except for the pain scale, higher scores indicate better performance for all other five scales. The Cronbach’s alpha for this sample was 0.83.
The Manchester Foot Pain Disability Questionnaire (MFPDQ)
The simplified Chinese version of the MFPDQ (19 items) was used in this survey, with the Cronbach’s alpha of 0.92 in this sample.
Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B)
The FACT-B is a specific quality of life (QoL) scale for breast cancer patients. The FACT-General part includes 27 items with four domains including physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being [29]. The part of breast cancer module (BCS) has 10 items [29]. A higher score indicates better well-being. Cronbach’s alpha for the current sample was 0.90.
The 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36)
The SF-36 has 36 items with eight domains: “physical functioning”, “bodily pain”, “role limitation due to physical health problems”, “role limitations due to emotional problems”, “emotional well-being”, “social functioning”, “energy/fatigue”, and “general health perception” ([30], p. 1). A higher score indicates a more favourable health status. Cronbach’s alpha for the current sample was 0.91.
Statistical analysis
SPSS 26.0 was used for data analysis. Descriptive analysis was used to present sample characteristics including demographic and clinical characteristics as well as the characteristics of pain and QoL. Inferential statistics were used to identify the correlates of pain severity and pain interference. For categorical variables such as education level, univariate analysis was conducted to identify the potential significant variables. For continuous variables such as age, correlation analysis was employed to identify the potential significant variables. Prior to the univariate analysis and correlation analysis, normality of the data was examined using Shapiro–Wilk for categorical variables and skewness and kurtosis for continuous variables [31]. According to the results of the normality test, non-parametric tests (three or more groups, Kruskal–Wallis test; two groups, Mann–Whitney test) were utilized for univariate analysis, and Pearson correlation was used for correlation analysis. Variables that showed statistical significance (p < 0.05) in the univariate analysis and correlation analysis were included in the stepwise multiple regression analysis to quantify the unique contribution of each potential variable to the survivors’ joint pain.
Results
Characteristics of the participants
Data from four hundred and ten participants were analysed in this study. The mean age of the participants was 53.87 years (SD = 8.28). All the participants were receiving AI treatment and the mean duration of the AI treatment was 27.31 months (SD = 21.20). All the participants have completed the chemotherapy, with a mean duration of 4.54 months (SD = 1.37). Most participants (83.8%) were postmenstrual women, with the mean years since the last menstrual period being 7.57 years (SD = 6.08). The mean BMI of the participants was 23.93 (SD = 3.22). More than 60% of the participants were at stage II breast cancer. More demographic and clinical characteristics are presented in Table 1.
Joint pain in breast cancer survivors receiving AI treatment
Overall joint symptoms measured by NMQ
Two hundred and ninety-four participants (n = 294/410, 71.7%) experienced joint symptoms for at least one joint. The most frequently mentioned joint was knee (n = 160/410, 39.0%), which was followed by wrists/hand (n = 97/410, 23.7%), shoulders (n = 97/410, 23.7%), and lower back (n = 50/410, 12.2%). More details about other joints are presented in Table 2.
Joint pain in particular locations: knees, hands, feet, and hips
One hundred and fifty-five of the participants who experienced knee symptoms (measured by NMQ) further completed the OKS scale, with the mean OKS total score being 40.46 (SD = 6.19). For the mean score of each OKS item, the lowest score (mean = 2.20) was identified for item 1 (usual pain in the knee) on a 0 to 4 rating scale, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. For the other 11 items regarding trouble in performing daily activities due to knee pain (i.e. walking), the mean score ranged from 3.23 to 3.84. Details about the score of each OKS item are separately reported in another paper [32]. One hundred participants who experienced hand symptoms (measured by NMQ) further completed the MHQ, with the mean score of each subscale being 59.58 (SD = 16.14, overall hand function), 94.07 (SD = 11.04, overall ADL), 70.90 (SD = 25.03, work performance), 24.54 (SD = 21.73, pain), 80.18 (SD = 17.49, aesthetics), and 45.67 (SD = 18.36, satisfaction with hand function). Only 30 and 17 participants completed the MFPDQ and OHS to further assess the pain at the feet and hip, with a mean total score of 13.03 (SD = 9.33) and 39.41 (SD = 5.12), respectively.
Overall joint pain severity and pain interference
The diagram of the BPI indicated that more than half of the participants (n = 229/410, 55.9%) experienced pain in at least one location. One hundred and fifteen participants (n = 115/410, 28.0%) reported that the pain was mainly located around knee, which was followed by the locations around the shoulder (n = 73/410, 17.8%) and wrists and hand (n = 72/410, 17.6%) and low back (n = 41/410, 10.0%). As shown in Table 3, the mean scores for the subscale of pain intensity and pain interference were 1.30 (SD = 1.63) and 1.24 (SD = 1.79), respectively.
Quality of life
The mean total FACT-B score was 115.12 (SD = 16.41). The highest sub-score of SF-36 was physical functioning (86.89 ± 14.61). More details about the score of quality of life are shown in Table 4.
Factors linked to the joint pain severity and pain interference
Univariate analysis
For pain intensity, statistically significant variables of more severity of pain that were identified in univariate analysis were family income, presence of osteoarthritis, duration of daily physical exercise, receiving physiotherapy, and receiving massage (p < 0.05). For pain interference, the following variables were identified as significant variables of greater pain interference, including the presence of osteoarthritis, previous use of AI treatment, duration of daily physical exercise, receiving physiotherapy, and receiving massage (p < 0.05).
Correlation analysis
The correlation analysis indicated that breast cancer survivors’ pain severity was negatively correlated with all the sub-scores and total score of FACT-B (r = − 0.222 ~ − 0.683) and SF-36 (r = − 0.316 ~ − 0.715). Pain interference was positively correlated with age (r = 0.119) and years since the last menstrual period (r = 0.116) but negatively correlated with all the sub-scores of FACT-B (r = − 0.156 ~ − 0.690) and SF-36 (r = − 0.337 ~ − 0.657) (Table 5).
Regression analysis: correlates of joint pain
Regression analysis in Table 6 showed that breast cancer survivors’ poorer bodily pain, poorer physical well-being, receiving physiotherapy, and presence of osteoarthritis were the four important variables in predicting a greater severity of pain (p < 0.05). All those four factors together explained 61.5% of the survivors’ pain severity. For pain interference, the poorer physical well-being/function, poorer bodily pain, presence of osteoarthritis, receiving physiotherapy, previous use of AI treatment, and poorer role limitation due to physical health problems were identified as the important variables in predicting a greater pain interference (p < 0.05). All those identified factors together explained 58.1% of the survivors’ pain interference.
Discussion
Considering the different genetic structures in different ethnicities, understanding the AI-induced joint pain in Chinese breast cancer survivors and its correlates can help clinicians to prioritize tailored health services or interventions for pain relief [11]. According to a systematic review on the prevalence of AI-induced joint pain [18], a very small number of studies (n = 4/21) reported the anatomical location of AI-induced pain. In this sample, the specific locations of the participants’ joint pain were identified, and knee was reported as the most prevalent pain location (39.0%). This finding was supported by a previous study [33], in which knee was reported as the most affected joint of AI treatments with the percentage of 33.1%. For the prevalence of AI-induced joint symptoms in different locations in this sample, the percentages ranged from 4.6 to 39.0% (measured by the NMQ), which were significantly different from other studies (ranging from 20.0 to73.7%) [18]. Such a high heterogeneity might be caused by the variety of instruments used for pain measurement in different studies. Some studies used BPI [34], while some others used instruments like the visual analogue scale [35] and functional assessment of cancer therapy-endocrine subscale (FACT-ES) [36]. These scales have different assessment time frames; for instance, the BPI is an instrument used to assess pain in the past 24 h; however, the FACT-ES assess pain in the past 7 days. The mean score of pain severity in this sample was rated as 1.30, which was lower than a previous study that used the same instrument (BPI) to measure pain of metastatic breast cancer patients (mean = 2.23) [37]. One possible explanation might be that the participants in this study were breast cancer survivors at an early stage and had completed the active anti-cancer treatments including chemotherapy, while pain is more frequent and severe for cancer patients who are at an advanced stage [38]. Besides, the ethnic difference and genetic variations between the study samples in the two studies (the previous study [37] recruited participants in the USA) might also lead to different study findings as genetic variation involved in metabolism of AIs may contribute to the variations in the occurrence and severity of the side effects including joint pain [12].
Survivors’ poorer physical well-being/functioning, previous use of AI treatment, presence of osteoarthritis, and receiving physiotherapy were identified as the common and significant correlates for high level of pain severity and pain interference. AI-induced joint pain can negatively impact survivors’ walking and other physical functions [39]. Previous research evidence indicated that breast cancer survivors who had a poorer physical function of lower extremities, shoulders, and hands since the AI treatment were more likely to report reductions in physical activities [40]. An increasing body of evidence has demonstrated that physical exercise such as walking and strength training can in turn increase the physical and functional well-being of survivors with joint symptoms [41] as well as effectively relieve the joint pain of breast cancer survivors undergoing AI treatment [42]. AI-induced joint pain, poorer physical, and functional well-being, and participation in physical exercise are therefore interrelated to each other, which can help explain why the breast cancer survivors with poorer physical well-being/functioning reported greater severity of pain. However, due to the nature of the cross-sectional study, causality among AI-induced joint symptoms, physical well-being, and participation in physical exercise cannot be determined in this study, which can be further explored in future research via a longitudinal study.
Participants’ AI treatment history was identified as another factor associated with the greater interference of joint pain. In this study, 16.2% of the participants had previously received AI treatment prior to the current course of AI treatment. This study finding can be partly supported by previous study findings that breast cancer survivors who previously received hormone replacement therapy (HRT) were more likely to develop musculoskeletal symptoms than those without previous HRT use [43]. The presence of osteoarthritis was identified as another significant correlate of AI-induced joint pain in this study. The possible explanation might be that both the AI-induced joint pain and osteoarthritis are believed related to oestrogen deprivation which can increase chronic inflammatory conditions and lead to pain particularly in joints [44, 45]. Interestingly, participants who were receiving physiotherapy reported greater severity of pain. However, the study finding should be interpreted with caution, and physiotherapy cannot be concluded as a risk factor for joint pain. According to previous studies, it is common that people use problem-focused coping strategies to deal with problems and distress actively by seeking advice and help from others [46]. Thus, one possible explanation for this finding might be that patients who had more severity of pain were more active regarding help-seeking, and physiotherapy was one of the treatments that they preferred to approach. Whether any biological mechanism/pathways exist between physiotherapy and AI-induced joint pain cannot be concluded through this study but is worthy of further exploration in future studies by adopting some biomarkers [5] such as receptor activator of nuclear factor-kB ligand (RANKL) as the potential indicators.
Implications and limitations
Study findings indicated that, in clinical practice, in addition to increasing the use of interventions for pain alleviation, there is a need to comprehensively assess the clinical characteristic of breast cancer survivors such as previous use of AI treatment and presence of osteoarthritis to identify the target group for more specific attention. Considering the high incidence of pain in the knees and the negative influence of poor physical well-being/functioning on pain, some specific components can be included in the intervention programme to make it more tailored and effective, for example, promoting survivors’ understanding of the importance of physical exercise via health education and providing more upper extremity exercises or low intensity lower extremity exercises. In future research, more studies should be conducted to explore the correlates of AI-induced joint pain in Chinese breast cancer survivors at a genetic level.
This study has some limitations. The study was conducted at one study site using convenience sampling, which might limit its representativeness and the generalizability of the study findings. There might be a risk of over-analysing the results as multiple testing was conducted in this study although only subgroups with relatively adequate sample size were analysed. Although the knee, shoulder, and hand were identified as the top three joint pain locations, further sub-group analyses based on these three locations (e.g. levels of pain in three groups) were not conducted as some patients reported pain at more than two joints which made it difficult to separate the participants into three different groups. Physiotherapy was identified as one of the correlates of joint pain; however, further sub-group analyses based on the types and dose of physiotherapy (e.g. frequency and duration) could not be conducted due to the absence of relevant information. In addition, although most of the participants were postmenopausal patients, there were still a small number of premenopausal or perimenopausal patients who might receive AI treatment in combination with ovarian function suppression; however, relevant treatment information regarding ovarian function suppression in those premenopausal or perimenopausal patients was not collected as a confounding factor to determine to which extent the joint pain was related to the ovarian function suppression.
Conclusion
Chinese breast cancer survivors experienced various types of joint pain, particularly knee pain. The importance of identifying correlates of joint pain such as survivors’ poorer physical functioning, their previous use of AI treatment, and the presence of osteoarthritis should be recognized and assessed comprehensively in clinical practice to identify the target group for more attention as well as to inform the development of individualized health services or interventions.
Data availability
Datasets used and analysed in this study are available from the corresponding author on a reasonable request basis.
References
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F (2021) Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71(3):209–49
Zhang ML, Peng PE, Wu CX, Gong YM, Zhang SW, Chen WQ, Bao PP (2019) Report of breast cancer incidence and mortality in China registry regions, 2008–2012. Chinese J Oncol 41(4):315–20
Chen H, Shao ZM, Yu KD, Xu GZ (2020) Association of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor with cataract risk in postmenopausal women with breast cancer. Ann Trans Med 8(6):342
Raptopoulos Z, Constantinou C (2020) The effect of exercise on the alleviation of side effects induced by aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal breast cancer patients. Curr Oncol Rep 22(11):1–8
Borrie AE, Kim RB (2017) Molecular basis of aromatase inhibitor associated arthralgia: known and potential candidate genes and associated biomarkers. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 13(2):149–156
Niravath P (2013) Aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgia: a review. Ann Oncol 24(6):1443–1449
Arem H, Sorkin M, Cartmel B, Fiellin M, Capozza S, Harrigan M et al (2016) Exercise adherence in a randomized trial of exercise on aromatase inhibitor arthralgias in breast cancer survivors: the Hormones and Physical Exercise (HOPE) study. J Cancer Surviv 10(4):654–662
Irwin ML, Cartmel B, Gross CP, Ercolano E, Li F, Yao X et al (2015) Randomized exercise trial of aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgia in breast cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol 233(10):1104–1111
Fields J, Richardson A, Hopkinson J, Fenlon D (2016) Nordic walking as an exercise intervention to reduce pain in women with aromatase inhibitor associated arthralgia: a feasibility study. J Pain Symptom Manag 52(4):548–559
Hershman DL, Shao T, Kushi LH, Buono D, Tsai WY, Fehrenbacher L, Kwan M, Gomez SL, Neugut AI (2011) Early discontinuation and non-adherence to adjuvant hormonal therapy are associated with increased mortality in women with breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 126(2):529–537
Font R, Espinas JA, Barnadas A, Izquierdo A, Galceran J, Saladie F, Marcos-Gragera R, Torrent A, Manchon-Walsh P, Borras JM (2019) Influence of adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy on disease-free and overall survival: a population-based study in Catalonia, Spain. Breast Cancer Res Treat 175(3):733–740
Zhu Y, Koleck TA, Bender CM, Conley YP (2020) Genetic underpinnings of musculoskeletal pain during treatment with aromatase inhibitors for breast cancer: a biological pathway analysis. Biol Res Nurs 22(2):263–276
Hertz DL, Smith KL, Zong Y, Gersch CL, Pesch AM, Lehman J, Blackford AL, Henry NL, Kidwell KM, Rae JM, Stearns V (2021) Further evidence that OPG rs2073618 is associated with increased risk of musculoskeletal symptoms in patients receiving aromatase inhibitors for early breast cancer. Front Genet 12:826
Romero SA, Su HI, Satagopan J, Li QS, Seluzicki CM, Dries A, DeMichele AM, Mao JJ (2020) Clinical and genetic risk factors for aromatase inhibitor-associated arthralgia in breast cancer survivors. Breast 1(49):48–54
Hertz DL, Henry NL, Rae JM (2017) Germline genetic predictors of aromatase inhibitor concentrations, estrogen suppression and drug efficacy and toxicity in breast cancer patients. Pharmacogenomics 18(5):481–499
Gupta A, Henry NL, Loprinzi CL (2020) Management of aromatase inhibitor–induced musculoskeletal symptoms. JCO Oncol Pract 16(11):733–739
Leysen L, Beckwée D, Nijs J, Pas R, Bilterys T, Vermeir S, Adriaenssens N (2017) Risk factors of pain in breast cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer 25(12):3607–3643
Beckwée D, Leysen L, Meuwis K, Adriaenssens N (2017) Prevalence of aromatase inhibitor-induced arthralgia in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer 25(5):1673–1686
Naing L, Winn T, Rusli BN (2006) Practical issues in calculating the sample size for prevalence studies. Arch Orofac Sci 1:9–14
Rosenberg NA, Huang L, Jewett EM, Szpiech ZA, Jankovic I, Boehnke M (2010) Genome-wide association studies in diverse populations. Nat Rev Genet 11(5):356–366
Fenlon D, Addington-Hall JM, O’Callaghan AC, Clough J, Nicholls P, Simmonds P (2013) A survey of joint and muscle aches, pain, and stiffness comparing women with and without breast cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage 46(4):523–535
De Barros EN, Alexandre NM (2003) Cross-cultural adaptation of the Nordic musculoskeletal questionnaire. Int Nurs Rev 50(2):101–108
Fang YX, Li SY, Zhang YN, Zhang P, Wu H, Wang DH (2013) Test-retest reliability of Nordic musculoskeletal questionnaire in nurses. Chin J Ind Hyg Occup Dis 31(10):753–758
Wang XS, Mendoza TR, Gao SZ, Cleeland CS (1996) The Chinese version of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI-C): its development and use in a study of cancer pain. Pain 67(2–3):407–416
Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A (1998) Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80(1):63–9
Xie F, Li SC, Lo NN, Yeo SJ, Yang KY, Yeo W, Chong HC, Fong KY, Thumboo J (2007) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Singapore English and Chinese versions of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in knee osteoarthritis patients undergoing total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 15(9):1019–1024
Ostendorf M, Van Stel HF, Buskens E, Schrijvers AJ, Marting LN, Verbout AJ, Dhert WJ (2004) Patient-reported outcome in total hip replacement: a comparison of five instruments of health status. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86(6):801–8
Horng YS, Lin MC, Feng CT, Huang CH, Wu HC, Wang JD (2010) Responsiveness of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire in patients with hand injury. J Hand Surg 35(3):430–436
Webster K, Cella D, Yost K (2003) The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) measurement system: properties, applications, and interpretation. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1(1):79
Ware JE, Sherbourne CD (1992) A 36 item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36): conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30:473–483
Kim HY (2013) Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorat Dent Endodontics 38(1):52–54
Liu XL, Huang YY, Wang T, Molassiotis A, Yao LQ, Huang HQ, Zheng SL, Tan JY (2022 Mar 1) Psychometric assessment of the Chinese version of the Oxford Knee Score in breast cancer survivors experiencing hormone treatment-related knee dysfunction. Asia-Pac J Oncol Nurs 9(3):135–142
Yagata H, Ohtsu H, Komoike Y, Saji S, Takei H, Nakamura T, Ohashi Y, Iwase T, Shimozuma K (2016) Joint symptoms and health-related quality of life in postmenopausal women with breast cancer who completed 5 years of anastrozole. Support Care Cancer 24(2):683–689
Crew KD, Greenlee H, Capodice J, Raptis G, Brafman L, Fuentes D, Sierra A, Hershman DL (2007) Prevalence of joint symptoms in postmenopausal women taking aromatase inhibitors for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:3877–3883
Laroche M, Borg S, Lassoued S, De Lafontan B, Roche H (2007) Joint pain with aromatase inhibitors: abnormal frequency of Sjogren’s syndrome. J Rheumatol 34:2259–2263
Oberguggenberger A, Hubalek M, Sztankay M, Meraner V, Beer B, Oberacher H, Giesinger J, Kemmler G, Egle D, Gamper EM, Sperner-Unterweger B (2011) Is the toxicity of adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy underestimated? Complementary information from patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Breast Cancer Res Treat 128(2):553–561
Shen MJ, Redd WH, Winkel G, Badr H (2014) Associations among pain, pain attitudes, and pain behaviors in patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Behav Med 37(4):595–606
Van Den Beuken-Van MH, Hochstenbach LM, Joosten EA, Tjan-Heijnen VC, Janssen DJ (2016) Update on prevalence of pain in patients with cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Pain Symptom Manag 51(6):1070–1090
Mangani I, Cesari M, Kritchevsky SB, Maraldi C, Carter CS, Atkinson HH, Penninx BW, Marchionni N, Pahor M (2006) Physical exercise and comorbidity. Results from the Fitness and Arthritis in Seniors Trial (FAST). Aging Clin Exp Res 18(5):374–80
Brown JC, Mao JJ, Stricker C, Hwang WT, Tan KS, Schmitz KH (2014) Aromatase inhibitor associated musculoskeletal symptoms are associated with reduced physical activity among breast cancer survivors. Breast J 20(1):22–28
Baillet A, Zeboulon N, Gossec L, Combescure C, Bodin LA, Juvin R, Dougados M, Gaudin P (2010) Efficacy of cardiorespiratory aerobic exercise in rheumatoid arthritis: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arthritis Care Res 62(7):984–992
Lu G, Zheng J, Zhang L (2020) The effect of exercise on aromatase inhibitor-induced musculoskeletal symptoms in breast cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Support Care Cancer 28(4):1587–1596
Sestak I, Cuzick J, Sapunar F, Eastell R, Forbes JF, Bianco AR, Buzdar AU (2008) Risk factors for joint symptoms in patients enrolled in the ATAC trial: a retrospective, exploratory analysis. Lancet Oncol 9(9):866–872
Riggs BL, Melton LJ III (1992) The prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. N Engl J Med 327(9):620–627
Sherwin BB (1996) Hormones, mood, and cognitive functioning in postmenopausal women. Obstet Gynecol 87(2):20S-S26
Zabalegui A, Cabrera E, Navarro M, Cebria MI (2013) Perceived social support and coping strategies in advanced cancer patients. J Res Nurs 18(5):409–420
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the relevant personnel who helped the participant recruitment and all the participants of this study.
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions Collaborative research project between the Hong Kong Polytechnic University School of Nursing and the Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
TW, study design, data analysis and interpretation, and manuscript drafting and revision. YYH, data collection, quality assurance, and data analysis and interpretation. AM, JYT, and XLL, study conception and design, data checking, and manuscript revision. HQH, project coordination and facilitation of data collection. SLZ, study conception and design and manuscript revision. YLQ, facilitation of data collection and analysis, data checking, and manuscript revision. The final version of the manuscript has been read and approved by all authors.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval
Ethical approvals of the cross-sectional study as part of a large clinical research project were obtained from the Human Subjects Ethics Sub-Committee at The Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HSEARS20180509004), the Human Research Ethics Committee at Charles Darwin University (H19011), and the Clinical Trial Research Ethics Committee at the Affiliated Hospital of the Southwest Medical University Hospital (KY2018004).
Consent to participate
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Consent for publication
No data in relation to an individual participant is included in this manuscript.
Completing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, T., Huang, YY., Liu, XL. et al. Prevalence and correlates of joint pain among Chinese breast cancer survivors receiving aromatase inhibitor treatment. Support Care Cancer 30, 9279–9288 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07345-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07345-3