Abstract
Purpose
A significant proportion of cancer patients suffer from chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). This descriptive study aimed to examine patients’ experience of CIPN symptoms, daily limitations, involvement of healthcare professionals, and social support.
Methods
Cross-sectional data have been collected in the Netherlands via a national online questionnaire comprising closed items only (February 2021).
Results
Out of 3752 respondents, 1975 received chemotherapy only (i.e., without targeted therapy) and were therefore included. The majority (71.2%) reported symptoms in both hands and feet (e.g., tingling and loss of sensation or diminished sensation). Participants reported most limitations in household chores, social activities, hobbies, sports, walking, and sleeping and least in family/(taking care of) children, cycling, driving, self-care, eating and drinking, and sexuality and intimacy. Many patients indicated that their healthcare professionals informed them about the possibility of CIPN development before treatment (58.4%), and they paid attention to CIPN during and after treatment (53.1%). However, many patients (43%) reported a lack of information on what to do when CIPN develops. Few participants (22%) visited their general practitioner (GP) for CIPN. In general, patients’ social environments sometimes to always showed empathy to patients.
Conclusions
Symptoms of CIPN are frequently reported and can result in various daily limitations. Support from professionals and peers is crucial in managing CIPN, which is sometimes lacking. Appropriate guidance and support should be provided to patients to decrease the impact of CIPN on daily life. Future research should investigate differences in chemotherapeutic agents and the resulting symptoms and consequences.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
In the Netherlands, 123,672 new patients were diagnosed with cancer in 2021 [1]. The 5-year survival rate currently is 66% and increases by about 1% each year due to improved diagnostics and treatment [2]. The long-term consequences of cancer and its treatment become more prevalent [3], which means that after completion of treatment, patients often face several physical and psychosocial limitations in their daily lives [4,5,6]. Although symptoms usually improve or disappear over time, in some patients, the symptoms remain, leaving them with chronic symptoms [7].
A common long-term consequence of cancer treatment is chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN), which is caused by chemotherapeutic agents like taxanes, platinum compounds, and vinca alkaloids [8, 9]. Peripheral neuropathy is defined by the National Cancer Institute as: “a nerve problem that causes pain, numbness, tingling, swelling, or muscle weakness in different parts of the body”[10], which can be experienced as both painful and nonpainful [11]. The sensations patients experience can vary greatly depending on patient characteristics and perceptions, as well as chemotherapy type and cumulative dose [11]. One month after completion of chemotherapy, almost 80% of cancer survivors experience CIPN, which decreases to 30% after 6 months or longer [3, 8, 12,13,14,15], showing that it is still present in a significant group of patients until late after chemotherapy.
CIPN symptoms can be difficult to deal with and bring significant limitations to patients’ daily lives [16]. Even though patients are often cured of cancer, they might still feel ill due to CIPN as it continuously reminds them of being treated for a life-threatening disease [17]. Earlier research has shown that CIPN strongly interferes with daily life activities, such as walking, hobbies, and relationships [11]. Patients’ identities can change due to CIPN, as they have to make changes in their roles because certain activities can no longer be performed (e.g., performing a job or playing an instrument) [17]. Furthermore, several studies showed that CIPN symptoms can negatively affect physical, social, and emotional areas of life [11, 16, 18, 19]. This shows that CIPN can be a highly relevant limiting side effect of chemotherapy with major consequences on daily life that affects more than just physical functioning. However, to our knowledge, no earlier study examined the specific daily limitations of a broad patient group (e.g., multiple tumor types) with a large sample size.
It is crucial to be aware of the symptoms and daily consequences these patients experience as well as the attempts they make to control or reduce these symptoms since this knowledge enables healthcare professionals to adequately support patients in their needs [11]. Healthcare professionals should assess and address the symptoms of CIPN, weigh the impact on the daily lives of their patients and, subsequently, provide appropriate support to try to preserve their quality of life (QoL) [11]. A Dutch study examined reasons of colorectal cancer patients to visit their GP during the first 5 years of follow-up and concluded that chemotherapy-related symptoms, among which was CIPN, was one of the most frequent reasons [20]. However, to the best of our knowledge, no study has assessed how patients perceive support from healthcare professionals regarding CIPN.
In addition to support from healthcare professionals, support from friends, family, and significant others (i.e., social support) is important [21]. Social support can alleviate several disease aspects, such as coping with cancer and stress [22,23,24,25,26,27], anxiety, depression, and QoL [28]. A recent study among breast cancer patients examined the effect of perceived social support on chemotherapy-related symptoms, including CIPN symptoms [29]. Results showed that these symptoms were identified as less severe when patients reported medium to high perceived social support, compared to those with low perceived social support. However, the relevant CIPN symptoms examined in the study were pain and numbness, whereas CIPN involves a much broader spectrum of symptoms. It is important to examine the social support experienced by cancer survivors. In this study, social support is referred to as the degree of empathy shown by the social environment.
This study aimed to report the experiences of cancer survivors who suffer or had suffered from self-reported CIPN in the Netherlands regarding (1) CIPN symptoms, (2) daily limitations, (3) involvement of healthcare professionals, and (4) social support.
Methods
Study design
A cross-sectional exploratory national online questionnaire study was performed among adult cancer survivors with CIPN in the Netherlands. The questionnaire was initiated and developed by a patient advocate and a researcher from the Dutch Federation of Cancer Patients Organizations (NFK), which is the Dutch umbrella organization that represents 19 cancer patient organizations. A researcher of the PROFILES Registry with scientific expertise in CIPN was also involved in the development of the questionnaire [30]. Furthermore, four patient advocates of two patient organizations (the Dutch breast cancer patient organization (Borstkankervereniging Nederland) and the Dutch gynaecologic cancer patient support group (Stichting Olijf) were involved, three of whom experienced CIPN themselves. These people participated in a workgroup. The workgroup met three times to discuss the content of the questionnaire. In between, the workgroup provided (digital) feedback on draft versions of the questionnaire.
Data collection
The questionnaire was distributed between February 1 and 15, 2021 via www.doneerjeervaring.nl, social media channels and the Doneer Je Ervaring (Donate Your Experience) panel. Additionally, patient organizations have spread invitations for the questionnaire among their members and sponsors via email. Finally, partner organizations like the Dutch Cancer Society and Kanker.nl (Dutch web platform with tailored medical information and peer-support targeted at cancer survivors and relatives [31]) have spread the invitation.
Participants
Patients could participate if they currently suffered from CIPN or had suffered from CIPN in the past. Participants were informed about privacy regulations of the NFK, in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (EU). The Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) did not apply since the study did not include an intervention wherefore ethical approval by the Medical Ethical Review Board was not needed. By completing the questionnaire, patients gave implied consent. Participation was completely online and anonymous.
Questionnaire
The questionnaire started with four closed-ended questions regarding demographics. The remaining 29 closed-ended questions included the following topics: CIPN sensations, daily limitations, attention to CIPN by healthcare professionals, and social support. In questioning the daily limitations, cycling was included as a separate category since cycling is one of the most widely used means of transportation in the Netherlands, making it a daily activity for many people and not just a sports activity.
Statistical analyses
No minimum sample size was calculated prior to the study since this study was explorative in nature. Descriptive statistics were reported. Absolute numbers and percentages were provided for nominal variables. Means and standard deviations were provided for continuous variables. For both items related to satisfaction with the supervision of healthcare professionals, the numerical scores 1 to 10 were recoded to the categorical scores insufficient (1–5), satisfactory to good (6–8), and excellent (9–10). IBM SPSS Statistics version 28 was used for all analyses.
Results
In total, 3752 participants filled in the questionnaire. Participants were included if they had received “chemotherapy only” as treatment. Excluded were participants that received “targeted therapy,” “targeted therapy combined with chemotherapy,” or neither of those. In total, 1975 participants who suffered from of had suffered from CIPN remained and were included in this study. Sociodemographic characteristics of participants are shown in Table 1. Participants had a mean age of 58.8 (SD = 11.3), and 76.1% were female. The most prevalent tumor types were breast (42.8%), blood/lymph (24.2%), colorectal (8.9%), and gynecological cancer (5.8%). In 41% of patients, cancer had been diagnosed more than 5 years ago, followed by 2–5 years ago (34.7%) and less than 2 years ago (23.6%).
CIPN symptoms
More than half of the participants reported to suffer from CIPN for more than 2 years at the time of the questionnaire (55.1%) (Table 2). In 71.2% of the participants, CIPN was present in both foot/feet and hand(s). The most prevalent symptoms in hands were tingling (59.6%) and loss of sensation or diminished sensation (47.7%). Most participants attempted to reduce or control these symptoms by applying self-management strategies (69.9%).
Daily limitations
Figure 1 shows the reported daily limitations due to CIPN. In several types of daily activities, most patients report never experiencing limitations, namely, eating and drinking (69.4%), self-care (58.2%), driving (46%), sexuality and intimacy (45%), cycling (40.8%), and family/(taking care of) children (31.7%). In the remaining categories, limitations were more common. Being “sometimes limited” was most reported by participants for household chores (41.3%), sleep (38.1%), social activities (37.8%), hobbies (35.9%), walking (34.8%), sports (29.0%), and work (25.7%).
Involvement of healthcare professionals
Table 3 shows an overview of hospital healthcare professionals’ and GPs’ attention to CIPN. Regarding hospital healthcare professionals, more than half of the participants (58.4%) reported being informed before treatment about the possibility of the development of CIPN. Also, most participants (72.7%) reported that attention was given to CIPN symptoms during or after treatment. However, many (43%) reported not being informed about what to do when CIPN develops. Satisfaction with attention to CIPN was rated as insufficient by almost a quarter of patients (23%). However, many patients rated it as satisfactory to good (50.3%), or as excellent (26.7%).
Only a small proportion of the participants (22%) reported having visited their GP for CIPN. The majority rated the GP attention to CIPN as satisfactory to good (53.5%), followed by excellent (25.5%). Few indicated this as insufficient (21.2%).
Social support
Participants indicated that partners showed empathy regarding CIPN always (47.6%), often (22.3%), and sometimes (11%) respectively (Fig. 2). Only a small minority reported that their partner never showed empathy (1.8%). This also applied to children (30.2%, 19.8%, 12.2%, 2.1% respectively). In the case of family, friends, and acquaintances, participants reported that empathy was shown often (27.1%), sometimes (25.5%), and always (25.4%), respectively, followed by a small minority of participants who reported that empathy was never shown (3.2%). Most participants indicated “I don’t know/not applicable” for social support regarding colleagues and business associates (55.3%) as well as for employers (60.6%). However, the remaining participants indicated that empathy was shown never (4.2%), sometimes (14.5%), often (12.8%), and always (10.8%) by colleagues and business associates. In the case of employers, participants reported that empathy was shown never (5.5%), sometimes (9.6%), often (10.6%), and always (11%).
Discussion
The aim of this study was to explore patients’ experience of CIPN symptoms, daily limitations, involvement of healthcare professionals, and social support. Although symptoms are mostly experienced in both hands and feet and are often non-painful (e.g., tingling and loss of sensation or diminished sensation), a significant part of participants reports painful symptoms. These symptoms can result in a variety of daily limitations, in which most patients are able to perform activities of daily life (ADL) but seem to experience problems mainly in their roles and social activities. Support and empathy are not always experienced by patients. This mainly applies to support and empathy from healthcare professionals, friends and acquaintances, and work-related peers.
This study has shown that even though most patients with CIPN experience non-painful symptoms, a significant proportion of people (also) experience painful symptoms. Earlier research into colorectal cancer survivors has shown that QoL and physical, role, cognitive, and social functioning are worse in patients with painful CIPN compared with patients with non-painful CIPN [18]. However, the effect of painful versus non-painful CIPN on the daily limitations people experience was not examined in our study. For this reason, and since painful versus non-painful CIPN may involve different impairments and coping mechanisms, research on the difference in daily limitations and appropriate psychosocial interventions between painful and non-painful CIPN is needed.
Results of this study have shown that most patients experience limitations in daily life, which vary in how often people experience them. For example, daily activities such as eating and drinking, self-care, cycling, intimacy and sexuality, and driving are not limiting for a reasonable group of patients. Therefore, some patients seem able to perform the ADL themselves. However, there are also many ADL in which many patients often experience limitations, such as walking, sleeping, and household chores. Previous research has indeed shown that patients with CIPN might become limited in various aspects of functioning (i.e., physical, social, emotional, role, and cognitive), which in turn deteriorates their QoL [13, 14, 16, 18, 32]. Patients should therefore receive support from healthcare professionals and peers. This may increase the (sense of control over their) ability to perform daily activities independently, contributing to patient empowerment, which can improve QoL [33,34,35]. However, results should be interpreted with caution as no comparison in daily limitations between patients with CIPN and the general population has been made. Therefore, it is not clear what the CIPN-specific limitations are, as the general population may also experience limitations given the relatively high average age in this sample.
Furthermore, this study showed that patients indicate they were not informed about what to do when CIPN develops. It is not known whether information has not been provided to patients, or whether patients were informed but had different priorities in the process of facing a life-threatening disease. This means that for many patients, a search for symptom self-management begins when CIPN symptoms arise. Research has shown that patients often lack knowledge and self-management skills to properly manage their cancer-related pain [36]. Several studies have shown that psychoeducation for cancer-related pain can positively influence patients’ knowledge and ability to self-manage their symptoms [37,38,39,40,41]. Applying symptom self-management must be supported by healthcare professionals [42], which starts with informing patients appropriately and providing advice, starting before treatment. Furthermore, options and wishes in dose reduction of chemotherapy should be considered during treatment to possibly limit development or worsening of CIPN [8, 43,44,45,46,47]. However, no evidence-based treatment recommendations can currently be provided as there are no effective treatments for non-painful CIPN [45, 46].
In addition, patients should also be supported in self-management by their social environment [42]. Our study showed that most patients often feel empathy by their social environment mainly by partners, family, and friends, in which the degree of empathy varies. Earlier research has shown that such support improves CIPN and coping with cancer [27, 29]. However, our study showed that empathy by colleagues and employers is often lacking. Work-related social support includes both organizational support from employers (e.g., job security, flexible working hours, and sick pay) and interpersonal support from colleagues (e.g., empathy and positive attitudes) [48,49,50,51]. Since work-related social support is crucial in achieving work-related goals and returning to work after cancer [48,49,50,51], more attention must be paid to social support from colleagues and employers. However, in this study, colleague and employer support was not applicable for most participants since many patients are probably retired given the high average age of the sample. Therefore, these results should be interpreted cautiously, and further research on work-related social support is needed.
Furthermore, even though our research shows that many patients often or always feel empathy with respect to CIPN by family, friends, and acquaintances, there is still a significant group of patients who never or only sometimes feel empathy is shown. Earlier research has found that 52% of breast cancer patients experienced to be sometimes avoided or contact is feared by friends and family [52]. Interestingly, this study also examined the perspective of healthy people, which showed that 61% of them would or might avoid people with cancer. Reasons of relatives for not providing social support to cancer patients appear to be diverse and can include, for example, the perception of one’s own inability to provide support, as well as not wanting to burden the cancer patient emotionally [53]. However, it has been shown that patients wish to receive social support, and they experience increased QoL when they receive helpful social support [54]. However, social support appears to diminish significantly within 1 year after diagnosis [54], which could possibly explain the lack of empathy regarding CIPN experienced by some of the patients in our study, since CIPN can be present for a long time after treatment [3, 8, 12,13,14,15]. Another explanation may be that relatives often do not know what CIPN entails and do not understand the symptoms [55]. Because of the variety of symptoms, it can be difficult to understand and explain CIPN to family, friends, and acquaintances. Healthcare professionals should provide appropriate information to patients about CIPN even before treatment has started, so that patients can properly explain their symptoms when they arise [55], thus creating more openness and awareness about CIPN.
Strengths and limitations
This study has several strengths. First, this was a nationwide study with a high number of participants. Second, a strength of this study was the variety in the time since diagnosis and the type of cancer of the participants. The distribution of participants in less or more than 2 years after diagnosis is nearly equal. Thus, any coasting effect of CIPN (i.e., unexpected decrease or increase in CIPN symptoms in the weeks or months after the last dose of chemotherapy [56]) in this sample can be considered less relevant.
Some limitations also need to be discussed. First, the questionnaire was probably mainly filled in by patients that are connected to patient organizations, which might not be representative of all cancer patients. Second, it also appears to be an unrepresentative sample in terms of distribution in tumor types. This applies, for example, to lymphoma, which involves a much lower percentage of patients in the Netherlands than in this sample. It also applies to breast cancer, which explains the high number of women in this sample. As women and men have different coping strategies in general [57] and relating to cancer specifically [58], which may also affect the daily limitations they face, this may have affected the results of daily limitations. Third, the questionnaire was only available in Dutch, which prevented non-Dutch-speaking residents from completing the questionnaire. Fourth, a non-validated questionnaire was used. Fifth, only physical, role, and social aspects of functioning were considered in examining daily limitations. Future research should also look at emotional and cognitive functioning. Sixth, fatigue was not taken into account in the assessment of daily limitations, while fatigue is one of the most common side effects of cancer treatment [59]. Seventh, the sample is very heterogeneous and no analyses regarding differences between chemotherapeutic agents could be made since no data regarding chemotherapeutic agents was collected. Future research should examine comparisons between chemotherapeutic agents and associated symptom and consequences.
Conclusion
This exploratory study showed that patients with CIPN suffer from various symptoms which may result in daily limitations. The prevalence of these limitations differs, and, as a result, the extent to which patients are able to perform ADL also varies. The degree of attention to, and satisfaction with, this attention from healthcare professionals varies, which also applies to the level of empathy from the social environment. Appropriate guidance from healthcare professionals, starting before treatment, and support from the social environment is crucial in enabling patients to feel empowered in their daily lives despite CIPN.
Data availability
Data are available from and with permission from Dutch Federation of Cancer Patient Organizations (NFK).
References
Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland. Nederlandse Kankerregistratie [Internet]. 2021. www.iknl.nl/nkr-cijfers
Integraal Kankercentrum Nederland. Cancer patient survival increases, but not across all cancers [Overleving kankerpatiënten stijgt, maar niet bij alle kankersoorten] [Internet]. 2022. https://iknl.nl/nieuws/2022/overleving-kankerpatienten-stijgt,-maar-niet-bij-a
Mols F, Beijers T, Vreugdenhil G, et al. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and its association with quality of life: a systematic review. Support Care Cancer. 2014;22:2261–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-014-2255-7.
Rutherford C, Müller F, Faiz N, et al. Patient-reported outcomes and experiences from the perspective of colorectal cancer survivors: meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. J Patient-Reported Outcomes. 2020;4:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/S41687-020-00195-9/FIGURES/4.
Foster C, Wright D, …, HH-E journal of, et al. Psychosocial implications of living 5 years or more following a cancer diagnosis: a systematic review of the research evidence. Wiley Online Libr. 2009;18:223–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2354.2008.01001.x.
Ju A, White K, Wiltink L, et al. Prevalence of long-term patient-reported consequences of treatment for colorectal cancer: a systematic review *Corresponding authors. Iran J Color Res. 2021;9:125–43. https://doi.org/10.30476/ACRR.2021.92134.1107.
Phillips JL, Currow DC. Cancer as a chronic disease. Collegian. 2010;17:47–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COLEGN.2010.04.007.
Seretny M, Currie GL, Sena ES, et al. Incidence, prevalence, and predictors of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain. 2014;155:2461–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2014.09.020.
Wen PY. Neurologic complications of chemotherapy. Off Pract Neurol Second Ed. 2003;20:1134–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-44-306557-8/50178-7.
National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health. NCI Dictionary of Cancer Terms [Internet]. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2021;3–5. https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/tumor
Tofthagen C. Patient perceptions associated with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2010;14:E22–8. https://doi.org/10.1188/10.CJON.E22-E28.
Glendenning JL, Barbachano Y, Norman AR, et al. Long-term neurologic and peripheral vascular toxicity after chemotherapy treatment of testicular cancer. Cancer. 2010;116:2322–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24981.
Bonhof CS, Mols F, Vos MC, et al. Course of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and its impact on health-related quality of life among ovarian cancer patients: a longitudinal study. Gynecol Oncol. 2018;149:455–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.03.052.
Eckhoff L, Knoop A, Jensen M, et al. Persistence of docetaxel-induced neuropathy and impact on quality of life among breast cancer survivors. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:292–300.
Bao T, Basal C, Seluzicki C, et al. Long-term chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy among breast cancer survivors: prevalence, risk factors, and fall risk. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;159:327–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-016-3939-0.
Bakitas M. Background noise: the experience of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. Nurs Res. 2007;56:323–31.
Jensen MAE, Mørch CD, Yilmaz MN, et al. A new self-understanding as chemo sufferer - a phenomenological study of everyday life with chemotherapy induced neuropathy among survivors after colorectal cancer. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2022;17(1):2049437. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2022.2049437.
Bonhof CS, Trompetter HR, Vreugdenhil G, et al. Painful and non-painful chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and quality of life in colorectal cancer survivors: results from the population-based PROFILES registry. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28:5933–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-020-05438-5.
Tofthagen CS, Cheville AL, Loprinzi CL. The physical consequences of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. Curr Oncol Rep. 2020;22:50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-020-00903-0
Duineveld LAM, Molthof H, Wieldraaijer T, et al. General practitioners’ involvement during survivorship care of colon cancer in the Netherlands: primary health care utilization during survivorship care of colon cancer, a prospective multicentre cohort study. Fam Pract. 2019;36:765–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmz028.
Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, et al. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. J Pers Assess. 1988;52:30–41. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA5201_2.
Ozdemir D, T Arslan F, et al. An investigation of the relationship between social support and coping with stress in women with breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2018;27:2214–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/PON.4798.
Kyngäs H, Mikkonen R, Nousiainen EM, et al. Coping with the onset of cancer: coping strategies and resources of young people with cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2001;10:6–11. https://doi.org/10.1046/J.1365-2354.2001.00243.X.
Andreu Y, Galdón MJ, Durá E, et al. A longitudinal study of psychosocial distress in breast cancer: prevalence and risk factors. Psychol Heal. 2012;27:72–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2010.542814.
Parelkar P, Thompson NJ, Kaw CK, et al. Stress coping and changes in health behavior among cancer survivors: a report from the American Cancer Society’s study of cancer survivors-II (SCS-II). J Psychosoc Oncol. 2013;31:136–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/07347332.2012.761322.
Zucca AC, Boyes AW, Lecathelinais C, et al. Life is precious and I’m making the best of it: coping strategies of long-term cancer survivors. Psychooncology. 2010;19:1268–76. https://doi.org/10.1002/PON.1686.
Bottaro R, Craparo G, Faraci P. What is the direction of the association between social support and coping in cancer patients? A systematic review. J Health Psychol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591053221131180.
Parker P, Baile W, …, CM-… ‐Oncology: J of the, et al. Psychosocial and demographic predictors of quality of life in a large sample of cancer patients. Wiley Online Libr. 2002;12:183–193. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.635.
Oh GH, Yeom CW, Shim EJ, et al. The effect of perceived social support on chemotherapy-related symptoms in patients with breast cancer: a prospective observational study. J Psychosom Res. 2020;130:109911. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JPSYCHORES.2019.109911.
van de Poll-Franse LV, Horevoorts N, Schoormans D, et al. Measuring clinical, biological, and behavioral variables to elucidate trajectories of patient-reported outcomes: The PROFILES Registry. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst. 2022;114:800–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djac047.
Frost J, Beekers N, Hengst B, et al. Meeting cancer patient needs: designing a patient platform. Conf Hum Factors Comput Syst - Proc. 2012;2012-Janua:2381–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/2212776.2223806.
Ezendam N, Pijlman B, Oncology CB-…, et al. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and its impact on health-related quality of life among ovarian cancer survivors: results from the population-based PROFILES …. Gyneco. 2014;135:510–517
McCorkle R, Ercolano E, Lazenby M, et al. Self-management: enabling and empowering patients living with cancer as a chronic illness. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:50–62. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.20093.
Te Boveldt N, Vernooij-Dassen M, Leppink I, et al. Patient empowerment in cancer pain management: an integrative literature review. Psychooncology. 2014;23:1203–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/PON.3573.
Kaal SEJ, Husson O, van Duivenboden S, et al. Empowerment in adolescents and young adults with cancer: relationship with health-related quality of life. Cancer. 2017;123:4039–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/CNCR.30827.
Dalal S, Tanco KC, Bruera E. State of art of managing pain in patients with cancer. Cancer J (United States). 2013;19:379–89. https://doi.org/10.1097/PPO.0b013e3182a631c5.
Thomas EM, Weiss SM. Nonpharmacological interventions with chronic cancer pain in adults. Cancer Control. 2000;7:157–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/107327480000700206.
Valenta S, Miaskowski C, Spirig R, et al. Randomized clinical trial to evaluate a cancer pain self-management intervention for outpatients. Asia-Pacific J Oncol Nurs. 2022;9:39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apjon.2021.12.003.
Miaskowski C, Dodd M, West C, et al. Randomized clinical trial of the effectiveness of a self-care intervention to improve cancer pain management. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:1713–20. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2004.06.140.
Park YJ, Lee MK. Effects of nurse-led nonpharmacological pain interventions for patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2022;54:422–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/JNU.12750.
Oldenmenger WH, Geerling JI, Mostovaya I, et al. A systematic review of the effectiveness of patient-based educational interventions to improve cancer-related pain. Cancer Treat Rev. 2018;63:96–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CTRV.2017.12.005.
van Dongen SI, de Nooijer K, Cramm JM, et al. Self-management of patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review of experiences and attitudes. Palliat Med. 2020;34:160–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269216319883976.
Demiris G, Afrin LB, Speedie S, et al. Patient-centered applications: use of information technology to promote disease management and wellness. A White Paper by the AMIA Knowledge in Motion Working Group. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15:8–13. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M2492.
Speck RM, Sammel MD, Farrar JT, et al. Impact of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy on treatment delivery in nonmetastatic breast cancer. J Oncol Pract. 2013;9:5. https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.2012.000863.
Loprinzi CL, Lacchetti C, Bleeker J, et al. Prevention and management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in survivors of adult cancers: ASCO guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:3348.
Jordan B, Margulies A, Cardoso F, et al. Systemic anticancer therapy-induced peripheral and central neurotoxicity: ESMO–EONS–EANO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, prevention, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2020;31:1306–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ANNONC.2020.07.003/ATTACHMENT/E06DE228-48DD-46EF-A6F3-8FF45267D2D9/MMC1.PDF.
Hertz DL, Childs DS, Park SB, et al. Patient-centric decision framework for treatment alterations in patients with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). Cancer Treat Rev. 2021;99:102241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2021.102241.
Armaou M, Schumacher L, Grunfeld EA. Cancer survivors’ social context in the return to work process: narrative accounts of social support and social comparison information. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28:504–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-017-9735-9.
Tamminga SJ, de Boer AGEM, Verbeek JH, et al. Breast cancer survivors’ views of factors that influence the return-to-work process - a qualitative study. Scand J Work Environ Heal. 2012;38:144–54. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3199.
Amir Z, Neary D, Luker K. Cancer survivors’ views of work 3 years post diagnosis: A UK perspective. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2008;12:190–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJON.2008.01.006.
Wells M, Williams B, Firnigl D, et al. Supporting ‘work-related goals’ rather than ‘return to work’ after cancer? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of 25 qualitative studies. Psychooncology. 2013;22:1208–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/PON.3148.
Peters-Golden H. Breast cancer: varied perceptions of social support in the illness experience. Soc Sci Med. 1982;16:483–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(82)90057-0.
Ray CD, Manusov V, McLaren RM. “Emotional support won’t cure cancer”: reasons people give for not providing emotional support. West J Commun. 2019;83:20–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2018.1472800.
Arora NK, Finney Rutten LJ, Gustafson DH, et al. Perceived helpfulness and impact of social support provided by family, friends, and health care providers to women newly diagnosed with breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2007;16:474–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/PON.1084.
Tanay MAL, Robert G, Rafferty AM, et al. Clinician and patient experiences when providing and receiving information and support for managing chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: a qualitative multiple methods study. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2022;31:e13517. https://doi.org/10.1111/ECC.13517.
Staff NP, Grisold A, Grisold W, et al. Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: a current review. Ann. Neurol. John Wiley and Sons Inc.; 2017;81;6:772–781. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24951.
Tamres LK, Janicki D, Helgeson VS. Sex Differences in coping behavior: a meta-analytic review and an examination of relative coping. Personal Soc Psychol Rev. 2002;6:2–30. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0601_1.
Hasan EM, Calma CL, Tudor A, et al. Gender differences in coping, depression, and anxiety in patients with non-metastatic lung cancer. Cancer Manag Res. 2022;14:2041–52. https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S368992.
Ma Y, He B, Jiang M, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of cancer-related fatigue: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2020;111:103707. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJNURSTU.2020.103707.
Acknowledgements
The authors of this study want to thank the patients who participated in this study, as well as the patient organizations, Kanker.nl, and Dutch Cancer Society for cooperating in this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The questionnaire was initiated and developed by Vivian Engelen, Aize de Boer, and Floortje Mols. Analyses were performed by Daniëlle L. van de Graaf. The first draft was written by Daniëlle L. van de Graaf, and all the authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All the authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval
Ethical approval was not needed since this study did not include an intervention.
Consent to participate
Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.
Competing 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
van de Graaf, D.L., Engelen, V., de Boer, A. et al. Experiences of cancer survivors with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in the Netherlands: symptoms, daily limitations, involvement of healthcare professionals, and social support. J Cancer Surviv (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-023-01402-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-023-01402-4