The associations between late effects of cancer treatment, work ability and job resources: a systematic review

The associations between late effects of cancer treatment, work ability and job resources: a systematic review

Boelhouwer, Ingrid G. ; Vermeer, Willemijn; van Vuuren, Tinka DOI

10.1007/s00420-020-01567-w Publication date

2021

Document Version Final published version Published in

International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health License

CC BY

Link to publication

Citation for published version (APA):

Boelhouwer, I. G., Vermeer, W., & van Vuuren, T. (2021). The associations between late effects of cancer treatment, work ability and job resources: a systematic review. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 94(2), 147-189.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-020-01567-w

General rights

It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Disclaimer/Complaints regulations

If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please contact the library:

https://www.amsterdamuas.com/library/contact/questions, or send a letter to: University Library (Library of the

University of Amsterdam and Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences), Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP

Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-020-01567-w REVIEW

The associations between late effects of cancer treatment, work ability and job resources: a systematic review

Ingrid G. Boelhouwer

 · Willemijn Vermeer

 · Tinka van Vuuren

Received: 30 July 2019 / Accepted: 25 August 2020 / Published online: 15 September 2020

© The Author(s) 2020

Abstract

Objective The aim of this review is to evaluate associations between possible late effects of cancer treatment (i.e. physical complaints, fatigue, or cognitive complaints) and work ability among workers beyond 2 years after cancer diagnosis who returned to work. The role of job resources (social support, autonomy, leadership style, coaching, and organizational culture) is also evaluated.

Methods The search for studies was conducted in PsycINFO, Medline, Business Source Premier, ABI/Inform, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. A quality assessment was used to clarify the quality across studies.

Results The searches included 2303 records. Finally, 36 studies were included. Work ability seemed to decline shortly after cancer treatment and recover in the first 2 years after diagnosis, although it might still be lower than among healthy workers.

No data were available on the course of work ability beyond the first 2 years. Late physical complaints, fatigue and cognitive complaints were negatively related with work ability across all relevant studies. Furthermore, social support and autonomy were associated with higher work ability, but no data were available on a possible buffering effect of these job resources on the relationship between late effects and work ability. As far as reported, most research was carried out among salaried workers.

Conclusion It is unknown if late effects of cancer treatment diminish work ability beyond 2 years after being diagnosed with cancer. Therefore, more longitudinal research into the associations between possible late effects of cancer treatment and work ability needs to be carried out. Moreover, research is needed on the buffering effect of job resources, both for salaried and self-employed workers.

Keywords Cancer treatment · Job resources · Late effects · Work ability · Work ability index

Introduction

A growing number of people in the workforce have experi- enced a cancer diagnosis at some time during their life. The majority of working people diagnosed with cancer re-enter

the workplace. The mean rates of return to work reported in reviews are 62% (Spelten et al. 2002), 64% (Mehnert 2011), and 73% (De Boer et al. 2020a). Return to work pathways vary, among others because of differences in reintegration strategies between countries (Kiasuwa Mbengi et al. 2018), the availability of disability pension (Tikka et al. 2017), or the effectiveness of programs to support return to work (de Boer et al. 2015).

Compared to healthy people 1.4 times more unemploy- ment is observed among cancer patients (De Boer et al.

2009). However, the group of workers with a cancer diag- nosis in their life history will continue to expand as survival rates are greatly improving, as the incidence of cancer is expected to rise a further 75% over the next two decades (World Health Organization 2012; Stewart and Wild 2014) and as the retirement age is expected to be raised even fur- ther in many countries. As studies concerning cancer and work merely focus on the first two years after diagnosis and

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https ://doi.org/10.1007/s0042 0-020-01567 -w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

* Ingrid G. Boelhouwer i.g.boelhouwer@hva.nl

1

Department of Applied Psychology, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Wibauthuis, Wibautstraat 3b, 1091 GH Amsterdam, The Netherlands

2

Faculty of Management, Open University of The Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands

3

Loyalis Knowledge and Consult, Heerlen, The Netherlands

often concern whether people return to work, less is known about the population after return to work beyond these first two years. As a consequence, it is important to focus on the occupational well-being and the situation in the workplace of this group of workers after they returned to work.

A range of long-term physical and psychological changes can be experienced by cancer survivors (Ganz 2001). These changes may present during active treatment and persist on the long term, beyond the first two years after cancer diag- nosis, or changes may appear months or years later as late effects (Stein et al. 2008). As a clear distinction between long-term and late effects is not always possible, in this review all these long-term changes that affect daily function- ing are indicated as late effects in line with the definition of the Dutch Federation of Cancer Patient Organizations (Dutch Federation of Cancer Patient Organizations NFK 2017). Late effects of cancer treatment include, for instance, fatigue (Prue et al. 2006; Servaes et al. 2007; Reinertsen et al.

2010), lymphedema (Cormier et al. 2010), cardiovascular disease (Keating et al. 2006; Drafts et al. 2013), osteoporosis (Miller et al. 2016), anxiety (Mitchell et al. 2013), fear of recurrence (Lebel et al. 2016), or cognitive complaints (e.g.

problems with concentration, learning and memory) (Wefel et al. 2015). Late effects of cancer treatment may continue to influence the ability to function at work for as long as ten or even more years after diagnosis (Koppelmans et al.

2012; Silver et al. 2013). The Dutch Federation for Cancer Patient Organizations reported that impairments resulting from these late effects were experienced in particular also in the context of work (Dutch Federation of Cancer Patient Organizations NFK 2017). This underlines the importance of studying late effects in the context of work.

To make comparisons possible it is necessary to study the associations of late effects of cancer treatment with a work outcome measure also used in studies among the general population or populations with chronic diseases. Therefore, a useful concept is ‘work ability’, which generally refers to the extent to which someone is able to carry out their work, taking the demands of the job, and health and mental resources into account (Ilmarinen et al. 2005). Work ability is reported to be a predictor of other work outcome measures among healthy populations, like absenteeism or early retirement (Ilmarinen and Tuomi 2004). In general, different (chronic) health prob- lems are reported to be associated with decreased work ability (Leijten et al. 2014), and predictors of work ability are similar for workers with and without chronic health conditions (Kool- haas et al. 2013). However, other definitions are also used in the scientific literature (Lederer et al. 2014) and measurement methods of work ability may vary between studies (Brady et al.

2019; Cadiz et al. 2019). About a decade ago in an overview by Munir, Yarker, and McDermott (2009) on work ability and cancer, it was reported that very few well-validated measures of work ability had been used in previous studies. Therefore, it

is important to report about the way work ability was assessed in the included studies within the current systematic literature review as well.

Furthermore, it is important to determine whether specific supporting factors in achieving work goals, so-called job resources within the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model (Demerouti et al. 2001), demonstrate an association with work ability in this specific population workers past can- cer diagnosis or if job resources can even buffer a possible negative association of late effects of cancer treatment with a lower work ability. In the JD-R model, job demands are regarded as the aspects of the job that require effort and it is possible that the late effects of cancer treatment result in work demands being experienced as heavier. Furthermore, across studies among general populations job resources are positively related to work ability (Brady et al. 2019). In addi- tion, in some studies job resources were reported to buffer the impact of job demands on burn-out (Bakker et al. 2005;

Xanthopoulou et al. 2007). Clearly, job resources in the cur- rent work situation might be of great importance for work functioning among workers experiencing any late effects of cancer treatment after they returned to work.

As there is a shift in labor markets towards more flex- ible contracts, and smaller enterprises, the subpopulation of self-employed, freelancers and entrepreneurs, in other words the non-salaried, grows in several European Union member states (CBS 2019). These workers show different behavior after a cancer diagnosis than the salaried (Torp et al. 2018), as they more often continue working during treatment and take fewer time off work due to cancer. This might be due to the financial necessity to earn an income. Another dif- ference is that the non-salaried have neither an employer, a supervisor, a human resource manager, an occupational physician, nor colleagues to provide job resources such as social support.

In short, this systematic literature review will focus on the work ability of all people working after a cancer diagnosis and cancer treatment (salaried and non-salaried). The aim is to present an overview of the studies that present data on work ability, also reporting on the method used to assess work ability. Furthermore, any available results on a pos- sible association of late effects (physical complaints, fatigue or cognitive complaints) and work ability beyond the first two years after diagnosis will be reviewed. Finally, the role of job resources will also be evaluated.

Methods Search strategy

To structure this systematic literature review the checklist

of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and

Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used (Moher et al. 2009).

Systematic searches for publications were conducted on March 10th, 2020 in the databases PsycINFO, Medline, Business Source Premier and CINAHL, and on March 13th, 2020 in the databases ABI/Inform, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. Search terms were determined by the first author and an information specialist in mutual agreement with the other authors. In general, the search consisted of search terms for cancer combined with search terms for paid work. Search terms were broad to ensure no relevant studies would be missed. No restrictions were placed on publication date. For full search strategies, see Supplementary Appen- dix 1. Additional searches consisted of citation tracking by the first author to discover articles not found by the system- atic search.

Inclusion criteria: considered studies had to (1) be pub- lished in English peer-reviewed journals, (2) be an original quantitative research article (including pilot studies), (3) focus on work ability in people working after a cancer diag- nosis, and (4) include adults (18 years or older).

Exclusion criteria: articles were excluded if they focused on (1) work-related risk factors for cancer, or (2) the ability to work if regarded as the ability to be at work rather than in the sense of work ability during work, or (3) populations entirely without paid work, or (4) populations entirely on long term sick leave, or (5) predicting return to work by work ability, or (6) the assessment of the effect of an inter- vention regarding return to work after a cancer diagnosis.

Study selection

First, after the removal of duplicates, the search results were screened by title and abstract in Rayyan (Ouzzani et al. 2016) independently by the first author and two other researchers (the second author and research trainees). Those papers clearly not relevant to this review were eliminated. In case of a missing abstract or missing relevant details needed for screening, full paper copies were retrieved and screened.

Second, the then included papers were used for additional citation tracking by the first author to identify possible addi- tional studies. Third, the three authors discussed the eligibil- ity of the remaining papers based on the criteria for inclusion and exclusion.

Data extraction

After this, the first author extracted a range of data from the included papers relevant for this review, including data on (1) study design, (2) population (e.g. number of participants included in analyses, age, gender, cancer type, time since cancer diagnosis), (3) setting, (4) the assessment method of work ability, (5) possible late effects of cancer treat- ment, namely physical complaints, fatigue, and cognitive

complaints, and (6) possible job resources (leadership style, coaching, organizational culture, social support, and auton- omy). This data-extraction was reviewed by the second and the third author.

Study characteristics

The searches included 2303 records, including two results by additional citation tracking. After the removal of duplicates, 1565 titles and abstracts were screened. After elimination of the studies clearly not relevant to this review and after close reading 36 studies remained. A reason for this decrease in numbers was that studies on cancer and work mostly con- cern whether people return to work during the first two years after diagnosis and that these studies also focus on many other work-related aspects other than work ability. The study selection is documented in a PRISMA flow diagram, see Fig. 1. The data-extraction of the 36 studies is presented in Table 1.

The 36 studies covered 12 (33%) longitudinal studies (De Boer et al. 2008; Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 2009; Bains et al.

2012; Nilsson et al. 2016; Doll et al. 2016; Zanville et al.

2016; Duijts et al. 2017; Hartung et al. 2018; Wolvers et al.

2019; Gregorowitsch et al. 2019; Tamminga et al. 2019;

Couwenberg et al. 2020), six (17%) case–control studies

(Taskila et al. 2007; Gudbergsson et al. 2008a, 2011; Lee

et al. 2008; Lindbohm et al. 2012; Carlsen et al. 2013), and

18 (50%) cross-sectional studies. Almost half of all included

studies was published in 2017 or later. The setting of 14

studies was Northern Europe. Other European settings were

the Netherlands (eight studies), and the United Kingdom,

Germany, Italy, Switzerland, and Slovakia with one study

each. Other settings outside Europe were the United States

of America (five studies), Brazil (one study), and Asia (three

studies). The studies focused on a combination of types of

cancer in 16 studies, breast cancer in ten studies, prostate

cancer in three studies, and ovarian, rectal, colorectal, thy-

roid, stomach cancer, hematological cancer and lymphoma

in one study each. Gender was not mentioned in five studies

(14%) among populations with a past breast cancer diag-

nosis, very likely to be women but possibly not all, and not

in two studies among prostate cancer diagnoses, the latter

certainly concerning men. The gender distribution therefore

showed eight studies (22%) among women, five (14%) not

with full certainty only among women, three studies (8%)

among men, and 20 studies (56%) among both genders. Type

of employment was not clear in 16 studies (44%). The other

20 studies concerned 13 studies (36%) with both employed

and self-employed, 7 studies with employed only (20%),

and none of the studies only included self-employed. The

baseline of the data collection varied from the moment of

diagnosis, the first day of sick leave, to the end of primary treatments.

Quality assessment

The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using three quality assessment checklists. For cohort and case–control studies the checklists from the ‘Critical Appraisal Skills Programme’ (CASP) were used (Criti- cal Appraisal Skills Programme 2018a, b). Some items were adapted to the current study. These adjustments are described in the notes below the Tables 2, 3, and 4. For cross-sectional studies (except case–control studies) the Appraisal tool for Cross Sectional Studies (AXIS tool) (Downes et al. 2016) was used. The quality assessment was used to test the quality across studies.

The quality assessment was performed for all 36 studies by the first author. The second and the third author indepen- dently assessed the quality of different subsets of cohort, case–control and cross-sectional studies. The results were discussed afterwards, and agreement was reached on the

level of quality of each of the included studies for the pre- sent study.

The 12 cohort studies were all of good quality and therefore no studies were excluded. Of the 12 included cohort studies two studies made use of a follow up period long enough to possibly investigate late effects of cancer treatment that is beyond two years after diagnosis (Duijts et al. 2017; Gregorowitsch et al. 2019). Furthermore, these two studies concerned European populations.

Also the six case–control studies were all of good qual- ity, not resulting in any exclusions. The time since diag- nosis was beyond  two year after diagnosis in four studies and two studies also included participants within the first two years after diagnosis. Five studies of the case–control studies concerned European populations (Taskila et al.

2007; Gudbergsson et al. 2008a, 2011; Lindbohm et al.

2012; Carlsen et al. 2013).

The 18 cross-sectional studies showed some quality differences, but the quality of all studies was acceptable.

The selection process in two pilot studies might have impaired representativeness (Neudeck et al. 2017; Bielik et al. 2020). In one cross-sectional study the time since

Fig. 1 PRISMA 2009 flow diagram

Records identified through database searching

(n = 2.301)

Screening Include d Eligibilit y Idenficaon

Additional records identified through other sources

(n = 2)

Records after duplicates removed (n = 1.565)

Records screened

(n = 1.565) Records excluded

(n = 1.516)

Full-text articles assessed for eligibility

(n = 49)

Full-text articles excluded after close reading

(n = 13) Reasons:

- No assessment of work ability in the study (n=2) - Concerned the ability to (be

at) work (n=2)

- Work ability as a % disability pension (n=2)

- Concerned the desire for early retirement (n=1) - Focus on return to work

(n=3)

- Only employees approaching 24 months sick leave (n=1) - Focus on unemployment

(n=1)

- Only one of the 41 participants was member of the workforce (n=1).

Studies included in synthesis (n = 36)

Table 1 Summar y of s tudy r esults on t he w or k ability in (self-)em plo yed populations wit h a pas t cancer diagnosis Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Bains e t al. Color ect al, pr imar y ( 2012 ) diagnosis wit h cur ativ e tr eat - ment, N = 49 at T2, 44% f emale, mean ag e 52.49

(SD 5.42), 39% wor

king at T2, United Kingdom

Longitudinal, T0

= pos t-sur ger y/ pr e-tr eatment, T1 = 3 mont hs, T2 = 6 mont hs

W AI item 1 is descr

ibed (t he me thod r ef ers t o thr ee items)

Item 1: High w or k ability at baseline w as associated wit h g reater wor k ability at f ollo w- up ( β = 0.67, t = 3.99, p = .0005, f

= 0.53) Bielik e t al. ( 2020 ) Ov ar ian, 13.8% me tas tatic, N = 123, female, mean ag e 59.7, 34.1% cur rentl y em plo yed, Slo - vakia

Cr oss-sectional, mean 3.13 y

ears af ter diagnosis

Cur rent w or k abil - ity 1 (w ors t)–10 (bes t) W or k ability co ver ed b y differ -

ent dimensions sur ve ys

Cur rent w or k ability : Full healt h: 9.58 W ith - out cancer : 9.07

At diagnosis: 4.20

At time of sur ve y: 6.22 *Significant differ ence p < .001 Car lsen et al. ( 2013 )

Br eas t, N = 170, recur rence ex cluded,

female, mean ag

e 54.2 (r ang e

42–64), contr ols N = 391, Denmar k

Case–contr ol, 5–8 y ears af ter diagnosis

W AI item 1 Item 1: mean 8.66 (con - trols 8.99), p < .0001 Fatigue (of ten),

was associated wit h r educed wor k ability in a full y adjus ted

model (also contr

olled f or healt h-r elated fact ors) (OR

10.7, CI 3.31– 34.3) [s

trong er as among con -

trols, OR 4.11 (CI 1.97–8.57)]

Less help and suppor t from a super visor was significantl y associated wit h reduced w or k abil -

ity (OR 2.40; CI 1.04–5.54) among the cancer sur

viv ors in t he full model (also contr olled for healt h-r elated fact ors). The latter was no t t he case f or help and suppor t

from colleagues, but when onl

y con - trolled f or ag e t his suppor t sho wed a significant associa -

tion (OR 3.47, CI 1.73–6.97)

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e

Cheung e t al. ( 2017 )

Br eas t, pr imar -

ily diagnosed, N = 151, mean ag e 49.98 (r ang e

22–66), 43.1% cur rentl y w or k-

ing, 9.7% self- em plo yed, Hong Kong

Cr oss-sectional, 1–16 y

ears af ter

diagnosis Wor k ability bef or e diagnosis, dur ing treatment and cur - rentl y r epor ted at time of sur ve y

W AI items, 1, 2, 3, and 6

Item 1: w or k ability bef or e diagnosis mean 8.48, SD 1.26, dur ing

treatment mean 4.95, SD 2.91, cur

rent mean

7.21, SD 1.81 Item 2: ph

ysical w or k ability ( N = 54): 7.4% ver y good, 1.1% good, 64.8% moder ate, 13.0%

poor Item 2: ment

al w or k ability ( N = 55): 10.9% v er y good, 45.5% good, 36.4% moder ate,

5.5% poor 1.8% v

er y poor

Item 6: 35% of t

he cur rentl y wor king no t sur e if the y could continue t o wor k in t he subseq uent 2 y ears W or k ability bef or e t he diagnosis and w or k ability dur ing tr eat - ment w er e associated wit h cur rent w or k abil - ity (0.63, p = .005 resp. .49, p < .0001) Higher cur rent w or k

ability if less effects of healt

h-r elated pr oblems

Contr ol at w or k w as cor related wit h cur rent w or k ability (Spear man ’s r ho 0.29, p = .038)

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Couw en - ber g e t al. ( 2020 )

Rect al, N = 172, 8,7% me ta -

static, 71% male, median ag e 57, 100% paid em plo y- ment, contr ols N = 58, Dutc h

Pr ospectiv e cohor t study (sur ve y bef or e tr eatment,

3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 mont

hs af ter treatment)

WA I Significant decr ease at 3, and 6 mont hs Significantl y lo wer t han contr ols at 24 mont hs Dahl e t al. ( 2020 ) Pr os tate, N = 730,

100% male, mean ag e 65.5 (SD 5.9), 46% w or k-

ing at time of sur ve y, N or wa y

Cr oss-sectional, 3 y ears (SD 1.4) af ter tr eatment

W AI item 1 Cur rent w or k ability 7.4 (SD 2.1) Dahl e t al. ( 2016 ) Pr os tate, N = 563, mean ag e 62.6 (SD 5.38) wit h 66% < 65 y ears, 93% w or king at time of sur ve y, No rwa y

Cr oss-sectional, mer ge of national pr ospectiv e s tudy (q ues tionnair es at

baseline, 3, 12 and 24 mont

hs) and a cr oss-sectional sing le-hospit al based sur ve y, per for med up t o 6 y ears af ter r adical pr os tatect om y

W AI items 1 and 2 Item 1 ( N = 563): 8.6

(SD 0.5) Scor e 10: 30%, 8–9:

46%, 6–7: 15%, 0–5: 9% Item 2 (

N = 542) ph ysical w or k ability 55% v er y good, 28% pr etty good, 13% f air ly good, 3% q uite bad, 1% ver y bad Item 2 ( N = 539) ment al w or k ability : 56% v er y good, 28% pr etty good, 12% f air ly good, 3% q uite bad 1% v er y bad

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Dahl e t al. Br eas t, color ec - ( 2019 ) tal, leuk emia,

non-Hodgkin lym

phoma,

melanoma. 63% female, median ag e 49 y ears (rang e 27–65), N = 1189, 75% em plo yed (3% sic k lea ve), No rwa y

Cr oss-sectional, median time since firs t cancer diag - nosis w as 16 y ears (rang e 6–31)

W AI item 1 Cur rent w or k ability

8.3 (SD 1.8) among em plo yed

Those wit h lo w wor k ability repor ted sig - nificantl y higher mean le vels of gener al healt h p < 0.001

Those wit h lo w wor k ability repor ted sig - nificantl y higher mean le vels of to tal f atigue p < 0.001

De Boer e t al. ( 2011 )

Esophag eal, s tom - ac h, color ect al, hepatic, pancr e- atic or biliar y, ne w patients, 22% f emale, mean ag e 56 (SD 8), N = 333, 95 (self-) em plo yed

of whom 45 par ticipated, t he Ne ther lands

Cr oss-sectional, bef or e tr eatment W AI items 1 and 2 Item 1: mean cur rent wor k ability w as 5.4; for t he subg roup no t on sic k lea ve higher (7.1, SD 2.7), t han f or t he subg roup on sic k lea ve (3.7, SD 2.2), p < .001 Item 2: Ph ysical w or k ability and ment al wor k ability higher f or the g roup no t on sic k lea ve

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e

De Boer e t al. ( 2008 )

Br eas t, f emale genit als or genit o-ur ological mos tly , pr imar y

diagnosis of cancer

, N = 195 at T3 (24% alr eady re tur ned t o w or k at 6  mont hs), 60% female, mean ag e 42.2 (SD 9.3), t he Ne ther lands

Longitudinal (pr

ospectiv e), T1 = 6 mont hs af ter firs t da y of sic k lea ve, T2 = 12 mont hs af ter firs t da y of sic k lea ve, T3 = 18 mont hs af ter firs t da y of sic k lea ve

W AI items 1 and 2

Item 1: significant r

ise in scor es from T1 t o T2 and from T2 t o T3 (4.6, SD

3.2, 6.3, SD 2.7, and 6.7, SD 2.7 r

esp.) Bo th men and w omen im pr ov ed o ver time (p < .001), but women im pr ov ed mor e (p = .002) Patients wit h cancer of the f emale g enit als and br eas t cancer patients im pr ov ed mos t o ver time ( p = .01) Doll e t al. ( 2016 ) Uter ine, o var ian, cer vical, vul var , and o ther (onl y ne w), and also

benign disease, N = 185 at baseline, f emale, mean ag e 56.5 (SD 13), N = 174 at T3, U nited St ates of Amer ica

Longitudinal (pr

ospectiv e), T1 = 1 mont h af ter sur ger y, T2 = 3 mont hs af ter sur ger y, T3 = 6 mont hs af ter sur ger y

A subse t of q ues - tions of t he W AI, in t his s tudy item 1 is used

Item 1: Baseline wit

hout sur gi - cal com plications 8.8 (SD 2.3), wit h sur gical com plications 7.7 (SD 3.2)

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Dui jts e t al. Var ious (48% ( 2017 ) br eas t), par t 1 of t he s tudy : N = 252, 69.8% female, mean ag e

50.7 (SD 7.4) at T0, wit

h em plo y- ment contr act, The N et her lands

Longitudinal (pr

ospectiv e), T0 = 2 y ears af ter diagnosis, T1 = 3 y ears af ter

diagnosis, T2 = 4 y ears af ter diagnosis

W AI item 1

Item 1: Gr oup N = 151 ‘continu - ousl y w or king’ 5.6 (SD

1.8) Multiv

ar iate time lag model: cur rent w or k ability pr edict or of wor k continuation one year later ( p = .007), β = 0.38 (SE 0.14)/ OR 1.46; CI 1.11–1.92) Fosså e t al. ( 2015 ) Pr os tate, N = 612 (30% w or king), mean ag e 69 (rang e 47–105, wit h 30% < 65) No rwa y

Cr oss-sectional, median obser

vation time since diagno - sis 4.0 y ears (r ang e, 0–23 y ears)

Self-r epor ted reduction of w or k

ability (“no”: scor

e of 0–5 v s. “y es”: scor e of 6–10)

Limit ations of w or k abil - ity : 10–22% Significantl y f ew er patients e xper i- enced limit ations of t heir w or k ability af ter radical pr os tatec - tom y (10%) t han af ter high-dose radio ther ap y (22%) Gr egor ow - itsc h e t al. ( 2019 )

Br eas t, N = 939 (68% em plo yed at

baseline, median ag e 52), The Ne ther lands

Pr ospectiv e cohor t

study (baseline, 6, 18, and 30 mont

hs) Contr ols N = 3,641

WA I Em plo yed: baseline 71% moder ate-poor w or k ability , 30 mont hs 24% moder ate-poor w or k ability (lo wer t han contr ols)

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Gudber gs - son e t al. ( 2008a )

Br eas t, tes ticu - lar , or pr os tate, N = 446 (all re tur ned t o wor k), 51% female, ag e 49.1

(SD 9.3), (also self-em

plo yed) and nor m g roup N = 588, Nor wa y

Case–contr ol 2–6 y ears af ter pr imar y sur ger y or chemo ther ap y

W AI items 1, 2 and 3

Item 1: Sur viv ors scor ed lo wer

(mean 8.2, SD 2.0) than nor

m g roup (mean 8.6, SD 1.6), p < .001,

effect size 0.25 Item 2: Sur

viv ors scor ed mor e moder ate/r at her poor/poor ph ysical wor k ability (21% versus 9%, p < .001,

effect size 0.34) and mor

e moder ate/r at her poor/poor ment al w or k ability (19% v ersus 9%, p < .001, effect size 0.30)

Sur viv ors e xper i- enced mor e suppor t

from colleagues at wor

k ( p = .005), but similar contr ol as the nor m g roup No dat a on possible associations of t hese fact ors wit h w or k ability r epor ted

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Gudber gs - son e t al. ( 2008b )

Br eas t, tes ticular , or pr os tate, firs t cancer diag - nosis be tw een 25–57 y ears of ag e, N = 513, 51%

female, 84% had re tur ned t o w or k, and of t his g roup 83% had no w or k chang es and 17% did ha ve w or k chang es, N or wa y

Cr oss-sectional, 2–6 y ears af ter pr i- mar y tr eatment

W AI items 1, 2, and 3

Item 1: the subg

roup wit h w or k chang es scor ed lo wer

(mean 6.9, SD 2.4) than g

roup wit hout wor k c hang es (mean 8.5, SD 1.8), p < .001,

effect size 0.75 Item 2: The subg

roup wit hout wor k c hang es scor ed less lo w (moder ate, rat her poor , poor) on ph ysical w or k ability (16% v ersus 38%) and ment al w or k ability (14% v ersus 30%) t han the subg roup wit h wor k c hang es (bo th p < .001, effect sizes

0.51 and 0.61) Ment al w or k ability (and no t ph ysical w or k ability) r educed due t o cancer w as associated wit h cur rent w or k abil - ity in univ ar iate and multiv ar iate anal yses (β −0.139, p = .003)

Sym pt om scale scor e w as associ - ated wit h cur rent wor k ability in univ ar iate anal y- ses ( β = 0.396, p < .001)

Social suppor t fr om colleagues w as associated wit h cur - rent w or k ability in univ ar iate anal yses (β = 0.241, p < .001) No dat a on possi -

ble association of contr

ol wit h w or k ability r epor ted

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Gudber gs - son e t al. ( 2011 )

Br eas t, tes ticu - lar , or pr os tate, N = 446, 52% female, mean ag e

52.9 (SD 6.5), and contr

ol g roup N = 588, Nor wa y

Case contr ol, 2–6 y ears af ter pr i- mar y tr eatment

W AI items 1, 2 and 3

Item 1: males had a higher w

or k

ability (8.4, SD 1.8) than f

emales (8.0, SD 2.1), p = .04, effect size = 0.20) No g ender differ ences in contr ol g roup (8.6,

SD 1.6) Item 2: No differ

ence in ph ysical wor k ability or ment al wor k ability be tw een male and f emale sur viv ors Differ ence be tw een male sur viv ors and male contr ols on ph ysical wor k ability (effect size 0.37, p < .001) and ment al w or k abil -

ity (effect size 0.27, p = .004) Differ ence be tw een female sur viv ors and female contr ols on ment al w or k abil -

ity (effect size 0.30, p < .001). No gender differ ence be tw een female sur viv ors and female contr ols on ph ysical w or k ability

Somatic sym pt oms wer e associated wit h o ver all cur - rent w or k ability in univ ar iate anal yses and multiv ar iate anal yses (β =−0.078, p = .012)

Suppor t fr om col - leagues and super vi - sors w as assessed and combined wit h

communication No separ

ate dat a of an association of onl y social suppor t wit h ov er all cur rent w or k ability

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Har tung

et al. ( 2018 )

Hemat ological, N = 91 at base -

line, 67% male, mean ag

e 49 (SD 8), N = 52 at T1, N = 40 at T2, 10% self-em plo yed, Ger man y

Longitudinal, baseline (less t han 4 w eek s bef or e tr eatment), 6 mont hs, and 1 y ear

WA I Mean W AI significantl y incr eased fr om 18.5 at baseline t o 28.3 af ter 12 mont hs ( p = 0.001) Ho e t al. ( 2018 ) Br eas t, N = 327,

female, 6% recur

rent disease, mean ag e at time

of diagnosis: 47 (rang

e 42–52), mean ag e at time of sur ve y: 53 (rang e 48–58), 53% em plo yed, Sing apor e

Cr oss-sectional, 3–8 y

ears af ter diagnosis

WA I

Item 1 N = 168 em plo yed: wor k ability 8% poor , 29% moder ate, 48% good, and 15% e xcellent

Sur viv ors wit h subop timal w or k ability e xpr essed mor e br eas t and ar m sym pt oms, as com par ed wit h sur viv ors wit h good or e xcellent wor k ability

Gener al, ph ysi - cal, and ment al fatigue w er e

less common in sur viv ors wit h op timal w or k

ability Higher le

vel of ph ysical f atigue remained signifi - cantl y associated wit h poor er w or k ability in t he full model

Br eas t cancer sur viv ors wit h subop timal cur - rent w or k ability had lo wer scor es for cognitiv e functioning

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Kiser ud

et al. ( 2016 )

Lym phoma. N = 312, also

second cancers, 85% w

or king or on sic k lea ve

at baseline and 58% at moment of sur

ve y, 40% female, mean ag e

41.5 (SD 13.5) at diagnosis and 54.0 (SD 11.3) at time of sur

ve y, No rwa y

Cr oss-sectional follo

w-up s tudy , mean time fr om diagnosis t o sur ve y was 12.4 y ears (SD 6.1) and fr om HD T- ASCT t o sur ve y 9.7 y ears (SD 5.1)

W AI items 1 and 2

Item 1: The subg

roup em plo yed at f ollo w up: 9.2 (SD

1.8) at diagnosis and 7.3 (SD 2.5) at moment of sur

ve y Lee e t al. ( 2008 ) St omac h, N = 408,

73.5% male, also self-em

plo yed and no t-w or king

included, also 994 g

ener al population, K or ea

Case contr ol, 21–36 mont hs af ter diagnosis

Multiple-c hoice item r eg ar ding lessened w or k-

related ability than bef

or e can - cer diagnosis

Mor e cancer sur viv ors had lessened w or k-

related ability (37%) than t

he g ener al popu -

lation (10.6%), OR 6.11, CI 3.64–10.27

Easil y f atigued and exhaus ted in t he wor kplace: 50% of t he cancer sur viv ors v ersus 22.4% in t he gener al popula -

tion (OR 4.02, CI 2.55–6.33) No dat

a on t he association wit h wor k ability

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e

Lindbohm e t al. ( 2012 )

Br eas t, tes ticular , pr os tate, or l ym - phoma, N = 1449, 66% f emale, ag e

25–57 at time of diagnosis, ref er ence g roup N = 2709, Den - mar k, F inland,

Iceland, and Nor

wa y (in t he Iceland sam ple cancer r ecur rence ex cluded)

Case contr ol, 1–8 y ears af ter diagnosis

W AI item 1 Item 1: ag e-adjus ted mean w or k ability w as slightl y lo wer among the br eas t cancer sur viv ors (8.41) t han among t he f emale ref er ence g roup (8.58, p < .01). No differ ence in w or k ability be tw een men wit h tes ticular

cancer diagnosis (8.76) and t

he male r ef er ence gr oup (8.69). Pr os tate cancer sur viv ors had a lo wer w or k ability (8.28) t han t he male ref er ence g roup (p < .01)

Lo w suppor t fr om super visor or col - leagues w er e associ - ated wit h lo w w or k ability among bo th men and w omen, in t he cancer g roup and t he r ef er ence gr oup High colleagues ’ av oidance beha vior was r elated t o lo wer wor k ability among

female cancer sur viv ors ( p < .001) (and no t in f emale ref er ences) Super visors ’ high av oidance beha vior was r elated t o lo wer wor k ability among male cancer sur vi - vors ( p < .01) (and no t in r ef er ences) No dat a of an asso -

ciation of social climate wit

h w or k ability

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Mosk ow - itz e t al. ( 2014 )

Br eas t, tes ticu - lar , color ect al, and pr os tate cancer , Hodgkin lym phoma and

non-Hodgkin lym

phoma, among o thers, N = 1525, 15.8% recur rence or secondar y cancer , 61.6% f emale, mean ag e 49.1

(SD 10.8), also self-em

plo yed included, U nited St ates of Amer ica

Cr oss-sectional, av er ag e time since com ple tion of tr eatment w as 3 y ears (r ang e 0–464 mont hs)

Whe ther unable t o wor k full time, unable t o w or k

the same as bef or e cancer , or unable t o w or k at all

A g reater le vel of functional limit a- tions (ph ysical, cognitiv e and social) w er e sig - nificantl y r elated to limited w or k ability ( β = 5.88, p < .001)

A g reater le vel of functional limi - tations (ph ysical, cognitiv e and social) w er e sig - nificantl y r elated to limited w or k ability ( β = 5.88, p < .001) A g reater le vel of sym pt oms (cog - nitiv e, dis tress,

fatigue, cancer fear

, f amil y f ear) wer e no t sig - nificantl y r elated to limited w or k ability

A g reater le vel of sym pt oms (cognitiv e, dis tress, f atigue, cancer f ear , famil y f ear) w er e no t significantl y related t o limited wor k ability Mus ti e t al. ( 2018 ) Br eas t, N = 503, mean ag e 51.5 (SD 3.6), per ma - nent, fix ed ter m and o ther type of contr act, It aly

Cr oss-sectional, sur ve y 3.2 (SD 0.9) years since tr eat - ment, r etr ospectiv e

about moment re tur n t o w or k (23.0% e xper i- enced > 6 mont hs sic k lea ve)

Same or r educed wor k ability 43.5% r educed w or k

ability at moment of re tur n t o w or k

Suppor t/solidar ity from em plo yer 85.1% in g roup wit h no r educed w or k

ability and 70.2% in gr oup wit h r educed wor k ability , p < 0.001 Suppor t/solidar ity

from colleagues 91.5% in g

roup wit h no r educed w or k

ability and 76.8% in gr oup wit h r educed wor k ability , p < 0.001

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Neudec k

et al. ( 2017 )

Th yr oid, N = 66, 69.7% f emale, 68% w or king, Switzer land

Cr oss-sectional, max. 7 y ears af ter tr eat -

ment. Mean time since t

he diagnosis of t hyr oid cancer was 37.8 mont hs (SD: 21.7; r ang e: 7–79)

Ad hoc q ues tion- nair e 71.2% f elt im pair ed wit h respect t o t heir w or k ability dur ing t he firs t year af ter t he diagnosis Nieuw en hui jsen

et al. ( 2009 )

Gas trointes tinal, br eas t, f emale genit als, male genit als, ur ologi - cal haemat ologi - cal, and o ther types, pr imar y diagnosis of can - cer , N = 195 at T1 (of whom N = 45 neur opsy chologi - cal tes ted at T2), 67% f emale, mean ag e 44 (SD 9), t he N et her - lands

Longitudinal (pr

ospectiv e), T1 = 6 mont hs af ter firs t da y of sic k lea ve, T2 = 12 mont hs af ter firs t da y of sic k lea ve, also neur o-psy cho - logical tes ting, T3 = 18 mont hs af ter firs t da y of sic k lea ve

W AI item 1 on T2

Item 1: At T1 no differ

ence (p = .27) be tw een the par ticipants in t he neur o- psy chological

study (4.1, SD 3.0) and the r

es t of t he cohor t (4.7, SD 3.3)

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e

Nilsson e t al. ( 2016 )

Br eas t, f emale, N = 692 at T1, mean ag e 50.8

(SD 8.07), Sw eden

Longitudinal (pr

ospectiv e), T1 = 4 w eek s af ter sur ger y T2–T6 dur ing 24 mont hs

W AI item 2 Item 2: significant dif - fer ence in ph ysical wor k ability be tw een baseline ( β = 0.354, p < .001) and 4 mont hs (β = 0.138, p < .001) as well as be tw een 4 and 8 mont hs ( β = 0.285, p < .001) Item 2: significant differ - ences in ment al/social wor k ability w er e found be tw een 8 and 12 mont hs ( β = 0.286, p < .001) Or teg a e t al. ( 2018 ) Br eas t, N = 114 (thr ee tr eatment gr oups of N = 38),

female, mean ag es 48.1–50.1, self-em plo yed

36.8–52.6%, Br azil

Cr oss-sec - tional, > 1 y ear af ter tr eatment

W or k Limit ations Ques tionnair e (the per cent ag e

of time limited in per for ming w or k task s in t he las t 2 w eek s)

Patients in t he mas - tect om y and br eas t- conser ving sur ger y gr oups sho wed r educed wor k effectiv eness (pr esenteeism) and loss of pr oductivity com par ed wit h w omen in t he br eas t r econ - str uction and contr ol gr oups ( p = 0.0004 and p = 0.0006, respec - tiv ely)

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Tamming a

et al. ( 2019 )

Br eas t (61%),

gynecological cancer (35%), or o

ther type of

cancer (4%) Inter vention g roup N = 49, mean ag e

47.1 (SD 8.2), 98% f

emale Contr ol g roup N = 57, mean ag e

47.8 (SD 7.6), 100% f

emale, 4% self-em plo yed, The N et her lands

Longitudinal, base -

line and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 mont

hs of f ollo w-up

W AI items 1 and 2 W or k ability im pr ov ed from baseline t o 1 y ear and s table fr om 1 t o 2 y ears

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Taskila e t al. Br eas t, l ym phoma, ( 2007 ) tes ticular or pr os tate, no dis tant me tas - tasis, N = 591, 73,9% f emale, ag e 25–57 at time

of diagnosis, also freelancers and entr

epr eneurs

included, also 757 r

ef er ents, Finland

Case contr ol, 2–6 y ears af ter diagnosis

W AI items 1 and 2 Item 1: near ly t he same as in r ef er ents and highes t mean v alue for men wit h tes ticular

cancer (8.95), and lo wes t f or men wit h pr os tate cancer (8.00) Item 2: 26% r epor ted de ter ior ated ph ysical wor k ability due t o cancer 19% r epor ted de ter ior ated ment al wor k ability due t o cancer

Among t he f emale sur viv ors (and male ref er ents, but no t among male sur vi - vors), co-w or kers ’ suppor t w as r elated to r educed r isk of im pair ed ph ysical wor k ability (OR

0.83, CI 0.73–0.94) and f

or im pair ed ment al w or k abil -

ity (OR 0.84, CI 0.73–0.96) A be tter social climate at w or k was onl y r elated t o im pair ed ment al wor k ability (and no t t o ph ysical w or k ability), f or male sur viv ors (OR 0.80,

CI 0.70–0.91) and for f

emale sur viv ors

(OR 0.84, CI 0.76–0.94)

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Tor p e t al. 15 mos t common ( 2012 ) cancers: lik e br eas t, gyneco - logical, pr os - tate, tes ticular , N = 653, pr imar y

diagnoses, 9% wit h me tas tasis, 68% f emale, mean ag e 51.9

(SD 7.9), 6% self-em

plo yed, No rwa y

Cr oss-sectional, 15–39 mont

hs af ter cancer diagnosis

W AI items 1 and 2 Item 1: mean t ot al (cur - rent) w or k ability w as 8.6 (SD 1.8) among men and 8.6 (SD 1.7) among w

omen Self-em plo yment w as a pr edict or f or lo wer wor k ability . Comor - bidity (36%) w as str ong ly cor related wit h w or k ability Item 2: 31% r epor ted a reduction in ph ysical wor k ability due t o cancer , 23% r epor ted a r eduction in ment al wor k ability . Mor e women t han men had reduced ment al w or k ability due t o cancer

Gener al social sup - por t ( β = 0.15, p ≤ .001) is a significant pr edict or of t ot al w or k ability in univ ar iate (and no t in multiv ar iate) reg ression Cancer -related col - league suppor t w as a significant pr edic - tor of t ot al w or k ability ( β = 0.15, p ≤ .01) in multi - var iate r eg ression Cancer -related super - visor suppor t w as no t a significant pr e- dict or of t ot al w or k ability in r eg ression anal yses

Decision latitude ( β = 0.08, p ≤ .05) is a significant pr edic - tor of w or k ability in univ ar iate (and no t in multiv ar iate) reg ression

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e Tor p e t al. Mos t common ( 2017 ) in vasiv e types of cancer : colon, rect al, lung, skin

(melanoma), br eas t, cer vical, uter ine, o var ian, pr os tate, tes - ticular , bladder , centr al ner vous sy stem, t hyr oid,

non-Hodgkin lym

phoma, and leuk emia, N = 1115, 69%

female, 8% self- em plo yed No t r etur ned t o wor k at time of sur ve y: 24% self- em plo yed and 18% salar ied

Cr oss-sectional, 15–39 mont

hs af ter diagnosis

W AI items 1 and 2 Item1: com par ed wit h the salar ied w or kers, the self-em plo yed people r epor ted significantl y mor e of ten r educed t ot al wor k ability ( p = .02,

effect size 0.26). The neg

ativ e effect of self-em plo yment on t ot al w or k ability seems t o be medi - ated b y r educed w or k hours and a neg ativ e cancer -related financial chang e

Item 2: no significant differ

ences be tw een t he salar ied and t he self- em plo yed

Poor -self r ated healt h s tatus cor - related signifi - cantl y wit h lo w to tal w or k ability in logis tic r eg res - sion anal yses

Ha ving higher deci -

sion latitude at wor

k w as a f act or pr ev enting lo w t ot al wor k ability (OR 0.80, CI 0.68–0.94)

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e

Von Ah e t al. ( 2018 )

Br eas t, N = 68, ex clusion of sec - ondar y cancers or me tas tasis, mean ag e 52.12 (SD 8.16), U nited St ates of Amer ica

Cr oss-sectional, study population on av er ag e 5 (SD 3.8) years pos t-tr eat -

ment (minimum 1 y ear)

WA I

Mean 38.9 (SD 7.5). P oor or moder ate w or k ability : 26.5%

Significant r ela - tionship be tw een per ceiv ed cogni - tiv e im pair ment and w or k ability (β = − 0.658, p < .000), explained v ar i-

ance: 46,5% Significant r

ela - tionship be tw een per ceiv ed cognitiv e ability and w or k abil - ity ( β = 0.472, p < .000), explained v ar i- ance: 29,9%

Von Ah e t al. ( 2017 )

Br eas t N = 68, ex clusion of br ain me tas tasis, mean ag e 52.12

(SD 8.603), 1% self-em

plo yed, United S tates of Amer ica

Cr oss-sectional, study population on a ver ag e 4.97 (SD 3.36) y ears pos t-tr eatment (minimum 1 y ear)

WA I W AI:

Mean 38.91 (SD 7.45) Poor 7–27: 10%, moder

-

ate 28–36: 16%, good 37–43: 46%, e

xcellent 44–49: 28%

Linear r eg res -

sion: significant relationship be tw een atten - tional f atigue (higher = higher lev el of atten - tion) and per - ceiv ed w or k abil - ity ( β = 0.627, p < .001), explained v ar i- ance: 39%

Table 1 (continued) Aut hors and y ear of

publication (ref er ence number)

Study population Study design W or k ability Late effects of cancer tr eatment and w or k ability (> 2 y ears af ter diagnosis) Job r esour ces and wor k ability Type of cancer , N = (e x-) cancer patients in anal ysis, (g ender), ag e in years, (% at w or k, type of em plo y- ment), se tting

Study appr oac h and time points measur ed

Assessment me Results in g ener al Ph ysical com - Fatigue Cognitiv e com - Job r esour ces: social thod plaints plaints suppor t, leadership sty le, coac hing, aut onom y, or ganiza - tional cultur e W ol vers

et al. ( 2019 )

Br eas t 84%, color ect al,

Non-Hodgkin, lym

phoma, o ther , N = 89, 91% female, mean ag e

47.9 (7.2), 10% self-em

plo yed, The N et her lands

Longitudinal inter

vention s tudy ,

baseline, 6, 12, 18 mont

hs

W AI item 1 In

verse, longitudinal association be

tw een fatigue and per ceiv ed wor k ability Zan ville

et al. ( 2016 )

Br eas t, N = 44 (22 c hemo- ther ap y-tr eated and 22 c hemo- ther ap y-naïv e), non-me tas tatic, female, mean ag e

resp. 49.68 (SD 8.0) and 52.68 (SD 9.3), U

nited St ates of Amer ica

Longitudinal, T0

= pr e-tr eatment (appr oximatel y one thir d of c hemo - ther ap y-tr eated receiv ed neo-adju - vant c hemo ther ap y and w er e sur ger y and tr eatment naïv e at baseline), T1 = appr oximatel y 1-mont h pos t- chemo ther ap y, T2 = appr oximatel y 1 y ear af ter T1

Item fr om F unc - tional W ell-Being

subscale of FA CT/GOG-Ntx (v ersion 4)

– N N umber , SD S tandar d De viation, OR Odds R atio, CI Confidence Inter val