Cognition and Return to Work Status 2 Years After Breast Cancer Diagnosis

Marie Lange,Justine Lequesne,Agnes Dumas,Bénédicte Clin,Ines Vaz-Luis,Barbara Pistilli,Olivier Rigal,Christelle Lévy,Florence Lerebours,Anne-Laure Martin,Sibille Everhard,Gwenn Menvielle,Florence Joly

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.27576

2024-08-01

Abstract:Importance: Return to work after breast cancer (BC) treatment depends on several factors, including treatment-related adverse effects. While cancer-related cognitive impairment is frequently reported by patients with BC, to date, no longitudinal studies have assessed its association with return to work. Objective: To examine whether cognition, assessed using objective and subjective scores, was associated with return to work 2 years after BC diagnosis. Design, setting, and participants: In a case series of the French Cancer Toxicities (CANTO) cohort, a study of patients with stage I to III BC investigated cognition from April 2014 to December 2018 (2 years' follow-up). Participants included women aged 58 years or younger at BC diagnosis who were employed or looking for a job. Main outcomes and measures: The outcome was return to work assessed 2 years after BC diagnosis. Objective cognitive functioning (tests), cognitive symptoms, anxiety, depression, and fatigue were prospectively assessed at diagnosis (baseline), 1 year after treatment completion, and 2 years after diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to explain return to work status at year 2 according to each cognitive measure separately, adjusted for age, occupational class, stage at diagnosis, and chemotherapy. Results: The final sample included 178 women with BC (median age: 48.7 [range, 28-58] years), including 37 (20.8%) who did not return to work at year 2. Patients who returned to work had a higher (ie, professional) occupational class and were less likely to have had a mastectomy (24.1% vs 54.1%; P < .001). Return to work at year 2 was associated with lower overall cognitive impairment (1-point unit of increased odds ratio [1-pt OR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.13-0.79; P = .01), higher working memory (1-pt OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.23-3.59; P = .008), higher processing speed (1-pt OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.20-3.36; P = .01) and higher attention performance (1-pt OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.04-2.64; P = .04), higher perceived cognitive abilities (1-pt OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.03-1.21; P = .007), and lower depression (1-pt OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.93; P = .001) at year 2 assessment. Return to work at year 2 was associated with several measures assessed at baseline and year 1: higher processing speed (1-pt OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.37-4.31; P = .003 and 1.95; 95% CI, 1.14-3.50; P = .02), higher executive performance (1-pt OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.28-5.75; P = .01, and 2.88; 95% CI, 1.36-6.28; P = .006), and lower physical fatigue (10-pt OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95; P = .009 and 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98; P = .02). Conclusions and relevance: In this case series study of patients with BC, return to work 2 years after diagnosis was associated with higher cognitive speed performance before and after BC treatment. Cognitive difficulties should be assessed before return to work to propose suitable management.