Top

Supportive Care in Cancer

Published in:

01-09-2015 | Original Article

The psychometric properties of the Korean version of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-cognitive (FACT-Cog) in Korean patients with breast cancer

Authors: Jin-Hee Park, Sun Hyoung Bae, Yong Sik Jung, Young-Mi Jung

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 9/2015

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive scale (FACT-Cog) in patients with breast cancer in Korea.

Methods

The FACT-Cog was translated into Korean using forward and back translation. Patients with breast cancer who had undergone chemotherapy were enrolled from the university hospital and assessed using the Korean version of the FACT-Cog, the cognitive functioning scale of the EORTC-QLQ-C30 (EORTC-CF), and the Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition (BDI-II). Analyses of internal consistency, construct validity, concurrent validity, and convergent validity were performed to evaluate the psychometric characteristics.

Results

A total of 250 patients completed the questionnaire. There were no missing data and patients completed the scale within 10 min. The Korean version of the FACT-Cog had acceptable internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of 0.94 for the total scores and 0.87–0.95 for the four subscales. The item-total correlation coefficients ranged from 0.36 to 0.95. Moderate correlations were found (r = 0.33 to 0.53) between the Korean version of the FACT-Cog and the EORTC-CF. There was acceptable convergent validity, with weak and moderately significant correlations (r = −0.41 to −0.22) between the Korean version of the FACT-Cog and the BDI-II. Confirmatory factory analysis supported a four-factor structure of the Korean version of the FACT-Cog with a good model fit.

Conclusions

The Korean version of the FACT-Cog is a valid and reliable scale to measure self-reporting of cognitive impairment in patients with breast cancer who are undergoing chemotherapy.

Hutchinson AD, Hosking JR, Kichenadasse G et al (2012) Objective and subjective cognitive impairment following chemotherapy for cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Treat Rev 38:926–934. doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2012.05.002 PubMedCrossRef

Pullens MJ, De Vries J, Roukema JA (2010) Subjective cognitive dysfunction in breast cancer patients: a systematic review. Psychooncology 19:1127–1138. doi:10.1002/pon.1673 PubMedCrossRef

Mehnert A, Scherwath A, Schirmer L et al (2007) The association between neuropsychological impairment, self-perceived cognitive deficits, fatigue and health related quality of life in breast cancer survivors following standard adjuvant versus high-dose chemotherapy. Patient Educ Couns 66:108–118. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2006.11.005 PubMedCrossRef

Von Ah D, Habermann B, Carpenter JS, Schneider BL (2013) Impact of perceived cognitive impairment in breast cancer survivors. Eur J Oncol Nurs 17:236–241. doi:10.1016/j.ejon.2012.06.002

Falleti MG, Sanfilippo A, Maruff P et al (2005) The nature and severity of cognitive impairment associated with adjuvant chemotherapy in women with breast cancer: a meta-analysis of the current literature. Brain Cogn 59:60–70. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2005.05.001 PubMedCrossRef

Stewart A, Bielajew C, Collins B et al (2006) Meta-analysis of the neuropsychological effects of adjuvant chemotherapy treatment in women treated for breast cancer. Clin Neuropsychol 20:76–89. doi:10.1080/138540491005875 PubMedCrossRef

Bender CM, Sereika SM, Berga SL et al (2006) Cognitive impairment associated with adjuvant therapy in breast cancer. Psychooncology 15:422–430. doi:10.1002/pon.964 PubMedCrossRef

Wagner L, Sweet J, Butt Z et al (2009) Measuring patient self-reported cognitive function: development of the functional assessment of cancer therapy—cognitive function instrument. J Support Oncol 7:W32–W39

Munir F, Burrows J, Yarker J et al (2010) Women’s perceptions of chemotherapy-induced cognitive side affects on work ability: a focus group study. J Clin Nurs 19:1362–1370. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03006.x PubMedCrossRef

10.

Myers JA (2009) Comparison of the theory of unpleasant symptoms and the conceptual model of chemotherapy-related changes in cognitive function. Oncol Nurs Forum 36:E1–E10. doi:10.1188/09.ONF. E1-E10 PubMedCrossRef

11.

Lai J-S, Butt Z, Wagner L et al (2008) Evaluating the dimensionality of perceived cognitive function. J Pain Symptom Manag 37:982–995. doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2008.07.012 CrossRef

12.

Vardy J, Wong K, Yi QL et al (2006) Assessing cognitive function in cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 14:1111–1118. doi:10.1007/s00520-006-0037-6 PubMedCrossRef

13.

Von Ah D, Tallman EF (2014) Perceived cognitive function in breast cancer survivors: evaluating relationships with objective cognitive performance and other symptoms using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Cognitive scale (FACT-Cog). J Pain Symptom Manag. doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2014.08.012

14.

Cheung YT, Lim SR, Shwe M et al (2013) Psychometric properties and measurement equivalence of the English and Chinese versions of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-cognitive in Asian patients with breast cancer. Value Health 16:1001–1013. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2013.06.017 PubMedCrossRef

15.

Joly F, Lange M, Rigal O et al (2012) French version of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-cognitive function (FACT-Cog) version 3. Support Care Cancer 20:3297–3305. doi:10.1007/s00520-012-1439-2 PubMedCrossRef

16.

Beck AT, Steer RA, Brown GK (1996) BDI-II, Beck depression inventory: manual, 2nd edn. Harcourt Brace, Boston

17.

Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (1996) Using multivariate statistics, 3rd edn. HarperCollins, New York

18.

Boomsma A, Hoogland JJ (2001) The robustness of LISREL modeling revised. In: Cudeck S, du Toit R, Sörbom D (eds) Structural equation modeling: present and future. Scientific Software International, Chicago, pp 107–123

19.

Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B et al (1993) The European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:365–376. doi:10.1093/jnci/85.5.365 PubMedCrossRef

20.

Yun YH, Park YS, Lee ES et al (2004) Validation of the Korean version of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res 13:863–868PubMedCrossRef

21.

American Psychiatric Association (1994) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM), 4th edn. American Psychiatric Association, Washington

22.

Lim SH, Lee EJ, Jeong SW et al (2011) The validation study of beck depression scale 2 in Korean version. Anxiety Mood 7:48–53

23.

Bonomi AE, Cella DF, Hahn EA et al (1996) Multilingual translation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT) quality of life measurement system. Qual Life Res 5:309–320PubMedCrossRef

24.

Eremenco SL, Cella D, Arnold BJ (2005) A comprehensive method for the translation and cross-cultural validation of health status questionnaires. Eval Health Prof 28:212–232. doi:10.1177/0163278705275342 PubMedCrossRef

25.

Polit DF, Beck CT (2013) Essentials of nursing research: appraising evidence for nursing practice, 8th edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia

26.

DeVellis RF (2011) Scale development: theory and applications, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

27.

Jacobs SR, Jacobsen PB, Booth-Jones M et al (2007) Evaluation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy cognitive scale with hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. J Pain Symptom Manag 33:13–23. doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.06.011 CrossRef

28.

Taylor R (1990) Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: a basic review. JDMS 6:35–39

29.

Streiner DL, Norman GR (2003) Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

30.

Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC (1998) Multivariate data analysis, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

31.

Pedhazur E, Schmelkin LP (1991) Measurement, design and analysis: an integrated approach. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale

32.

Cronbach L, Meehl P (1955) Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychol Bull 52:281–302PubMedCrossRef

Title: The psychometric properties of the Korean version of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-cognitive (FACT-Cog) in Korean patients with breast cancer
Authors: Jin-Hee Park
Sun Hyoung Bae
Yong Sik Jung
Young-Mi Jung
Publication date: 01-09-2015
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 9/2015
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2632-x

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2015

Erratum to: Incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: ADVICE (Actual Data of Vomiting Incidence by Chemotherapy Evaluation) study

Statin use in cancer patients with brain metastases: a missed communication opportunity at the end of life

Cancer treatment-related neuropathic pain: proof of concept study with menthol—a TRPM8 agonist

Whose role? Oncology practitioners’ perceptions of their role in providing spiritual care to advanced cancer patients

Impact of time to antibiotics on outcomes of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia

Incongruent perceptions of pain and physical function among families living with lung cancer

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer