Abstract 235P
Background
Perceived discrimination (PD) in the workplace of individuals diagnosed with cancer has been reported in the literature. Our study aimed at understanding the clinical and social factors related to reported PD in the workplace after return to work (RTW) of women diagnosed with early breast cancer (BC).
Methods
We used data from a French longitudinal cohort (CANTO; NCT01993498) including women diagnosed with stage I-III BC. Our analysis was conducted among 2130 women working and ≥5 years younger than legal retirement age at BC diagnosis (dx) who had returned to work two years afterwards. Logistic regression models were created, with PD in the workplace after RTW (i.e. being downgraded, unwillingly relocated or refused a promotion, or losing responsibilities) self-reported two years after dx as dependent variable and household income per capita (HI) as independent variable. Adjustment for age, working conditions before and after RTW (e.g. working part/full-time, size of the company, changes in working hours after RTW, number of months worked since RTW), clinical and health variables were carried out. To clarify the role of health in the association between HI and PD, stratified analyses by health status one year after dx (measured with QLQC30-GHS below/over 60) were carried out.
Results
Overall, 26% of women reported PD in the workplace after RTW, ranging from 20% when HI >3500€ to 29% when HI <1500€. After adjustment for working conditions, the association between HI and PD attenuated (table). After stratification by health status, no association between HI and PD was found among women with poor health status or among women with good health status. Table: 235P
Multivariable logistic regression of association between HI and PD in the workplace after RTW
| Household Income (€/month) | % | OR (95% CI) | |
| Model 1: Adjusted for age + clinical variables * | Model 1 + Adjusted for working conditions | ||
| >3500 | 12.5 | Ref | Ref |
| 3000-3500 | 10.1 | 1.19 (0.75 to 1.89) | 1.15 (0.71 to 1.85) |
| 2000-3000 | 27.3 | 1.34 (0.92 to 1.95) | 1.24 (0.84 to 1.84) |
| 1500-2000 | 24.4 | 1.56 (1.07 to 2.29) | 1.30 (0.87 to 1.94) |
| <1500 | 25.7 | 1.53 (1.04 to 2.24) | 1.40 (0.93 to 2.11) |
* stage at dx, treatment, Charlson at dx
Conclusions
After adjusting for working conditions, HI was not associated with reporting discrimination at work.
Clinical trial identification
NCT01993498.
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
UNICANCER.
Funding
This research was supported by the French Government under the “Investment for the Future” program managed by the National Research Agency (ANR), grant n° ANR-10-COHO-0004, and the French Foundation for Cancer Research, grant No. ARC, PGA1 RF20170205420.
Disclosure
I.V. Luis: Honoraria (self), Public Speaking: Novartis, Amgen, AstraZeneca ; Honoraria (self), Writing engagements: Kephren . A. Di Meglio: Honoraria (self): Thermo Fisher Scientific; Non-remunerated activity/ies, Clinical Research Fellowship: ESMO. B. Pistilli: Honoraria (self), Advisory role: Puma Biotechnology; Honoraria (self), Speaker: Pierre Fabre, Novartis, Myriad Genetics; Honoraria (self), Travel fees: MSD Oncology, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer; Research grant/Funding (institution), Clinical trial: Pfizer, Puma, Merus, Novartis, AstraZeneca; Non-remunerated activity/ies, ESMO membership: ESMO. P.H. Cottu: Honoraria (self): Pfizer, Novartis, Roche, AstraZeneca, NanoString Technologies; Advisory/Consultancy: Pfizer, Novartis, Genentech, Context Therapeutics; Research grant/Funding (institution): Novartis, Pfizer; Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Eli Lilly. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.