Additional file 1: of Health-related quality of life among long-term (≥5 years) prostate cancer survivors by primary intervention: a systematic review

Appendices. (DOCX 41 kb

Additional file 2: of Quality of life and physical activity in long-term (≥5 years post-diagnosis) colorectal cancer survivors - systematic review

Table S2. Association of PA and QOL – Subgroup analyses. (DOCX 43 kb

Additional file 1: of Quality of life and physical activity in long-term (≥5 years post-diagnosis) colorectal cancer survivors - systematic review

Table S1. Search terms. (DOCX 13 kb

Additional file 3: of Quality of life and physical activity in long-term (≥5 years post-diagnosis) colorectal cancer survivors - systematic review

Table S3. Association of PA and QOL - Symptom scales. (DOCX 18 kb

Benefit finding, posttraumatic growth and health-related quality of life in long-term cancer survivors: a prospective population-based study

We explored the relationship between benefit finding (BF)/posttraumatic growth (PTG) at baseline and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at baseline and follow-up in long-term cancer survivors (LTCS; ≥5-year post-diagnosis). HRQOL was assessed in LTCS in 2009–2011 (5- to 16-year post-diagnosis, baseline) and re-assessed in 2018/2019 (14- to 24-year post-diagnosis, follow-up). BF and PTG were measured at baseline; mean scores were dichotomized into ‘none-to-low’ ( =3). Linear regression models and linear mixed regression models were employed to assess the association of BF/PTG with HRQOL. Of the 6057 baseline participants, 4373 were alive in 2019, of whom 2704 completed the follow-up questionnaire. Cross-sectionally, LTCS with none-to-low BF reported better HRQOL at baseline and at follow-up than LTCS with higher BF. Longitudinally, no difference was found between none-to-low and moderate-to-high BF on the HRQOL change from baseline to follow-up. HRQOL differences between the PTG groups were not statistically significant cross-sectionally and longitudinally, except those participants with moderate-to-high PTG reported higher role functioning and global health status/QOL. Cross-sectionally, BF was significantly negatively related to subscales of HRQOL, while PTG was positively correlated to role functioning and global health status/QOL. The results add further evidence that BF and PTG are two different positive psychological concepts.</p

Additional file 1: Table S1. of Reproductive profiles and risk of breast cancer subtypes: a multi-center case-only study

Definitions of breast cancer subtypes that have been applied in previous BCAC manuscripts. Table S2 Number of breast cancer patients with reproductive risk factor data in the 34 BCAC studies assessed in this study. Table S3 Number of breast cancer case patients with tumor marker data in the 34 BCAC studies assessed in this study. Table S4 Distribution of tumor characteristics according to breast cancer subtypes. Table S5 Association between parity (ever versus never) and BC subtypes for age overall and for specific ages (40, 50 and 60 years). Table S6 Frequency table showing parity by subtype and age group. Table S7 Associations between age at menarche, age at FFTP and breast cancer subtypes. The same analysis as in Table 4 is performed but here parity is considered a continuous variable. Table S8 Effect of parity (ever versus never) on BC subtype risk across all ages at BC diagnosis and corrected for BMI. Associations between age at menarche, age at FFTP and breast cancer subtype risk. (DOCX 60 kb

List of participating studies and number of Caucasian subjects included in at least one GxE analysis.

<p>List of participating studies and number of Caucasian subjects included in at least one GxE analysis.</p

Main effects for the epidemiologic variables included in the analyses, derived from population-based studies only¹.

<p>Main effects for the epidemiologic variables included in the analyses, derived from population-based studies only^{<a href="http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003284#nt104" target="_blank">1</a>}.</p

Per-allele SNP odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals stratified by environmental risk factors of breast cancer, and combined SNP main effect.

<p>(A) <i>LSP1</i>-rs3817198 x Number of full-term births (among parous), (B) 1p11-rs11249433 x Parous (yes/no), (C) <i>CASP8</i>-rs17468277 x mean lifetime intake of alcohol (<20 g/day versus > = 20 g/day).</p

Associations between selected SNPs and breast cancer risk in Caucasians, overall and by ER status (estimated per-allele odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals)¹.

<p>Associations between selected SNPs and breast cancer risk in Caucasians, overall and by ER status (estimated per-allele odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals)^{<a href="http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003284#nt107" target="_blank">1</a>}.</p