Dyadic coping after cancer diagnosis – a longitudinal cluster analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/1651-226X.2025.42561Keywords:
trajectory, partnership, survivorship, couple-related, psycho-oncologicalAbstract
Background and purpose: Dyadic coping (DC) considers the perception of both the individual and their partner’s coping behavior and influences various health outcomes. Given the paucity of research investigating the course of DC after a cancer diagnosis, we explored longitudinal data to find statistically distinct trajectories of DC and to characterize and predict those based on medical, psychological and sociodemographic characteristics.
Materials and methods: In this prospective, multicenter study, we assessed patients with primary solid tumors at four measurement points using validated self-report questionnaires: first within 8 weeks of diagnosis, then at 6-month intervals. We measured DC using the Dyadic Coping Inventory (DCI). Clusters were identified via a feature-based clustering approach, characterized with t-tests and chi-squared tests and predicted with multinomial logistic regression.
Results and interpretation: We analyzed data from 418 patients in a partnership (mean age 61 years, 55.3% men, 84.8% married). Most prevalent cancers were prostate cancer (25.6%), skin cancer (17.5%) and breast cancer (16.3%). One cluster (33.5%) reported a stable high trajectory of coping behavior, indicating good coping behavior. It had the following characteristics: male (62.9%), regularly employed (57.9%), prostate cancer (34.3%) and childless (27.1%). The remaining sample contained a cluster with increasing coping behavior (34.7%) and another with decreasing coping behavior (31.8%). Lack of regular employment, having children and generalized anxiety are significantly associated with worsening coping behavior.
This study is one of the first to examine DC trajectories in a large sample of cancer patients in the early phase after diagnosis. It is essential to understand markers such as psychological stress or family and work-related issues to optimize clinical and psycho-oncological outcomes and facilitate the support or maintenance of couple-related disease management in the long term.
Downloads
References
Kayser K, Watson LE, Andrade JT. Cancer as a “we-disease”: Examining the process of coping from a relational perspective. Fam Syst Health. 2007;25:404–18.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1091-7527.25.4.404 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1091-7527.25.4.404
Köditz AK, Mehnert-Theuerkauf A, Ernst J. Partnerschaftsstatus und Prävalenz psychischer Störungen bei Frauen und Männern mit einer Krebserkrankung [Partnership status and prevalence of mental disorders in women and men with cancer]. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2024 [Online ahead of print.].
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2390-1951 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2390-1951
Gmelch S, Bodenmann G, Meuwly N, Ledermann T, Steffen-Sozinova O, Striegl K. Dyadisches Coping Inventar (DCI): Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung des partnerschaftlichen Umgangs mit Stress. JFamRes. 2008;20:185–202.
https://doi.org/10.20377/jfr-264 DOI: https://doi.org/10.20377/jfr-264
Ernst J, Hinz A, Niederwieser D, Döhner H, Hönig K, Vogelhuber M, et al. Dyadic coping of patients with hematologic malignancies and their partners and its relation to quality of life – a longitudinal study. Leuk Lymphoma. 2017;58:655–65.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10428194.2016.1194983 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10428194.2016.1194983
Pankrath A-L, Weißflog G, Mehnert A, Niederwieser D, Döhner H, Hönig K, et al. The relation between dyadic coping and relationship satisfaction in couples dealing with haematological cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2018;27(1):e12595.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12595 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12595
Crangle CJ, Torbit LA, Ferguson SE, Hart TL. Dyadic coping mediates the effects of attachment on quality of life among couples facing ovarian cancer. J Behav Med. 2020;43:564–75.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-019-00096-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-019-00096-3
Chen M, Gong J, Cao Q, Luo X, Li J, Li Q. A literature review of the relationship between dyadic coping and dyadic outcomes in cancer couples. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2021;54:102035.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2021.102035 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2021.102035
Rottmann N, Hansen DG, Larsen PV, Nicolaisen A, Flyger H, Johansen C, et al. Dyadic coping within couples dealing with breast cancer: a longitudinal, population-based study. Health Psychol. 2015;34:486–95.
https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000218 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000218
Ştefănuţ AM, Vintilă M, Tudorel OI. The relationship of dyadic coping with emotional functioning and quality of the relationship in couples facing cancer: a meta-analysis. Front Psychol. 2020;11:594015.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.594015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.594015
Johnson MD, Horne RM, Galovan AM. The developmental course of supportive dyadic coping in couples. Dev Psychol. 2016;52:2031–43.
https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000216 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000216
Stadelmann C, Senn M, Forster F, Rauch-Anderegg V, Nussbeck FW, Johnson MD, et al. Dyadic coping trajectories across the transition to parenthood: associations with child mental health problems. J Fam Psychol. 2023;37:358–68.
https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0001026 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0001026
Mehnert-Theuerkauf A, Hufeld JM, Esser P, Goerling U, Hermann M, Zimmermann T, et al. Prevalence of mental disorders, psychosocial distress, and perceived need for psychosocial support in cancer patients and their relatives stratified by biopsychosocial factors: rationale, study design, and methods of a prospective multi-center observational cohort study (LUPE study). Front Psychol. 2023;14:1125545.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1125545 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1125545
Goerling U, Ernst J, Esser P, Haering C, Hermann M, Hornemann B, et al. Estimating the prevalence of mental disorders in patients with newly diagnosed cancer in relation to socioeconomic status: a multicenter prospective observational study. ESMO Open. 2024;9(8):103655.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2024.103655 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2024.103655
Winkler J, Stolzenberg H. Der Sozialschichtindex im Bundes-Gesundheitssurvey. Das Gesundheitswesen. 2000;61 Spec No:S178–83.
Bodenmann G. Dyadic Coping Inventory. Manual Bern: Hand Huber; 2008.
Levesque C, Lafontaine M-F, Caron A, Fitzpatrick J. Validation of the english version of the dyadic coping inventory. Measure Eval Counsel Dev. 2014;47:215–25.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175614522272 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175614522272
Sackmann C, Weißflog G, Bodschwinna D, Hönig K, Ernst J. Different coping constructs in haematological cancer patients: the influence of dyadic on individual coping interplay of DC and IC in haematological cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2024;2024:1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/3272185 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/3272185
van Roij J, Raijmakers N, Kloover J, Kuip E, Smilde T, van der Velden L-A, et al. Dyadic coping and its association with emotional functioning in couples confronted with advanced cancer: results of the multicenter observational eQuiPe study. Psychooncology. 2022;31:1545–54.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5961 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5961
Landolt SA, Weitkamp K, Roth M, Sisson NM, Bodenmann G. Dyadic coping and mental health in couples: a systematic review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2023;106:102344.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102344 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102344
Mehnert A, Müller D, Lehmann C, Koch U. Die deutsche Version des NCCN Distress-Thermometers: empirische Prüfung eines Screening-instruments zur Erfassung psychosozialer Belastung bei Krebspatienten. Zeitschrift für Psychiatrie, Psychologie und Psychotherapie. 2006;45:213–23.
https://doi.org/10.1024/1661-4747.54.3.213 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1024/1661-4747.54.3.213
Mehnert A, Herschbach P, Berg P, Henrich G, Koch U. Progredienzangst bei Brustkrebspatientinnen: Validierung der Kurzform des Progredienzangstfragebogens PA-F-KF. Z Psychosom Med Psychother. 2006;52(2):274–88.
https://doi.org/10.13109/zptm.2006.52.3.274 DOI: https://doi.org/10.13109/zptm.2006.52.3.274
Löwe B, Unützer J, Callahan CM, Perkins AJ, Kroenke K. Monitoring depression treatment outcomes with the patient health questionnaire-9. Med Care. 2004;42(12):1194–201.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-200412000-00006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-200412000-00006
Löwe B, Decker O, Müller S, Brähler E, Schellberg D, Herzog W, et al. Validation and standardization of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7) in the general population. Med Care. 2008;46(3):266–74.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e318160d093 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e318160d093
Norton R. Measuring marital quality: a critical look at the dependent variable. J Marr Fam. 1983;45(1):141–51.
https://doi.org/10.2307/351302 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/351302
Zimmermann T, De Zwaan M, Heinrichs N. The German version of the Quality of Marriage Index: psychometric properties in a representative sample and population-based norms. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0212758.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212758 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212758
Teuling, Niek Den; Pauws, Steffen; van den Heuvel, Edwin. Clustering of longitudinal data: A tutorial on a variety of approaches; 2021. [accessed March 12, 2025] Available from https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.05469
Rousseeuw PJ. Silhouettes. A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. J Comput Appl Math. 1987;20:53–65.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-0427(87)90125-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-0427(87)90125-7
Supandi A, Saefuddin A, Sulvianti ID. Two step cluster application to classify villages in Kabupaten Madiun based on village potential data. Xplore. 2021;10:12–26.
https://doi.org/10.29244/xplore.v10i1.272 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29244/xplore.v10i1.272
Ruxton GD, Beauchamp G. Time for some a priori thinking about post hoc testing. Behav Ecol 2008;19:690–3.
https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arn020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arn020
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates; Taylor and Francis; 1988.
Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothenstein HR. Introduction to meta-analysis. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470743386
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Version 4.4.1. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2024.
Maechler M, Rousseeuw P, Struyf A, Hubert M, Hornik K. Cluster analysis basics and extensions. R package version 2.1.6. 2023.
Wickham H. ggplot2. Elegant graphics for data analysis. 2nd ed. Cham: Springer International Publishing (Use R!); 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4_9
Yee TW. VGAM. Vector generalized linear and additive models [Internet]. R package version 1.1-12; 2024. [last accessed 26 October, 2024] Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=VGAM
Bodschwinna D, Ernst J, Mehnert-Theuerkauf A, Gündel H, Weißflog G, Hönig K. Dyadic coping and social support: various types of support in hematooncological patients and their spouses—associations with psychological distress. Psycho-Oncology. 2021;30(7):1041–50.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5631 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5631
Liu W, Lewis FM, Oxford M, Kantrowitz-Gordon I. Common dyadic coping and its congruence in couples facing breast cancer: the impact on couples’ psychological distress. Psychooncology. 2024;33:e6314.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.6314 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.6314
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Anne-Kathrin Köditz, Anja Mehnert-Theuerkauf, Ute Goerling, Tanja Zimmermann, Beate Hornemann, Franziska Springer, Michael Friedrich, Jochen Ernst
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
