Dataset Information

Targeted eHealth Intervention to Reduce Breast Cancer Survivors' Fear of Recurrence: Results from the FoRtitude Randomized Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Fear of recurrence (FoR) is a prevalent concern among breast cancer survivors (BCS) yet few accessible interventions exist. This study evaluated a targeted eHealth intervention, "FoRtitude," to reduce FoR using cognitive behavioral skills training and telecoaching.

Methods

BCS (N = 196) were recruited from an academic medical center and 3 National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program community sites, had stage 0-III breast cancer, were 1-10 years post-primary treatment, with moderate to high FoR and familiarity with the internet. Using the Multiphase Optimization Strategy, participants were independently randomized to three cognitive behavioral skill (Relaxation, Cognitive restructuring, Worry practice) versus an attention control condition (health management content; HMC), and to telecoaching (motivational interviewing) versus no telecoaching. Website content was released across 4 weeks and included didactic lessons, interactive tools, and a text-messaging feature. BCS completed the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI) at baseline, 4 and 8 weeks. FCRI scores over time were compared using mixed-effects models. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

Results

FCRI scores decreased statistically significantly from baseline to post-intervention (T0=53.1 [SD = 17.4], T2=41.9 [SD = 16.2]; p < 0.001). The magnitude of reduction in FCRI scores was comparable across CBT and attention control HMC conditions and was predicted by increased self-efficacy. Telecoaching was associated with lower attrition and greater website use (mean adherence score = 26.6 [SD = 7.2] vs. 21.0 [SD = 10.5]; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

BCS experienced statistically significant reductions in FoR post-intervention, but improvements were comparable between CBT and attention controls. Telecoaching improved adherence and retention. Future research on optimal integration of CBT and HMC, dose, and features of eHealth delivery that contributed to reducing FoR is needed. In the COVID-19 era, remote delivery has become even more essential for reaching survivors struggling with FoR.

SUBMITTER: Wagner LI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8244801 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFear of cancer recurrence (FCR) has a profound negative impact on quality of life (QOL) for many cancer survivors. Breast cancer survivors (BCS) are particularly vulnerable, with up to 70% reporting clinically significant FCR. To the authors' knowledge, evidence-based interventions for managing FCR are limited. Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) promotes psychological flexibility in managing life's stressors. The current study examined the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of group-based ACT for FCR in BCS.MethodsPost-treatment BCS (91 patients with stage I-III disease) with clinical FCR randomly were assigned to ACT (6 weekly 2-hour group sessions), survivorship education (SE; 6 weekly 2-hour group sessions), or enhanced usual care (EUC; one 30-minute group coaching session with survivorship readings). FCR severity (primary outcome) and avoidant coping, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, depression, QOL, and other FCR-related variables (secondary outcomes) were assessed at baseline (T1), after the intervention (T2), 1 month after the intervention (T3), and 6 months after the intervention (T4) using intent-to-treat analysis.ResultsSatisfactory recruitment (43.8%) and retention (94.5%) rates demonstrated feasibility. Although each arm demonstrated within-group reductions in FCR severity over time, only ACT produced significant reductions at each time point compared with baseline, with between-group differences at T4 substantially favoring ACT over SE (Cohen d for effect sizes, 0.80; P < .001) and EUC (Cohen d, 0.61; P < .01). For 10 of 12 secondary outcomes, only ACT produced significant within-group reductions across all time points. By T4, significant moderate to large between-group comparisons favored ACT over SE and EUC with regard to avoidant coping, anxiety, depression, QOL, and FCR-related psychological distress.ConclusionsGroup-based ACT is a feasible and promising treatment for FCR and associated outcomes in BCS that warrants testing in larger, fully powered trials.

Project description:IntroductionOne of the most common distressing conditions experienced by breast cancer survivors is fear of cancer recurrence (FCR). There is, however, no standard intervention for ameliorating FCR. Our clinical experience and previous studies have suggested the potential benefits of problem-solving therapy (PST) and behavioural activation (BA). Given the huge number of cancer survivors and limited number of therapists to competently conduct PST and BA, we have developed PST and BA smartphone applications. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the smartphone-based PST (Kaiketsu-App) and BA (Genki-App) apps in reducing FCR in patients with breast cancer.Methods and analysisThe SMartphone Intervention to LEssen fear of cancer recurrence project is an open-label, individually randomised, parallel-group trial. Allocation will be managed by a central server using a computer-generated random allocation sequence provided by an independent data centre. Participants will be randomised to smartphone-based intervention plus treatment as usual (TAU) or waitlist control with TAU alone. The primary endpoint of the study is the Japanese version of the Concerns About Recurrence Scale, which will be administered as an electronic patient-reported outcome on the patients' smartphone after 8 weeks.Ethics and disseminationThe present study is subject to the ethical guidelines for clinical studies published by Japan's Ministry of Education, Science and Technology and Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare and the modified Act on the Protection of Personal Information as well as the ethical principles established for research on humans stipulated in the Declaration of Helsinki and further amendments thereto. The protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Nagoya City University on 15 January 2018 (ID: 60-00-1171).Trial statusThe randomised trial, which commenced on 2 April 2018, currently enrols participants. The estimated end date for this study is in March 2020.Trial registration numberUMIN000031140; Pre-results.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Frequent sickness absence-that is, 3 or more episodes of sickness absence in 1 year-is a problem for employers and employees. Many employees who have had frequent sickness absence in a prior year also have frequent sickness absence in subsequent years: 39% in the first follow-up year and 61% within 4 years. Moreover, 19% have long-term sickness absence (≥6 weeks) in the first follow-up year and 50% within 4 years. We developed an electronic health (eHealth) intervention, consisting of fully automated feedback and advice, to use either as a stand-alone tool (eHealth intervention-only) or combined with consultation with an occupational physician (eHealth intervention-occupational physician). OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the eHealth intervention, with or without additional occupational physician consultation, to reduce sickness absence frequency for employees with frequent sickness absence, versus care as usual (CAU). METHODS:This study was a three-armed randomized controlled trial. Employees with frequent sickness absence received invitational letters, which were distributed by their employers. The primary outcome measure was the number of register-based sickness absence episodes 12 months after completing the baseline questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures were register-based total sickness absence days and self-assessed burnout, engagement, and work ability. In a process evaluation 3 months after baseline, we examined adherence to the intervention and additional actions such as general practitioner and occupational physician visit, communication with the manager, and lifestyle change. RESULTS:A total of 82 participants were included in the analyses, 21 in the eHealth intervention-only group, 31 in the eHealth intervention-occupational physician group, and 30 in the CAU group. We found no significant difference in sickness absence frequency between the groups at 1-year follow-up. Sickness absence frequency decreased in the eHealth intervention-only group from 3 (interquartile range, IQR 3-4) to 1 episode (IQR 0.3-2.8), in the eHealth intervention-occupational physician group from 4 (IQR 3-5) to 3 episodes (IQR 1-4), and in the CAU group from 3 (IQR 3-4) to 2 episodes (IQR 1-3). For secondary outcomes, we found no significant differences between the intervention groups and the control group. The process evaluation showed that only 3 participants from the eHealth intervention-occupational physician group visited the occupational physician on invitation. CONCLUSIONS:Among employees with frequent sickness absence, we found no effect from the eHealth intervention as a stand-alone tool in reducing sickness absence frequency, nor on total sickness absence days, burnout, engagement, or work ability. This might be due to low adherence to the intervention because of insufficient urgency to act. We cannot draw any conclusion on the effect of the eHealth intervention tool combined with an occupational physician consultation (eHealth intervention-occupational physician), due to very low adherence to the occupational physician consultation. An occupational physician consultation could increase a sense of urgency and lead to more focus and appropriate support. As this was the first effectiveness study among employees with frequent sickness absence, strategies to improve recruitment and adherence in occupational eHealth are included. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Netherlands Trial Register NTR4316; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4316 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/713DHhOFU).

Project description:Purpose: Psychological interventions targeting fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) are effective in reducing fear and distress. Process evaluations are an important, yet scarce adjunct to published intervention trials, despite their utility in guiding the interpretation of study outcomes and optimizing intervention design for broader implementation. Accordingly, this paper reports the findings of a process evaluation conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial of a psychological intervention for melanoma patients. Methods: Men and women with a history of Stage 0-II melanoma at high-risk of developing new primary disease were recruited via High Risk Melanoma Clinics across Sydney, Australia and randomly allocated to receive the psychological intervention (n = 80) or usual care (n = 84). Intervention participants received a tailored psycho-educational resource and three individual psychotherapeutic sessions delivered via telehealth. Qualitative and quantitative data on intervention context, processes, and delivery (reach, dose, and fidelity), and mechanisms of impact (participant responses, moderators of outcome) were collected from a range of sources, including participant surveys, psychotherapeutic session audio-recordings, and clinical records. Results: Almost all participants reported using the psycho-educational resource (97%), received all intended psychotherapy sessions (96%), and reported high satisfaction with both intervention components. Over 80% of participants would recommend the intervention to others, and a small proportion (4%) found discussion of melanoma-related experiences confronting. Perceived benefits included enhanced doctor-patient communication, talking more openly with family members about melanoma, and improved coping. Of potential moderators, only higher FCR severity at baseline (pre-intervention) was associated with greater reductions in FCR severity (primary outcome) at 6-month follow-up (primary endpoint). Conclusions: Findings support the acceptability and feasibility of a psychological intervention to reduce FCR amongst individuals at high risk of developing another melanoma. Implementation into routine melanoma care is an imperative next step, with FCR screening recommended to identify those most likely to derive the greatest psychological benefit.