Guy H Montgomery1, Daniel David, Maria Kangas, Sheryl Green, Madalina Sucala, Dana H Bovbjerg, Michael N Hallquist, Julie B Schnur. 1. Guy H. Montgomery, Daniel David, Sheryl Green, Madalina Sucala, and Julie B. Schnur, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; Daniel David and Madalina Sucala, Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania; Maria Kangas, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Dana H. Bovbjerg, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, University of Pittsburgh; and Michael N. Hallquist, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to test the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy plus hypnosis (CBTH) to control fatigue in patients with breast cancer undergoing radiotherapy. We hypothesized that patients in the CBTH group receiving radiotherapy would have lower levels of fatigue than patients in an attention control group. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 200) were randomly assigned to either the CBTH (n = 100; mean age, 55.59 years) or attention control (n = 100; mean age, 55.97 years) group. Fatigue was measured at four time points (baseline, end of radiotherapy, 4 weeks, and 6 months after radiotherapy). Fatigue was measured using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) -Fatiguesubscale and Visual Analog Scales (VASs; Fatigue and Muscle Weakness). RESULTS: The CBTH group had significantly lower levels of fatigue (FACIT) at the end of radiotherapy (z, 6.73; P < .001), 4-week follow-up (z, 6.98; P < .001), and 6-month follow-up (z, 7.99; P < .001) assessments. Fatigue VAS scores were significantly lower in the CBTH group at the end of treatment (z, 5.81; P < .001) and at the 6-month follow-up (z, 4.56; P < .001), but not at the 4-week follow-up (P < .07). Muscle Weakness VAS scores were significantly lower in the CBTH group at the end of treatment (z, 9.30; P < .001) and at the 6-month follow-up (z, 3.10; P < .02), but not at the 4-week follow-up (P < .13). CONCLUSION: The results support CBTH as an evidence-based intervention to control fatigue in patients undergoing radiotherapy for breast cancer. CBTH is noninvasive, has no adverse effects, and its beneficial effects persist long after the last intervention session. CBTH seems to be a candidate for future dissemination and implementation.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to test the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy plus hypnosis (CBTH) to control fatigue in patients with breast cancer undergoing radiotherapy. We hypothesized that patients in the CBTH group receiving radiotherapy would have lower levels of fatigue than patients in an attention control group. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 200) were randomly assigned to either the CBTH (n = 100; mean age, 55.59 years) or attention control (n = 100; mean age, 55.97 years) group. Fatigue was measured at four time points (baseline, end of radiotherapy, 4 weeks, and 6 months after radiotherapy). Fatigue was measured using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) -Fatigue subscale and Visual Analog Scales (VASs; Fatigue and Muscle Weakness). RESULTS: The CBTH group had significantly lower levels of fatigue (FACIT) at the end of radiotherapy (z, 6.73; P < .001), 4-week follow-up (z, 6.98; P < .001), and 6-month follow-up (z, 7.99; P < .001) assessments. Fatigue VAS scores were significantly lower in the CBTH group at the end of treatment (z, 5.81; P < .001) and at the 6-month follow-up (z, 4.56; P < .001), but not at the 4-week follow-up (P < .07). Muscle Weakness VAS scores were significantly lower in the CBTH group at the end of treatment (z, 9.30; P < .001) and at the 6-month follow-up (z, 3.10; P < .02), but not at the 4-week follow-up (P < .13). CONCLUSION: The results support CBTH as an evidence-based intervention to control fatigue in patients undergoing radiotherapy for breast cancer. CBTH is noninvasive, has no adverse effects, and its beneficial effects persist long after the last intervention session. CBTH seems to be a candidate for future dissemination and implementation.
Authors: Andrea M Barsevick; Charles S Cleeland; Donald C Manning; Ann M O'Mara; Bryce B Reeve; Jane A Scott; Jeff A Sloan Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Helen J Michielsen; Alida F W Van der Steeg; Jan A Roukema; Jolanda De Vries Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2007-02-07 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Guy H Montgomery; Maria Kangas; Daniel David; Michael N Hallquist; Sheryl Green; Dana H Bovbjerg; Julie B Schnur Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Guy H Montgomery; Michael N Hallquist; Julie B Schnur; Daniel David; Jeffrey H Silverstein; Dana H Bovbjerg Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2010-02
Authors: Heather Greenlee; Melissa J DuPont-Reyes; Lynda G Balneaves; Linda E Carlson; Misha R Cohen; Gary Deng; Jillian A Johnson; Matthew Mumber; Dugald Seely; Suzanna M Zick; Lindsay M Boyce; Debu Tripathy Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: M E Mendoza; A Capafons; J R Gralow; K L Syrjala; J M Suárez-Rodríguez; J R Fann; M P Jensen Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Joseph Chilcot; Rona Moss-Morris; Micol Artom; Larissa Harden; Federica Picariello; Hector Hughes; Sarah Bates; Iain C Macdougall Journal: Int J Behav Med Date: 2016-06
Authors: Julie R Brahmer; Hamzah Abu-Sbeih; Paolo Antonio Ascierto; Jill Brufsky; Laura C Cappelli; Frank B Cortazar; David E Gerber; Lamya Hamad; Eric Hansen; Douglas B Johnson; Mario E Lacouture; Gregory A Masters; Jarushka Naidoo; Michele Nanni; Miguel-Angel Perales; Igor Puzanov; Bianca D Santomasso; Satish P Shanbhag; Rajeev Sharma; Dimitra Skondra; Jeffrey A Sosman; Michelle Turner; Marc S Ernstoff Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2021-06 Impact factor: 13.751