Betina Yanez1, Heather L McGinty1, David C Mohr2, Mark J Begale2, Jason R Dahn3, Sarah C Flury4, Kent T Perry4, Frank J Penedo1. 1. Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 2. Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 3. Mental Health and Behavioral Sciences Service, Miami Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Miami, Florida. 4. Department of Urology, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The utility of psychosocial interventions in reducing symptom burden and improving health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for men with localized prostate cancer has been demonstrated. However, studies have yet to demonstrate the efficacy of interventions in advanced prostate cancer (APC). This study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a technology-assisted, 10-week, group-based psychosocial intervention for diverse men with APC. METHODS: The participants were 74 men (mean age, 68.84 years; non-Hispanic white, 57%; black, 40.5%) who were randomized to a cognitive-behavioral stress management (CBSM) treatment or health promotion (HP) attention-control condition. The participants were assessed at the baseline, weekly throughout the 10-week program, and 6 months after the baseline. Outcomes were assessed with the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System along with established measures of HRQOL, CBSM intervention targets (eg, relaxation skills), and patient-reported acceptability. RESULTS: Feasibility was demonstrated through good retention rates (>85%) and acceptable average attendance rates (>70%), and acceptability was demonstrated through very favorable weekly session evaluations (mean score, 4/5) and exit surveys (mean score, 3.6/4). Men randomized to the CBSM condition reported significant reductions (P < .05) in depressive symptoms and improvements in relaxation self-efficacy (P < .05) at the 6-month follow-up. CBSM participants reported trends for improvement in distress and functional well-being (P < .08) in comparison with those in the HP condition. Effect sizes ranged from medium (0.54) to large (1.87) and, in some instances, were clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS:Technology-based CBSM interventions among diverse men with APC may be feasible, acceptable, and efficacious.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The utility of psychosocial interventions in reducing symptom burden and improving health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for men with localized prostate cancer has been demonstrated. However, studies have yet to demonstrate the efficacy of interventions in advanced prostate cancer (APC). This study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a technology-assisted, 10-week, group-based psychosocial intervention for diverse men with APC. METHODS: The participants were 74 men (mean age, 68.84 years; non-Hispanic white, 57%; black, 40.5%) who were randomized to a cognitive-behavioral stress management (CBSM) treatment or health promotion (HP) attention-control condition. The participants were assessed at the baseline, weekly throughout the 10-week program, and 6 months after the baseline. Outcomes were assessed with the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System along with established measures of HRQOL, CBSM intervention targets (eg, relaxation skills), and patient-reported acceptability. RESULTS: Feasibility was demonstrated through good retention rates (>85%) and acceptable average attendance rates (>70%), and acceptability was demonstrated through very favorable weekly session evaluations (mean score, 4/5) and exit surveys (mean score, 3.6/4). Men randomized to the CBSM condition reported significant reductions (P < .05) in depressive symptoms and improvements in relaxation self-efficacy (P < .05) at the 6-month follow-up. CBSM participants reported trends for improvement in distress and functional well-being (P < .08) in comparison with those in the HP condition. Effect sizes ranged from medium (0.54) to large (1.87) and, in some instances, were clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: Technology-based CBSM interventions among diverse men with APC may be feasible, acceptable, and efficacious.
Authors: Lisa C Campbell; Francis J Keefe; Cindy Scipio; Daphne C McKee; Christopher L Edwards; Steven H Herman; Lawrence E Johnson; O Michael Colvin; Colleen M McBride; Craig Donatucci Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-01-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Gbenga O Ogedegbe; Carla Boutin-Foster; Martin T Wells; John P Allegrante; Alice M Isen; Jared B Jobe; Mary E Charlson Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2012-01-23
Authors: Yan Leykin; Seema M Thekdi; Dianne M Shumay; Ricardo F Muñoz; Michelle Riba; Laura B Dunn Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2011-05-24 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Teresa A Rummans; Matthew M Clark; Jeff A Sloan; Marlene H Frost; John Michael Bostwick; Pamela J Atherton; Mary E Johnson; Gail Gamble; Jarrett Richardson; Paul Brown; James Martensen; Janis Miller; Katherine Piderman; Mashele Huschka; Jean Girardi; Jean Hanson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David Cella; Seung Choi; Sofia Garcia; Karon F Cook; Sarah Rosenbloom; Jin-Shei Lai; Donna Surges Tatum; Richard Gershon Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-06-18 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Padraig Warde; Malcolm Mason; Keyue Ding; Peter Kirkbride; Michael Brundage; Richard Cowan; Mary Gospodarowicz; Karen Sanders; Edmund Kostashuk; Greg Swanson; Jim Barber; Andrea Hiltz; Mahesh K B Parmar; Jinka Sathya; John Anderson; Charles Hayter; John Hetherington; Matthew R Sydes; Wendy Parulekar Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Frank J Penedo; Laura B Oswald; Joshua P Kronenfeld; Sofia F Garcia; David Cella; Betina Yanez Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Francisco Iacobelli; Rachel F Adler; Diana Buitrago; Joanna Buscemi; Marya E Corden; Alejandra Perez-Tamayo; Frank J Penedo; Melinda Rodriguez; Betina R Yanez Journal: Design Health (Abingdon) Date: 2018-04-02
Authors: Aasha I Hoogland; Suzanne C Lechner; Brian D Gonzalez; Brent J Small; Dinorah M Tyson; Yasmin Asvat; Anna Barata; Maria F Gomez; Yvelise Rodriguez; Heather S L Jim; Michael H Antoni; Paul B Jacobsen; Cathy D Meade Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2018-03-24 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Rina S Fox; Patricia I Moreno; Betina Yanez; Ryne Estabrook; Jessica Thomas; Laura C Bouchard; Heather L McGinty; David C Mohr; Mark J Begale; Sarah C Flury; Kent T Perry; Shilajit D Kundu; Frank J Penedo Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Lisa M Wu; Ali Amidi; Molly L Tanenbaum; Gary Winkel; Wayne A Gordon; Simon J Hall; Katrin Bovbjerg; Michael A Diefenbach Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-12-27 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Daniel L Hall; Emily G Lattie; Sara F Milrad; Sara Czaja; Mary Ann Fletcher; Nancy Klimas; Dolores Perdomo; Michael H Antoni Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2016-12-08 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Laura C Bouchard; Betina Yanez; Jason R Dahn; Sarah C Flury; Kent T Perry; David C Mohr; Frank J Penedo Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2019-07-16 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Thi Xuan Mai Tran; Jungeun Park; Joonki Lee; Yuh-Seog Jung; Yoonjung Chang; Hyunsoon Cho Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2020-10-15 Impact factor: 3.603