Catherine E Mosher1, Ekin Secinti2, Ruohong Li3, Adam T Hirsh2, Jonathan Bricker4,5, Kathy D Miller6, Bryan Schneider6, Anna Maria Storniolo6, Lida Mina7, Erin V Newton6, Victoria L Champion8, Shelley A Johns9. 1. Department of Psychology, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, 402 North Blackford Street, LD 124, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. cemosher@iupui.edu. 2. Department of Psychology, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, 402 North Blackford Street, LD 124, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University Fairbanks School of Public Health, Health Sciences Building (RG), 1050 Wishard Blvd. Floors 5 and 6, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. 4. Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, M3-B232, PO Box 19024, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA. 5. Department of Psychology, University of Washington, Box 351525, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA. 6. Indiana University School of Medicine, Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, 535 Barnhill Drive, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. 7. Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center, 2946 E Banner Gateway Dr, Gilbert, AZ, 85234, USA. 8. School of Nursing, Indiana University, 1111 Middle Drive NU 340G, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. 9. Indiana University School of Medicine, Center for Health Services Research, Regenstrief Institute, 1101 W. 10th Street, RF-226, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in women worldwide. With medical advances, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients often live for years with many symptoms that interfere with activities. However, there is a paucity of efficacious interventions to address symptom-related suffering and functional interference. Thus, this study examined the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of telephone-based acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for symptom interference with functioning in MBC patients. METHODS:Symptomatic MBC patients (N = 47) were randomly assigned to six telephone sessions of ACT or six telephone sessions of education/support. Patients completed measures of symptom interference and measures assessing the severity of pain, fatigue, sleep disturbance, depressive symptoms, and anxiety. RESULTS: The eligibility screening rate (64%) and high retention (83% at 8 weeks post-baseline) demonstrated feasibility. When examining within-group change, ACT participants showed decreases in symptom interference (i.e., fatigue interference and sleep-related impairment; Cohen's d range = - 0.23 to - 0.31) at 8 and 12 weeks post-baseline, whereas education/support participants showed minimal change in these outcomes (d range = - 0.03 to 0.07). Additionally, at 12 weeks post-baseline, ACT participants showed moderate decreases in fatigue and sleep disturbance (both ds = - 0.43), whereas education/support participants showed small decreases in these outcomes (ds = - 0.24 and - 0.18 for fatigue and sleep disturbance, respectively). Both the ACT and education/support groups showed reductions in depressive symptoms (ds = - 0.27 and - 0.28) at 12 weeks post-baseline. Group differences in all outcomes were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS:ACT shows feasibility and promise in improving fatigue and sleep-related outcomes in MBC patients and warrants further investigation.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE:Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in women worldwide. With medical advances, metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients often live for years with many symptoms that interfere with activities. However, there is a paucity of efficacious interventions to address symptom-related suffering and functional interference. Thus, this study examined the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of telephone-based acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for symptom interference with functioning in MBCpatients. METHODS: Symptomatic MBCpatients (N = 47) were randomly assigned to six telephone sessions of ACT or six telephone sessions of education/support. Patients completed measures of symptom interference and measures assessing the severity of pain, fatigue, sleep disturbance, depressive symptoms, and anxiety. RESULTS: The eligibility screening rate (64%) and high retention (83% at 8 weeks post-baseline) demonstrated feasibility. When examining within-group change, ACT participants showed decreases in symptom interference (i.e., fatigue interference and sleep-related impairment; Cohen's d range = - 0.23 to - 0.31) at 8 and 12 weeks post-baseline, whereas education/support participants showed minimal change in these outcomes (d range = - 0.03 to 0.07). Additionally, at 12 weeks post-baseline, ACT participants showed moderate decreases in fatigue and sleep disturbance (both ds = - 0.43), whereas education/support participants showed small decreases in these outcomes (ds = - 0.24 and - 0.18 for fatigue and sleep disturbance, respectively). Both the ACT and education/support groups showed reductions in depressive symptoms (ds = - 0.27 and - 0.28) at 12 weeks post-baseline. Group differences in all outcomes were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: ACT shows feasibility and promise in improving fatigue and sleep-related outcomes in MBCpatients and warrants further investigation.
Entities:
Keywords:
Acceptance and commitment therapy; Fatigue; Metastatic breast cancer; Psychosocial interventions; Sleep; Symptom interference
Authors: Catherine E Mosher; Joseph G Winger; Nasser Hanna; Shadia I Jalal; Lawrence H Einhorn; Thomas J Birdas; DuyKhanh P Ceppa; Kenneth A Kesler; Jordan Schmitt; Deborah A Kashy; Victoria L Champion Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2016-07-09 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Wendy W T Lam; Janice Tsang; Winnie Yeo; Joyce Suen; Wing Ming Ho; Tze Kok Yau; Inda Soong; Ka Yan Wong; Ava Kwong; Dacita Suen; Wing Kin Sze; Alice W Y Ng; Afaf Girgis; Richard Fielding Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2013-10-26 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: David W Kissane; Brenda Grabsch; Anthony Love; David M Clarke; Sidney Bloch; Graeme C Smith Journal: Aust N Z J Psychiatry Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 5.744
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Kelly Chinh; Ekin Secinti; Shelley A Johns; Adam T Hirsh; Kathy D Miller; Bryan Schneider; Anna Maria Storniolo; Lida Mina; Erin V Newton; Victoria L Champion; Catherine E Mosher Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Jennifer C Plumb Vilardaga; Joseph G Winger; Irene Teo; Lynda Owen; Linda M Sutton; Francis J Keefe; Tamara J Somers Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2019-09-17 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Catherine E Mosher; Ellen Krueger; Adam T Hirsh; Kathy D Miller; Tarah J Ballinger; Anna Maria Storniolo; Bryan P Schneider; Erin V Newton; Victoria L Champion; Shelley A Johns Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2020-10-07 Impact factor: 2.226
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
Authors: Joseph G Winger; Katherine Ramos; Sarah A Kelleher; Tamara J Somers; Karen E Steinhauser; Laura S Porter; Arif H Kamal; William S Breitbart; Francis J Keefe Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2021-08-12 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Ellen Krueger; Ekin Secinti; Catherine E Mosher; Patrick V Stutz; Andrea A Cohee; Shelley A Johns Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2021 Nov-Dec 01 Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Katherine Hadlandsmyth; Lilian N Dindo; Roohina Wajid; Sonia L Sugg; M Bridget Zimmerman; Barbara A Rakel Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Jacqueline H J Kim; Emma E Bright; Timothy J Williamson; Jennifer L Krull; Karen L Weihs; Annette L Stanton Journal: J Behav Med Date: 2020-06-13