Paul K J Han1,2, Caitlin Gutheil1, Rebecca N Hutchinson1,2,3, Jason A LaChance1,2,4. 1. Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, United States. 2. Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States. 3. Palliative Medicine Program, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, United States. 4. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is an important cause of suffering for cancer survivors, and both empirical evidence and theoretical models suggest that prognostic uncertainty plays a causal role in its development. However, the relationship between prognostic uncertainty and FCR is incompletely understood. OBJECTIVE: To explore the relationship between prognostic uncertainty and FCR among patients with ovarian cancer (OC). DESIGN: A qualitative study was conducted utilizing individual in-depth interviews with a convenience sample of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer who had completed first-line treatment with surgery and/or chemotherapy. Semi-structured interviews explored participants' (1) understanding of their prognosis; (2) experiences, preferences, and attitudes regarding prognostic information; and (3) strategies for coping with prognostic uncertainty. Inductive qualitative analysis and line-by-line software-assisted coding of interview transcripts was conducted to identify key themes and generate theoretical insights on the relationship between prognostic uncertainty and FCR. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 21 participants, nearly all of whom reported experiencing significant FCR, which they traced to an awareness of the possibility of a bad outcome. Some participants valued and pursued prognostic information as a means of coping with this awareness, suggesting that prognostic uncertainty causes FCR. However, most participants acknowledged fundamental limits to both the certainty and value of prognostic information, and engaged in various strategies aimed not at reducing but constructing and maintaining prognostic uncertainty as a means of sustaining hope in the possibility of a good outcome. Participants' comments suggested that prognostic uncertainty, fear, and hope are connected by complex, bi-directional causal pathways mediated by processes that allow patients to cope with, construct, and maintain their uncertainty. A provisional dual-process theoretical model was developed to capture these pathways. CONCLUSION: Among patients with OC, prognostic uncertainty is both a cause and an effect of FCR-a fear-inducing stimulus and a hope-sustaining response constructed and maintained through various strategies. More work is needed to elucidate the relationships between prognostic uncertainty, fear, and hope, to validate and refine our theoretical model, and to develop interventions to help patients with OC and other serious illnesses to achieve an optimal balance between these states.
BACKGROUND: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is an important cause of suffering for cancer survivors, and both empirical evidence and theoretical models suggest that prognostic uncertainty plays a causal role in its development. However, the relationship between prognostic uncertainty and FCR is incompletely understood. OBJECTIVE: To explore the relationship between prognostic uncertainty and FCR among patients with ovarian cancer (OC). DESIGN: A qualitative study was conducted utilizing individual in-depth interviews with a convenience sample of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer who had completed first-line treatment with surgery and/or chemotherapy. Semi-structured interviews explored participants' (1) understanding of their prognosis; (2) experiences, preferences, and attitudes regarding prognostic information; and (3) strategies for coping with prognostic uncertainty. Inductive qualitative analysis and line-by-line software-assisted coding of interview transcripts was conducted to identify key themes and generate theoretical insights on the relationship between prognostic uncertainty and FCR. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 21 participants, nearly all of whom reported experiencing significant FCR, which they traced to an awareness of the possibility of a bad outcome. Some participants valued and pursued prognostic information as a means of coping with this awareness, suggesting that prognostic uncertainty causes FCR. However, most participants acknowledged fundamental limits to both the certainty and value of prognostic information, and engaged in various strategies aimed not at reducing but constructing and maintaining prognostic uncertainty as a means of sustaining hope in the possibility of a good outcome. Participants' comments suggested that prognostic uncertainty, fear, and hope are connected by complex, bi-directional causal pathways mediated by processes that allow patients to cope with, construct, and maintain their uncertainty. A provisional dual-process theoretical model was developed to capture these pathways. CONCLUSION: Among patients with OC, prognostic uncertainty is both a cause and an effect of FCR-a fear-inducing stimulus and a hope-sustaining response constructed and maintained through various strategies. More work is needed to elucidate the relationships between prognostic uncertainty, fear, and hope, to validate and refine our theoretical model, and to develop interventions to help patients with OC and other serious illnesses to achieve an optimal balance between these states.
Authors: Rebecca G Hagerty; Phyllis N Butow; Peter M Ellis; Elizabeth A Lobb; Susan C Pendlebury; Natasha Leighl; Craig MacLeod; Craig Mac Leod; Martin H N Tattersall Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-02-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Eileen Huh Shinn; Cindy L Carmack Taylor; Kelly Kilgore; Alan Valentine; Diane C Bodurka; John Kavanagh; Anil Sood; Yisheng Li; Karen Basen-Engquist Journal: Palliat Support Care Date: 2009-09
Authors: Katherine B Roland; Juan L Rodriguez; Jennifer Rees Patterson; Katrina F Trivers Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2013-06-13 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Daniel L Hall; Christina M Luberto; Lisa L Philpotts; Rhayun Song; Elyse R Park; Gloria Y Yeh Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2018-06-05 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Nina M Tauber; Mia S O'Toole; Andreas Dinkel; Jacqueline Galica; Gerry Humphris; Sophie Lebel; Christine Maheu; Gozde Ozakinci; Judith Prins; Louise Sharpe; Allan Ben Smith; Belinda Thewes; Sébastien Simard; Robert Zachariae Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Paul K J Han; Norbert Hootsmans; Michael Neilson; Bethany Roy; Terence Kungel; Caitlin Gutheil; Michael Diefenbach; Moritz Hansen Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2013-09-13 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Zhonglin Chen; Gan He; Yi Zhao; Chenyan Han; Lei Xu; Hong Jian; Qiao Chu; Yaping He Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-08-15 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: Paul K J Han; Elizabeth Scharnetzki; Eric Anderson; John DiPalazzo; Tania D Strout; Caitlin Gutheil; F Lee Lucas; Emily Edelman; Jens Rueter Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2021-12-22 Impact factor: 3.612