Towards the validation of a new, blended theoretical model of fear of cancer recurrence.

OBJECTIVE: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is defined as "fear, worry, or concern about cancer returning or progressing". To date, only the seminal model proposed by Lee-Jones and colleagues has been partially validated, so additional model testing is critical to inform intervention efforts. The purpose of this study is to examine the validity of a blended model of FCR that integrates Leventhal's Common Sense Model, Mishel's Uncertainty in Illness Theory, and cognitive theories of worry. METHODS: Participants (n = 106) were women diagnosed with stage I to III breast or gynecological cancer who were enrolled in a Randomized Controlled Trial of a group cognitive-existential intervention for FCR. We report data from standardized questionnaires (Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory-Severity and Triggers subscales; Illness Uncertainty Scale; perceived risk of recurrence; Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale; Why do people Worry about Health questionnaire; Reassurance-seeking Behaviors subscale of the Health Anxiety Questionnaire, and the Reassurance Questionnaire) that participants completed before randomization. Path analyses were used to test the model. RESULTS: Following the addition of four paths, the model showed an excellent fit (χ2 = 13.39, P = 0.20; comparative fit index = 0.99; root mean square error of approximation = 0.06). Triggers, perceived risk of recurrence, and illness uncertainty predicted FCR. FCR was associated with maladaptive coping. Positive beliefs about worrying and intolerance of uncertainty did not predict FCR but led to more maladaptive coping. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide support for a blended FCR model.

Protocol of a randomized controlled trial of the fear of recurrence therapy (FORT) intervention for women with breast or gynecological cancer.

BACKGROUND: Clinically significant levels of fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) affect up to 49% of cancer survivors and are more prevalent among women. FCR is associated with psychological distress, lower quality of life, and increased use of medical resources. Despite its prevalence, FCR is poorly addressed in clinical care. To address this problem, we first developed, and pilot tested a 6-week, 2 h, Cognitive-existential group intervention therapy that targeted FCR in survivors of breast or gynecological cancer. Following the positive outcome of the pilot, we are now testing this approach in a randomized clinical trial (RCT). Goal and hypotheses: This multicenter, prospective RCT aims to test the efficacy of the intervention. The study hypotheses are that, compared to a control group, cancer survivors participating in the intervention (1) will have less FCR, (2) will show more favorable outcomes on the following measures: cancer-specific distress, quality of life, illness uncertainty, intolerance of uncertainty, perceived risk of cancer recurrence, and coping skills. We further postulate that the between-group differences will persist three and 6 months post-intervention. METHODS: Sixteen groups of seven to nine women are being allocated to the intervention or the control group. The control group receives a 6-week, 2 h, structurally equivalent support group. We are recruiting 144 cancer survivors from four hospital sites in three Canadian cities. The sample size was based on the moderate pre/post-test changes found in our pilot study and adjusted to the drop-out rates. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome, FCR, is measured by the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory. Secondary outcomes measured include cancer-specific distress, perceived risk of cancer recurrence, illness uncertainty, intolerance of uncertainty, coping, and quality of life. We use reliable and recognized valid scales. Participants are to complete the questionnaire package at four times: before the first group session (baseline), immediately after the sixth session, and 3 and 6 months post-intervention. ANALYSIS: In the descriptive analysis, comparison of group equivalent baseline variables, identification of confounding/intermediate variables and univariate analysis are planned. Each participant's trajectory is calculated using Generalized Estimating Equation models to determine the time and group effects, after considering the correlation structures of the groups. An intent-to-treat analysis approach may be adopted. DISCUSSION: Our Fear of Recurrence Therapy (FORT) intervention has direct implications for clinical service development to improve the quality of life for patients with breast (BC) and gynecological cancer (GC). Based on our pilot data, we are confident that the FORT intervention can guide the development of effective psychosocial cancer survivorship interventions to reduce FCR and improve psychological functioning among women with BC or GC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dr. Christine Maheu registered the trial with ISRCTN registry (Registration number: ISRCTN83539618, date assigned 03/09/2014).

Fear of cancer recurrence therapy (FORT): A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Most fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) interventions have small effects, and few target FCR. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) with breast and gynecological cancer survivors evaluated the efficacy of a cognitive-existential fear of recurrence therapy (FORT) compared to an attention placebo control group (living well with cancer [LWWC]) on FCR. METHOD: One hundred and sixty-four women with clinical levels of FCR and cancer distress were randomly assigned to 6-weekly, 120 min FORT (n = 80) or LWWC (n = 84) group sessions. They completed questionnaires at baseline (T1), posttreatment (T2; primary endpoint), 3 (T3), and 6 months (T4) posttreatment. Generalized linear models were used to compare group differences in the fear of cancer recurrence inventory (FCRI) total score and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: FORT participants experienced greater reductions from T1 to T2 on FCRI total with a between-group difference of -9.48 points (p = .0393), resulting in a medium effect of -0.530, with a maintained effect at T3 (p = .0330) but not at T4. For the secondary outcomes, improvements were in favor of FORT, including FCRI triggers (p = .0208), FCRI coping (p = .0351), cognitive avoidance (p = .0155), need for reassurance from physicians (p = .0117), and quality of life (mental health; p = .0147). CONCLUSIONS: This RCT demonstrated that FORT, compared to an attention placebo control group, resulted in a greater reduction in FCR posttreatment and at 3 months posttreatment in women with breast and gynecological cancer, indicating its potential as a new treatment strategy. We recommend a booster session to sustain gains. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Access to cancer screening for women with mobility disabilities.

Women with mobility disabilities are less likely to access cancer screening, even when they have a primary care provider. The Gateways to Cancer Screening project was initiated to document the challenges for women with disabilities in their access and experiences of screening for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer. The study followed the tenets of participatory action research. Five peer-led focus groups were held with 24 women with mobility disabilities. Study participants identified multiple and interacting institutional barriers to cancer screening. Their discussions highlighted the complex work of (1) arranging and attending health-related appointments, (2) confronting normative assumptions about women's bodies and (3) securing reliable health care and information. These overlapping, mutually reinforcing issues interact to shape how women with disabilities access and experience cancer screening. We explore implications for redesign of cancer screening services and education of health providers, providing specific recommendations suggested by our participants and the findings.

"I Want to Help, but What Do You Do in a Situation Like That?" Health Care Providers' Qualitative Perspectives on Working with Disabled Women in Breast Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: Disabled women find that social and physical discomforts during encounters with health providers pose barriers to breast cancer screening. We studied providers' perspectives and learning needs related to this problem in order to develop a disability education initiative. DESIGN: This was a descriptive qualitative study with focus group methods. Participants were recruited from staff of a joint Department of Medical Imaging at three academic teaching hospitals in Toronto, Canada. Seven focus groups were held with 43 clerical staff, mammography technologists, and radiologists. RESULTS: Participants reported that they aimed to provide positive breast screening experiences for disabled women but expressed uncertainty about respectful and appropriate communication with disabled women. Novel situations with disabled women were challenging and, without formal disability education, most relied on experiential learning. CONCLUSIONS: Our study elicited important information about the concerns and learning needs of health professionals who provide breast screening services to disabled women. This information supported development of a disability education curriculum for these providers.