A Novel Intervention to Reduce Fear of Progression and Trauma Symptoms in Advanced Cancer Using Written Exposure to Worst-Case Scenarios.

Background: Adults with advanced cancer experience profound future uncertainty, reflected in elevated fear of cancer progression (FoP) and cancer-related trauma symptoms. These symptoms are associated with physical symptom burden and poorer quality of life, and few interventions exist to manage them. Objective: To develop and pilot a written exposure-based coping intervention (EASE) focused on worst-case scenarios among adults with advanced cancer reporting elevated cancer-related trauma symptoms or FoP. Design: A single-arm intervention development and pilot trial. Participants: The trial enrolled 29 U.S. adults with stage III or stage IV solid tumor cancer (n = 24) or incurable or higher-risk blood cancer (n = 5) reporting elevated cancer-related trauma symptoms or FoP. Among those screened, 74% were eligible, with an eligible-to-enrolled rate of 85%. Design/Measurements: EASE was delivered over five 1:1 videoconferencing sessions. Feasibility and acceptability were evaluated via attendance, surveys, and exit interviews. Outcomes were assessed at five time points through 3-month (FU1, main assessment of interest) and 4.5-month (FU2) follow-up. Results: Participant and interventionist feedback was used to iteratively refine EASE. Among participants, 86% (25/29) completed all five sessions and FU1; surveys and exit interviews indicated high acceptability. Primary outcomes of cancer-related trauma symptoms and FoP improved significantly from pre to both follow-ups by predominantly large effect sizes. Secondary outcomes of anxiety, depression, hopelessness, fear of death/dying, and fatigue, and most process measures improved significantly by FU1 or FU2. Conclusions: EASE, a novel adaptation of written exposure therapy, is a promising approach to reducing FoP and cancer-related trauma symptoms among adults with advanced cancer that warrants further study.

Pilot randomized trial of an acceptance-based telehealth intervention for women with ovarian cancer and PARP inhibitor-related fatigue.

OBJECTIVE: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have dramatically changed treatment for advanced ovarian cancer, but nearly half of patients experience significant fatigue. We conducted a two-site pilot randomized trial to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a brief, acceptance-based telehealth intervention (REVITALIZE) designed to reduce fatigue interference in patients on PARPi. METHODS: From June 2021 to April 2022, 44 participants were randomized 1:1 to REVITALIZE (6 weekly one-on-one sessions+booster) or enhanced usual care. Feasibility was defined as: ≥50% approach-to-consent among potentially eligible patients and ≥70% completion of 12-week follow-up assessment; acceptance was <20% participants reporting burden and <20% study withdrawal. Fatigue, anxiety, depression, and quality of life were assessed at baseline, 4-, 8- and 12-weeks. RESULTS: Among 44 participants (mean age = 62.5 years, 81.8% stage III/IV disease), the study was feasible (56.4% approach-to-consent ratio, 86.3% completion of 12-week assessment) and acceptable (0% reporting burden, 11.3% study withdrawal). At 12-week follow-up, REVITALIZE significantly reduced fatigue interference (Cohen's d = 0.94, p = .008) and fatigue severity (d = 0.54, p = .049), and improved fatigue levels (d = 0.62, p = .04) relative to enhanced usual care. REVITALIZE also showed promise for improved fatigue self-efficacy, fatigue catastrophizing, anxiety, depression, and quality of life (ds = 0.60-0.86, p ≥ .05). Compared with enhanced usual care, REVITALIZE participants had fewer PARPi dose reductions (6.7% vs. 19.0%), and dose delays (6.7% vs. 23.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Among fatigued adults with ovarian cancer on PARPi, a brief, acceptance-based telehealth intervention was feasible, acceptable, and demonstrated preliminary efficacy in improving fatigue interference, severity, and levels. REVITALIZE is a novel, scalable telehealth intervention worthy of further investigation.

Evaluating the efficacy of common humanity-enhanced exposure for socially anxious young adults.

Despite some evidence of the benefits of self-compassion training among socially anxious individuals, little is known about whether enhancing self-compassion prior to exposure therapy increases initial exposure engagement. Additionally, manipulations have relied on broad definitions of self-compassion, rendering it difficult to distinguish the impact of individual components. This study employed three experiential exercises designed to enhance one facet of self-compassion-common humanity. Socially anxious undergraduates (N = 63) were randomized in groups to 1) common humanity-enhanced exposure (n = 32) or 2) exposure alone (n = 31). In the common humanity condition, participants wrote self-compassionately, shared fears, and completed a common humanity-focused lovingkindness meditation. All participants then completed a speech exposure in front of live judges followed by an optional second exposure. Within the common humanity condition, positive self-responding to the speech exposure increased (b = 0.30, p = .026). Common humanity participants also remained in the first exposure longer, relative to exposure alone (b = -30.92, p = .002). Participants rated exercises as at least moderately helpful, with sharing fears rated most helpful. In sum, a brief group-based multi-modal common humanity induction represents a promising approach to improving initial engagement with feared contexts among socially anxious individuals.

Cancer survivors' perceived vulnerability to COVID-19 and impacts on cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses to the pandemic.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Given the uncertainty COVID-19 has caused for individuals with prior medical conditions, we examined the extent to which cancer survivors consider themselves at risk for the global COVID-19 pandemic (henceforth COVID), both in general and due to their cancer history. Additionally, we evaluated whether perceived vulnerability to COVID among cancer survivors predicts their cognitive/affective and behavioral responses to the pandemic. DESIGN/SAMPLE: Cancer survivors who completed primary cancer treatment (median months since treatment = 33.00) and were enrolled in prior behavioral trials with our research team (N = 146) completed two surveys in May-July 2020 (95.89% retention). METHODS: Participants rated perceived next-year risk of infection and of dying from COVID. We adapted established scales to assess perceived vulnerability to COVID generally versus as a cancer survivor, catastrophizing about possible COVID symptoms, COVID-related contamination fears, and adherence to COVID prevention behaviors. FINDINGS: In May 2020, on a 1-100 scale with 0 = no chance and 100 = definitely will occur, cancer survivors reported a chance in the next year of contracting COVID of M = 39.94 (SD = 23.90), and dying from COVID of M = 24.46 (SD = 24.84). Cancer survivors reported somewhat greater vulnerability to COVID compared to same-aged peers, increased contamination fears, and high adherence to COVID prevention measures. Similar findings emerged six weeks later, suggesting stability over time. In simple linear regression models, both general and cancer survivor-specific perceived COVID vulnerability predicted COVID symptom catastrophizing and contamination fears; in multivariable models, only general vulnerability remained a significant predictor. General perceived vulnerability and contamination fears predicted greater adherence to COVID prevention behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors perceived elevated vulnerability to COVID even years after treatment, which predicted adherence to COVID prevention behaviors. Future research should identify the optimal balance between supporting cancer survivors' concerns and minimizing negative impacts on quality of life.

Acceptability, Feasibility, and Efficacy Potential of a Multimodal Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Intervention to Address Psychosocial and Advance Care Planning Needs among Anxious and Depressed Adults with Metastatic Cancer.

Background: Adults with metastatic cancer frequently report anxiety and depression symptoms, which may impact health behaviors such as advance care planning (ACP). Objective: The study leveraged acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), an evidence-based approach for reducing distress and improving health behaviors, and adapted it into a multimodal intervention (M-ACT) designed to address the psychosocial and ACP needs of anxious and depressed adults with metastatic cancer. The study evaluated M-ACT's acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy potential. Design: The study was designed as a single-arm intervention development and pilot trial. Setting/Subjects: The trial enrolled 35 anxious or depressed adults with stage IV cancer in community oncology clinics, with a referred-to-enrolled rate of 69% and eligible-to-enrolled rate of 95%. Measurements: M-ACT alternated four in-person group sessions with three self-paced online sessions. Acceptability and feasibility were assessed through enrollment, attendance, and satisfaction ratings. Outcomes and theorized intervention mechanisms were evaluated at baseline, midintervention, postintervention, and two-month follow-up. Results: Participant feedback was used to refine the intervention. Of participants starting the intervention, 92% completed, reporting high satisfaction. One-quarter did not begin M-ACT due to health declines, moving, or death. Completers showed significant reductions in anxiety, depression, and fear of dying and increases in ACP and sense of life meaning. In this pilot, M-ACT showed no significant impact on pain interference. Increases in two of three mechanism measures predicted improvement on 80% of significant outcomes. Conclusions: The M-ACT intervention is feasible, acceptable, and shows potential for efficacy in community oncology settings; a randomized trial is warranted.

Presence and predictors of anxiety disorder onset following cancer diagnosis among anxious cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Despite cancer survivors' frequent endorsement of anxiety symptoms, assessing the full range of anxiety disorders (AD), their timing of onset relative to cancer diagnosis, co-morbidity with mood disorder, and predictors of post-cancer onset, is rare or absent to date. This study provides a step toward addressing these gaps. METHODS: Cancer survivors at re-entry after primary treatment completion who screened positively for anxiety symptoms (N = 133) and sought care through an intervention trial completed standardized diagnostic interviews, dimensional assessment of disorder severity, and timing of disorder onset relative to cancer diagnosis. We evaluated sociodemographic and medical predictors of developing a first AD after cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: Most ADs began after cancer diagnosis (58%); for 68% of affected patients, this represented their first AD episode. The most common was generalized anxiety disorder (GAD; 41%), where "cancer-focused GAD" was distinguished from "typical GAD"; the next most common were specific phobia (14%) and social anxiety disorder (13%). A minority (31%) of ADs were comorbid with major depression. Relative to having no AD, experiencing more lingering treatment side effects predicted developing a first AD after cancer diagnosis. Relative to having an AD that began before cancer diagnosis, reporting a higher cancer stage predicted developing a first AD after diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors at re-entry seeking care for anxiety symptoms manifested a broad range of ADs which most commonly developed after cancer diagnosis and were prompted by the experience of cancer. Such disorders represent an unusually late-life, cancer-linked etiology that warrants further investigation and clinical attention.

A pilot randomized controlled trial of cognitive bias modification to reduce fear of breast cancer recurrence.

BACKGROUND: The most common, persistent concern among survivors of breast cancer is the fear that their disease will return, yet to the authors' knowledge, few interventions targeting fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) have been developed to date. The current pilot study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a home-delivered cognitive bias modification intervention to reduce FCR. The intervention, called Attention and Interpretation Modification for Fear of Breast Cancer Recurrence (AIM-FBCR), targeted 2 types of cognitive biases (ie, attention and interpretation biases). METHODS: A total of 110 survivors of breast cancer were randomized to receive 8 sessions of 1 of 2 versions of AIM-FBCR or a control condition program. Computer-based assessments of cognitive biases and a self-report measure of FCR were administered before the intervention, after the intervention, and 3 months after the intervention. RESULTS: Improvements in health worries (P = .019) and interpretation biases (rates of threat endorsement [P<.001] and reaction times for threat rejection [P = .007]) were found in those survivors who received AIM-FBCR compared with the control arm. Although only 26% of participants who screened into the study agreed to participate, the trial otherwise appeared feasible and acceptable, with 83% of those who initiated the intervention completing at least 5 of 8 sessions, and 90% reporting satisfaction with the computer-based program used. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current pilot study suggest the promise of AIM-FBCR in reducing FCR in survivors of breast cancer. Future research should attempt to replicate these findings in a larger-scale trial using a more sophisticated, user-friendly program and additional measures of improvement in more diverse samples. Cancer 2017;123:1424-1433. © 2016 American Cancer Society.