So what I'm stressed? A qualitative study examininga caregivers' reactions to emerging biomarkers of stress.

Background: Caregivers of adults with cancer often report significant distress yet remain difficult to engage in supportive services. While the field of Psychosomatic Medicine has continued to identify important markers of physiologic stress, and demonstrated disruption in these markers in caregiver populations, no research has investigated whether biomarker information on caregivers' reaction to stress could impact their willingness to address their ongoing distress. Methods: Here, we report on a qualitative study (N = 17) in which we conducted individual interviews with cancer caregivers to explore their key attitudes towards, and subjective experience of, mock stress biomarker data. A total of 17 caregivers of patients (M age = 56.1 years; SD = 12.3) with primarily metastatic brain tumors (glioblastoma) were interviewed regarding four commercially available biomarkers (telomere length; hair cortisol, activity levels and heart rate variability). Once presented with information about stress biomarkers, caregivers were asked to discuss their subjective reaction as if it was their own data as well as their motivation and willingness to seek support after receiving such information. We identified and extracted relevant themes. Results: Analysis utilizing the framework method revealed four emerging themes. The first theme described caregivers' ability to manage stress and willingness to engage with supportive services. Second, caregivers generally accepted the biomarker data but preferred it to be presented in a specific way. The third theme demonstrated that for some, biomarker data may actually increase their subjective distress (e.g., whether or not something could be done to improve their mental state). The last theme described how biomarkers were generally received as meaningful motivators that could increase caregivers' willingness to engage with supportive services. Conclusions: In addition to the more general identified theme of CG's willingness to engage with additional support, we gained insights into caregivers' reaction to the stress biomarkers presented. Findings will set the stage for the utility of stress biomarker information and whether it influences cancer caregivers' willingness to address their distress and motivation to engage in supportive services.

Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline Q&A.

@JCO_ASCO guideline on #cannabis in cancer with @JCOOP_ASCO companion Q&A addressing key clinical questions.

Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline.

PURPOSE: To guide clinicians, adults with cancer, caregivers, researchers, and oncology institutions on the medical use of cannabis and cannabinoids, including synthetic cannabinoids and herbal cannabis derivatives; single, purified cannabinoids; combinations of cannabis ingredients; and full-spectrum cannabis. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and cohort studies on the efficacy and safety of cannabis and cannabinoids when used by adults with cancer. Outcomes of interest included antineoplastic effects, cancer treatment toxicity, symptoms, and quality of life. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to January 27, 2023. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: The evidence base consisted of 13 systematic reviews and five additional primary studies (four RCTs and one cohort study). The certainty of evidence for most outcomes was low or very low. RECOMMENDATIONS: Cannabis and/or cannabinoid access and use by adults with cancer has outpaced the science supporting their clinical use. This guideline provides strategies for open, nonjudgmental communication between clinicians and adults with cancer about the use of cannabis and/or cannabinoids. Clinicians should recommend against using cannabis or cannabinoids as a cancer-directed treatment unless within the context of a clinical trial. Cannabis and/or cannabinoids may improve refractory, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting when added to guideline-concordant antiemetic regimens. Whether cannabis and/or cannabinoids can improve other supportive care outcomes remains uncertain. This guideline also highlights the critical need for more cannabis and/or cannabinoid research.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Palliative Medicine Fellows' Discussions, Perceptions, and Training Regarding Medical Cannabis.

CONTEXT: Medical cannabis is increasingly considered for palliation of pain, nausea/vomiting, anorexia, and other symptoms. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine whether training in hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) adequately prepares fellows to counsel patients about medical cannabis. METHODS: A previously validated questionnaire was adapted for HPM fellows. Domains included fellows' practices recommending cannabis and their knowledge of its effectiveness and risks compared with standard treatments. U.S. HPM fellowships were sent surveys in 2022 and 2023. RESULTS: Forty six programs participated, 123 fellows responded (response rate of 42%) including 69% female; 55% White, and 28% Asian. Of respondents, 65% reported receiving formal training regarding medical cannabis; 57% reported discussing medical cannabis with over five patients; 23% recommended medical cannabis to more than five patients in the preceding year. Only 19%, however, felt sufficiently informed to issue cannabis-related recommendations. HPM fellows with prior training were not more likely to feel sufficiently informed to discuss cannabis (RR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.82-1.66) or to recommend cannabis to patients (RR: 2.05, 95% CI: 0.89-4.71). Fellows rate cannabis as equally or more effective than conventional treatments for the following symptoms: anorexia/cachexia (63%), nausea/vomiting (43%), pain (25%), and neuropathic pain (21%). CONCLUSION: Most HPM fellows report formal training in the use of medical cannabis. Over half of trainees reported discussing medical cannabis with patients, but few considered themselves sufficiently informed to make cannabis-related clinical recommendations. These results suggest both a need for expanded high-quality evidence for medical cannabis in palliative care and for improved formal education for HPM fellows.

Toward a Psychological Model of Chemical Coping with Opioids in Cancer Care.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES AFTER PARTICIPATING IN THIS CME ACTIVITY, THE PSYCHIATRIST SHOULD BE BETTER ABLE TO: • Outline the risk factors involved with opioid accessibility in patients receiving treatment for cancer.• Identify factors to address in order to mitigate risk for opioid misuse during cancer care. ABSTRACT: Most patients with advanced cancer receive treatment for related pain. Opioid accessibility, however, is a risk factor for misuse, which can present care challenges and quality-of-life concerns. There is a lack of consistent universal screening prior to initiation of opioid prescribing. One crucial issue in treating this population is adequately identifying and mitigating risk factors driving opioid misuse. Drawing on theory and research from addiction science, psychology, palliative care, and oncology, the presented conceptual framework suggests that risk factors for opioid misuse during cancer care can be stratified into historical, current, malleable, and unmalleable factors. The framework identifies necessary factors to address in order to mitigate risk for opioid misuse during cancer care, and offers key directions for future research.

Dispensary personnel's views and experiences regarding oncologic cannabis and the counsel they offer adults with cancer.

BACKGROUND: A minority of oncologists feel qualified to advise adults with cancer on issues pertaining to medicinal cannabis. Adults with cancer frequently access medicinal cannabis information from non-medical sources such as cannabis dispensaries. We explored dispensary personnel's views and experiences regarding oncologic cannabis and the counsel they extend individuals with cancer. METHODS: Snowball sampling in this qualitative study facilitated recruitment across 13 states (N = 26). Semi-structured phone interviews ceased with thematic saturation. A multi-stage thematic analysis combined inductive and deductive codes. RESULTS: Of the 26 dispensary personnel interviewed, 54% identified as female and 19% as non-white. Median age was 40 years. A consensus emerged among participants concerning the botanical's efficacy for cancer-related symptoms; less so regarding its antineoplastic potential. Principles for serving those with cancer included provision of client-centered, symptom-based, and trial-and-error approaches. Non-inhalation modes of administration were generally recommended. No consensus was reached as to whether delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinal (THC)- or cannabidiol-predominant products were preferable in this population. Challenges in oncologic advising included successfully identifying individuals with cancer at the dispensary counter, financial toxicity, the special treatment required for the THC-naïve, and operating in the absence of standardized guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: These informed assertions suggest that members of the oncologic community should grapple with the extent to which they feel comfortable with both the nature and degree of counsel adults with cancer receive through dispensaries.

An acceptance and commitment therapy-based intervention for opioid use disorder risk in individuals with cancer: A treatment development study.

This paper describes the iterative development of an evidence-based behavioral intervention for individuals with cancer at risk for opioid use disorder, using the National Institutes of Health Stage Model for Behavioral Intervention Development. Adult patients with cancer from an outpatient palliative care clinic at an academic cancer center, with moderate to high risk of opioid misuse, were enrolled in a treatment development study that aimed to increase psychological flexibility. In this intervention, psychological flexibility is the posited mechanism of change for reduction of opioid use disorder risk. Patients completed baseline (pre-intervention) assessments, a six-session behavioral intervention based in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, post-intervention assessments, and a semi-structured exit interview. Ten patients with moderate to high risk of opioid misuse completed the intervention. Patients rated the intervention as highly acceptable and were generally highly satisfied. Patients reported finding the coping skills helpful (e.g., mindfulness, cognitive defusion) and reported a preference for more sessions. These treatment development efforts have implications for the development and design of acceptance- and mindfulness-based, targeted interventions for individuals with cancer, receiving palliative care and at risk for opioid use disorder. Specifically, this six-session behavioral intervention to increase psychological flexibility was acceptable to patients and ready to be studied in a pilot RCT.

Cannabis use among cancer survivors before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, 2019-2021.

We estimated the prevalence of past 30-day cannabis use, evaluated reasons for use, and identified individual-level factors associated with cannabis use among cancer survivors before (2019) and during (2020 and 2021) the COVID-19 pandemic. Cancer survivors, aged 18 years and older, were identified from the 2019 (n = 8185), 2020 (n = 11 084), and 2021 (n = 12 248) Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Prevalence of past 30-day cannabis use among survivors held steady through the pandemic (8.7%, 7.4%, and 8.4% in 2019, 2020 and 2021, respectively). Of those who used cannabis, 48.7% used it for medical reasons in 2019, 54.5% in 2020, and 43.5% in 2021. Survivors were more likely to report past 30-day cannabis use if they were younger, male, current or former tobacco smokers, and binge alcohol consumers and if they experienced poor mental health in the past 30-days. Our study identified subpopulations of cancer survivors that need to be targeted for evidence-informed discussions about cannabis use.

Willingness toward psychosocial support during cancer treatment: a critical yet challenging construct in psychosocial care.

Psychosocial distress screening, mandated by the American College Surgeons' Commission on Cancer, continues to be implemented across cancer centers nationwide. Although measuring distress is critical to identifying patients who may benefit from additional support, several studies suggest that distress screening may not actually increase patients' utilization of psychosocial services. While various investigators have identified barriers that may impede effective implementation of distress screening, we posit that patients' intrinsic motivation, which we term patients' willingness, may be the biggest predictor for whether cancer patients choose to engage with psychosocial services. In this commentary, we define patient willingness towards psychosocial services as a novel construct, distinct from the intention toward a certain behavior described across pre-existing models of health behavior change. Further, we offer a critical perspective of models of intervention design that focus on acceptability and feasibility as preliminary outcomes thought to encompass the willingness construct described herein. Finally, we summarize several health service models that successfully integrate psychosocial services alongside routine oncology care. Overall, we present an innovative model that acknowledges barriers and facilitators and underscores the critical role of willingness in health behavior change. Consideration of patients' willingness toward psychosocial care will move the field of psychosocial oncology forward in clinical practice, policy initiatives, and study design.

This commentary focuses on individual motivation to pursue psychosocial support within the context of routine oncologic treatment. We term this novel idea as patients' willingness to pursue psychosocial treatment and review how this construct is discussed across various models of intervention design, health behavior change, and health delivery. We conclude that patients' willingness towards psychosocial support is one of the most important predictors to whether a patient with cancer may choose to engage with psychosocial services.

Medical cannabis-related stigma: cancer survivors' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Although the vast majority of medical cannabis laws in the USA includes cancer as a qualifying condition and medical cannabis-related stigma influences decision-making regarding the botanical, few studies have explored the phenomenon in oncology. Early findings indicated oncologic cannabis-related stigma to be quite widespread. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with 24 adults with cancer histories using medical cannabis were analyzed using the Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework. RESULTS: Sixteen out of 24 participants discussed medical cannabis-related stigma in some depth. The phenomena emerged as more pervasive in medical than personal/professional domains and was internalized as well as experienced directly. It led some participants, but not others, to practice partial or complete secrecy. DISCUSSION: Taken together, our findings suggest that, while medical cannabis-related stigma remains widespread and led some study participants to alter behavior, an early shift in ethos towards greater medical cannabis acceptance could be underway. If so, this transition may be occurring more rapidly in non-medical than in clinical settings. CONCLUSION: Cancer survivors may experience heightened medical cannabis-related stigma in the clinic as compared to their personal/professional lives. Healthcare providers who depend on patient transparency when gathering medical histories and devising care plans may wish to neutralize perceptions of medical cannabis-related stigma.

Proxy ratings of psychological well-being in patients with primary brain tumors: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review examined the agreement of proxy ratings of depression and anxiety in neuro-oncology patients. METHODS: Searches were conducted across 4 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science) to identify studies that compared proxy ratings (non-health care providers) of anxiety and depression in patients with brain cancer. Methodological quality and potential risk of bias were evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist. RESULTS: Out of the 936 studies that were screened for inclusion, 6 were included for review. The findings were mixed in terms of whether patient and proxy ratings were accurate (e.g., deemed equivalent), with many of the selected studies suggesting moderate level of agreement for several of the selected studies and, when both depression and anxiety were included, depression ratings from proxy raters were more accurate than for anxiety. We identified important limitations across the selected articles, such as low sample size, clarity on defining proxy raters and the different instructions that proxy raters are given when asked to assess patients' mood symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that proxy ratings of depression and anxiety should be interpreted with caution. While there is some agreement in proxy and patients with brain cancer ratings of depression and anxiety (greater agreement for depression), future work should recruit larger samples, while also remaining mindful of defining proxy raters and the instructions given in collecting these ratings.

Backgrounds and Trainings in Cannabis Therapeutics of Dispensary Personnel.

PURPOSE: A growing body of scientific research indicates that oncology teams tend to offer individuals with cancer little clinical advice regarding medicinal cannabis (MC) and that individuals with cancer instead turn to cannabis dispensaries for MC guidance. Our objective was to investigate dispensary personnel's backgrounds and trainings in MC advising. METHODS: The study design was semistructured interviews across 13 states with cannabis dispensary personnel in managerial or client-facing positions. Of 38 recruited, 26 (68%) completed interview. The primary outcome was training in MC advising. Researchers targeted thematic saturation and adhered to Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research. RESULTS: Of 26 participants, 54% were female, with an average age of 40 (range: 22-64) years. Half worked in client-facing roles; half worked in managerial ones. Study participants endorsed passionate commitment to their profession, often motivated by personal experience with MC therapeutics. Cannabis dispensaries often privileged sales skills over cannabis therapeutics knowledge when hiring, resulting in uneven baseline levels of cannabis therapeutics expertise among staff. Most participants reported workplace cannabis therapeutics training to be unstandardized and weak. They described dispensary personnel as resourceful in pursuing cannabis knowledge, self-financing learning in off-hours, sampling dispensary products, and exchanging knowledge. Nearly half the participants called for quality, standardized cannabis therapeutics training for dispensary personnel. CONCLUSION: The many oncology teams who defer to dispensary personnel regarding MC advising rely on a workforce who views themselves as unevenly trained. Further research should include a national survey of cannabis dispensary personnel to learn whether these findings hold true in a larger sample. If so, the oncology community must determine the best approach to clinically advising individuals with cancer about MC.

Cancer Patients' Experiences with and Perspectives on the Medicinal Cannabis "High".

Background: Patients with cancer employ medicinal cannabis for poly-symptom management and as cancer-directed therapy. Little is known about their perspectives on the medicinal cannabis "high." Methods: Qualitative interviews across eight states with medicinal cannabis users with physician-verified cancer diagnoses (n = 24). Results: Every participant referenced and 15 spoke in depth about the medicinal cannabis "high." Antitheticals characterized it: sleepiness versus heightened attention; calm versus "agitation." The intensity of the "high" served as a proxy metric by which participant's judged medicinal cannabis' cancer-directed therapy and symptom management efficacies. Overall, however, study participants viewed the "high" as a barrier to medicinal cannabis use and worked to avoid experiencing for prolonged periods. Conclusions: The "high" is central to the manner with which patients with cancer experience medicinal cannabis. Clinicians should be aware that patients may struggle to fine-tune medicinal cannabis dosing in the setting of the "high," and this challenge should be included in clinical discussions regarding oncological medicinal cannabis use.

Developing and Field Testing BOLSTER: A Nurse-Led Care Management Intervention to Support Patients and Caregivers following Hospitalization for Gynecologic Cancer-Associated Peritoneal Carcinomatosis.

Introduction: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) afflicts women with advanced gynecologic cancers. Patients with PC often require ostomies, gastric tubes, or catheters to palliate symptoms, yet patients and caregivers report feeling unprepared to manage these devices. The purpose of this study was to develop and field test the Building Out Lifelines for Safety, Trust, Empowerment, and Renewal (BOLSTER) intervention to support patients and their caregivers after hospitalization for PC. Materials and Methods: We adapted components of the Standard Nursing Intervention Protocol with stakeholders and topical experts. We developed educational content; built a smartphone application to assess patients' symptoms; and assessed preliminary feasibility and acceptability in two single-arm prepilot studies. Eligible participants were English-speaking adults hospitalized for gynecologic cancer-associated PC and their caregivers. Feasibility criteria were a ≥50% consent-to-approach ratio and ≥80% outcome measure completion. The acceptability criterion was ≥70% of participants recommending BOLSTER. Results: During the first prepilot, BOLSTER was a 10-week intervention. While 7/8 (87.5%) approached patients consented, we experienced high attrition to hospice. Less than half of patients (3/7) and caregivers (3/7) completed outcome measures. For the second prepilot, BOLSTER was a four-week intervention. All (7/7) approached patients consented. Two withdrew before participating in any study activity because they were "too overwhelmed." We excluded data from one caregiver who completed baseline measures with the patient's assistance. All remaining patients (5/5) and caregivers (4/4) completed outcome measures and recommended BOLSTER. Conclusion: BOLSTER is a technology-enhanced, nurse-led intervention that is feasible and acceptable to patients with gynecologic cancer-associated PC and their caregivers.

Clinical Decision Support for Symptom Management in Lung Cancer Patients: A Group RCT.

CONTEXT: Clinical guidelines are available to enhance symptom management during cancer treatment but often are not used in the practice setting. Clinical decision support can facilitate the implementation and adherence to clinical guidelines. and improve the quality of cancer care. OBJECTIVES: Clinical decision support offers an innovative approach to integrate guideline-based symptom management into oncology care. This study evaluated the effect of clinical decision support-based recommendations on clinical management of symptoms and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) among outpatients with lung cancer. METHODS: Twenty providers and 179 patients were allotted in group randomization to attention control (AC) or Symptom Assessment and Management Intervention (SAMI) arms. SAMI entailed patient-report of symptoms and delivery of recommendations to manage pain, fatigue, dyspnea, depression, and anxiety; AC entailed symptom reporting prior to the visit. Outcomes were collected at baseline, two, four and six-months. Adherence to recommendations was assessed through masked chart review. HR-QOL was measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnaire. Descriptive statistics with linear and logistic regression accounting for the clustering structure of the design and a modified chi-square test were used for analyses. RESULTS: Median age of patients was 63 years, 58% female, 88% white, and 32% ≤high school education. Significant differences in clinical management were evident in SAMI vs. AC for all target symptoms that passed threshold. Patients in SAMI were more likely to receive sustained-release opioids for constant pain, adjuvant medications for neuropathic pain, opioids for dyspnea, stimulants for fatigue and mental health referrals for anxiety. However, there were no statistically significant differences in HR-QOL at any time point. CONCLUSION: SAMI improved clinical management for all target symptoms but did not improve patient outcomes. A larger study is warranted to evaluate effectiveness.

Cancer patient's attitudes of using medicinal cannabis for sleep.

PURPOSE: Poor sleep is one of the most common side effects of cancer treatment. One increasingly popular approach to manage side effects of cancer treatment is use of medicinal cannabis (MC). DESIGN: Cancer patients using MC participated in semi-structured interviews to assess their experiences with MC (n = 24). A multi-stage thematic analysis was applied to interview transcripts. Themes related to use of MC for sleep were extracted. FINDINGS: The majority reported MC use for sleep. These participants reported that MC improved sleep initiation and continuity, resulted in decreased use of sleep medications, and that improved sleep led to better health. No participant reported MC was ineffectual for sleep or caused undesirable side effects when used for sleep. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer patients often utilize MC to specifically manage poor sleep. There is a need for rigorous studies assessing prevalence of use for this indication and clinical trials to assess comparative efficacy and safety.

Cannabis and the Cancer Patient.

Session 2 of the National Cancer Institute's Cannabis, Cannabinoids, and Cancer Research Workshop opened with testimony from a lymphoma survivor who detailed medicinal cannabis-related improvements in nausea, low appetite, insomnia, and mental health and the limited clinical counsel she received regarding cannabis use. Discussion next turned to the evolution of the legal landscape of cannabis in the United States, one in which state and federal laws frequently conflict and the Controlled Substance Act renders cannabis Schedule I. This legal climate creates conundrums for US medicinal cannabis researchers who contend with limited funding opportunities, avenues to source trial drug, and procedural red tape and for oncology clinicians who recommend medicinal cannabis to patients with some frequency while perceiving themselves as ill equipped to make such clinical recommendations. Ultimately, it creates challenges for cancer patients who find themselves turning to nonmedical and anecdotal information sources. The risks of cannabis use by the cancer patient were discussed next. These include infection, pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic drug-botanical interactions, cyclic nausea and vomiting, e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated illness, legal issues, and high cost. The session concluded with a broad survey of the research supporting oncologic cannabinoid use, conclusive evidence for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and suggestive evidence for cancer-related pain.

Identifying patient-level factors associated with interest in psychosocial services during cancer: A brief report.

OBJECTIVES: Uptake of psychosocial services during cancer treatment remains relatively low. To use these services efficiently, novel approaches - based on evidence-based theory - are needed to understand cancer patients' readiness to seek psychosocial services. Guided by the transtheoretical model (TTM), we investigated individuals' readiness to use psychosocial services by assessing decisional conflict (pros/cons) and self-efficacy, which are established as the most important constructs of predicting a specific behavior. METHODS: In these secondary analyses, we examined demographic and treatment-related factors in a national sample of adult cancer patients and survivors in the United States as predictors of decisional balance (pros/cons) and self-efficacy (i.e., two core TTM constructs) of engaging in psychosocial services. Participants were recruited through an online survey. In addition to examining demographic factors (age, sex, race, and marital status) as independent variables using t tests and correlations, treatment-related variables, such as having multiple cancers, type of cancer, type of treatment, and treatment setting were included. RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty-six participants completed the survey. The sample was primarily Caucasian (79%) and female (54.7%); average age was 47.9 (SD = 14.8). While no significant relationships emerged for self-efficacy, younger age and non-Caucasian race were significantly related to greater cons of seeking psychosocial care. Finally, those with multiple cancers versus reporting only one malignancy endorsed more cons of seeking psychosocial care. CONCLUSIONS: These data highlight the importance of measuring the cons of seeking psychosocial care during cancer treatment, with younger age, non-Caucasian, and those reporting experience with multiple cancers endorsing greater cons. This may impact eventual uptake of available services. Future research should identify individuals at risk for declining services based on perceived cons of seeking psychosocial care during cancer.