Patients With Serious Mental Illness Can Engage in Tobacco Treatment Trials and Tobacco Cessation Interventions During Cancer Treatment.

PURPOSE: More than half of individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) smoke, contributing to premature cancer mortality. A cancer diagnosis provides an opportunity to assist with smoking cessation; however, supportive oncology trials frequently exclude patients with SMI. To fill this gap, we examined differences in engagement and tobacco cessation in a pragmatic clinical trial. METHODS: We recruited 303 participants from two National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers, of which 10% had prior diagnoses of SMI (major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia spectrum disorders). We compared self-reported smoking behaviors, patient attitudes and beliefs about cessation, and rates of trial completion, engagement, and smoking abstinence among recently diagnosed patients with cancer with and without SMI. Six months after trial completion, we completed qualitative interviews on barriers and facilitators to tobacco cessation in a random sample of participants with SMI. RESULTS: Trial participants with SMI had similar motivation to quit smoking as those without SMI. Additionally, participants with SMI had a similar ability to engage in a tobacco treatment trial (6.5 counseling sessions completed v 7.3 sessions) and benefit from tobacco treatment as those without SMI (32.3% v 27.8% 6-month quit rates). CONCLUSION: Patients with cancer and SMI were able to engage in and benefit from a tobacco cessation trial integrated into cancer care. A cancer diagnosis provides an opportunity to assist patients with SMI with smoking cessation referrals and treatment. Pragmatic supportive oncology trials that include a diverse population of adults with SMI are needed to inform care delivery and improve cancer outcomes for patients with SMI and cancer.

Identifying Barriers to Advocacy Among Patients With Lung Cancer: The Role of Stigma-Related Interpersonal Constraint.

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether aspects of disease-specific stigma are barriers to advocacy among individuals with lung cancer. SAMPLE & SETTING: 266 patients with lung cancer treated at two National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer centers in the United States. METHODS & VARIABLES: Patients completed a cross-sectional survey. Demographic, clinical, and stigma-related correlates of advocacy were also explored. RESULTS: In multivariable analyses, lower levels of patient advocacy were reported by older patients and those with higher levels of constrained disclosure (i.e., avoidance of or discomfort in disclosing one's lung cancer status). IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Avoidance of discussing lung cancer (constrained disclosure) may be a barrier to patient involvement in advocacy. Additional research is needed to examine this relationship, reduce stigma, and promote inclusivity for individuals with lung cancer.

Training oncology care providers in the assessment and treatment of tobacco use and dependence.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines for promoting smoking cessation in cancer care exist; however, most oncology settings have not established tobacco use assessment and treatment as standard care. Inadequate staff training and other implementation challenges have been identified as barriers for delivery of evidence-based tobacco treatment. Providing training in tobacco treatment tailored to the unique needs of tobacco-dependent patients with cancer is one strategy to improve adoption of best practices to promote smoking cessation in cancer care. METHODS: A tobacco treatment training program for oncology care providers (tobacco treatment training-oncology [TTT-O]) consisting of a 2-day didactic and experiential workshop followed by 6 monthly, collaboratory videoconference calls supporting participants in their efforts to implement National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines in their oncology settings was developed and implemented. This article presents preliminary results on program evaluation, changes in participants' self-efficacy, and progress in implementing tobacco treatment. RESULTS: Data have been obtained from the first 5 cohorts of TTT-O participants (n = 110) who completed training, course evaluations, baseline and follow-up surveys. Participants rated the training as highly favorable and reported significant gains in self-efficacy in their ability to assess and treat tobacco dependence. Participants also demonstrated significant improvements in tobacco treatment skills and implementation of several indicators of improved adoption of best practices for tobacco treatment in their cancer care settings. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of tobacco treatment training for cancer care providers is feasible, acceptable, and can have a significant positive impact on participants' tobacco treatment skills, self-efficacy, and greater adoption of tobacco treatment delivery in cancer care.

Rapid deployment of virtual mind-body interventions during the COVID-19 outbreak: feasibility, acceptability, and implications for future care.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 increased stress levels while reducing access to mind-body services in patients with cancer. We describe the rapid deployment of remotely delivered mind-body services to people with cancer during COVID-19, rates of participation, and acceptability from patients' perspectives. METHODS: Eligible participants were patients with cancer age ≥ 18 years enrolled in a single academic cancer center's online patient portal. Interventions included mind-body group therapy sessions in fitness, meditation, yoga, dance, tai chi, and music delivered using Zoom video conferencing. Sessions were 30-45 min and led by an integrative medicine clinician. Following each session, participants were asked to complete a three-item questionnaire assessing (1) satisfaction with the class session, (2) reduction in stress/anxiety, and (3) likelihood of recommending the class to others. Patients could also provide comments in real-time using the Zoom chat function. RESULTS: Among 5948 unique visits, the most frequently attended classes were fitness (n = 2513, 42.2%) followed by meditation (n = 1176, 19.8%) and yoga (n = 909, 15.3%). Of these visits, 3902 (65.6%) had an associated completed questionnaire. Across class types, a large majority of participants reported being extremely satisfied (n = 3733, 95.7%), experiencing extreme reductions in anxiety/stress (n = 3268, 83.8%), and being extremely likely to recommend the class to others (n = 3605, 92.4%). Fitness had the highest endorsement among class types (all p values < 0.001). Themes from the chat responses included gratitude, expressions of helpfulness, and feelings of connection. CONCLUSION: High utilization of and satisfaction with these virtual mind-body services demonstrate the significant potential of remote delivery to facilitate patient access to services.

Effect of Sustained Smoking Cessation Counseling and Provision of Medication vs Shorter-term Counseling and Medication Advice on Smoking Abstinence in Patients Recently Diagnosed With Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Persistent smoking may cause adverse outcomes among patients with cancer. Many cancer centers have not fully implemented evidence-based tobacco treatment into routine care. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of sustained telephone counseling and medication (intensive treatment) compared with shorter-term telephone counseling and medication advice (standard treatment) to assist patients recently diagnosed with cancer to quit smoking. Design, Setting, and Participants: This unblinded randomized clinical trial was conducted at Massachusetts General Hospital/Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Adults who had smoked 1 cigarette or more within 30 days, spoke English or Spanish, and had recently diagnosed breast, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, gynecological, head and neck, lung, lymphoma, or melanoma cancers were eligible. Enrollment occurred between November 2013 and July 2017; assessments were completed by the end of February 2018. Interventions: Participants randomized to the intensive treatment (n = 153) and the standard treatment (n = 150) received 4 weekly telephone counseling sessions and medication advice. The intensive treatment group also received 4 biweekly and 3 monthly telephone counseling sessions and choice of Food and Drug Administration-approved cessation medication (nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, or varenicline). Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was biochemically confirmed 7-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were treatment utilization rates. Results: Among 303 patients who were randomized (mean age, 58.3 years; 170 women [56.1%]), 221 (78.1%) completed the trial. Six-month biochemically confirmed quit rates were 34.5% (n = 51 in the intensive treatment group) vs 21.5% (n = 29 in the standard treatment group) (difference, 13.0% [95% CI, 3.0%-23.3%]; odds ratio, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.13-3.27]; P < .02). The median number of counseling sessions completed was 8 (interquartile range, 4-11) in the intensive treatment group. A total of 97 intensive treatment participants (77.0%) vs 68 standard treatment participants (59.1%) reported cessation medication use (difference, 17.9% [95% CI, 6.3%-29.5%]; odds ratio, 2.31 [95% CI, 1.32-4.04]; P = .003). The most common adverse events in the intensive treatment and standard treatment groups, respectively, were nausea (n = 13 and n = 6), rash (n = 4 and n = 1), hiccups (n = 4 and n = 1), mouth irritation (n = 4 and n = 0), difficulty sleeping (n = 3 and n = 2), and vivid dreams (n = 3 and n = 2). Conclusions and Relevance: Among smokers recently diagnosed with cancer in 2 National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers, sustained counseling and provision of free cessation medication compared with 4-week counseling and medication advice resulted in higher 6-month biochemically confirmed quit rates. However, the generalizability of the study findings is uncertain and requires further research. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01871506.

Sources and types of online information that breast cancer patients read and discuss with their doctors.

OBJECTIVES: Most research examining the impact of patients seeking online health information treats internet information homogenously, rather than recognizing that there are multiple types and sources of available information. The present research was conducted to differentiate among sources and types of internet information that patients search for, intend to discuss with their doctors, and recall discussing with their doctors, and to determine how accurate and hopeful patients rate this information. METHODS: We surveyed 70 breast cancer patients recruited from the waiting rooms of breast medical oncology and surgery clinics. The main variables in the study were as follows: (1) the sources and types of online information patients have read, intended to discuss, and actually discussed with their doctors, and (2) how accurately and hopefully they rated this information to be. RESULTS: Patients read information most frequently from the websites of cancer organizations, and most often about side effects. Patients planned to discuss fewer types of information with their doctors than they had read about. They most often intended to discuss information from cancer organization websites or WebMD, and the material was most often about alternative therapies, side effects, and proven or traditional treatments. Some 76.8% of total participants rated the information they had read as very or somewhat accurate, and 61% rated the information they had read as very or somewhat hopeful. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Internet information varies widely by source and type. Differentiating among sources and types of information is essential to explore the ways in which online health information impacts patients' experiences.

Electronic cigarette use among patients with cancer: characteristics of electronic cigarette users and their smoking cessation outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Given that continued smoking after a cancer diagnosis increases the risk of adverse health outcomes, patients with cancer are strongly advised to quit. Despite a current lack of evidence regarding their safety and effectiveness as a cessation tool, electronic cigarettes (E-cigarettes) are becoming increasingly popular. To guide oncologists' communication with their patients about E-cigarette use, this article provides what to the authors' knowledge is the first published clinical data regarding E-cigarette use and cessation outcomes among patients with cancer. METHODS: A total of 1074 participants included smokers (patients with cancer) who recently enrolled in a tobacco treatment program at a comprehensive cancer center. Standard demographic, tobacco use history, and follow-up cessation outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: A 3-fold increase in E-cigarette use was observed from 2012 to 2013 (10.6% vs 38.5%). E-cigarette users were more nicotine dependent than nonusers, had more prior quit attempts, and were more likely to be diagnosed with thoracic and head or neck cancers. Using a complete case analysis, E-cigarette users were as likely to be smoking at the time of follow-up as nonusers (odds ratio, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-1.7). Using an intention-to-treat analysis, E-cigarette users were twice as likely to be smoking at the time of follow-up as nonusers (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-3.3). CONCLUSIONS: The high rate of E-cigarette use observed is consistent with recent articles highlighting increased E-cigarette use in the general population. The current longitudinal findings raise doubts concerning the usefulness of E-cigarettes for facilitating smoking cessation among patients with cancer. Further research is needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of E-cigarettes as a cessation treatment for patients with cancer.

A qualitative study of lung cancer risk perceptions and smoking beliefs among national lung screening trial participants.

INTRODUCTION: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American Cancer Society recently released lung screening guidelines that include smoking cessation counseling for smokers undergoing screening. Previous work indicates that smoking behaviors and risk perceptions of the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) participants were relatively unchanged. We explored American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN)/NLST former and current smokers' risk perceptions specifically to (a) determine whether lung screening is a cue for behavior change, (b) elucidate risk perceptions for lung cancer and smoking-related diseases, and (c) explore postscreening behavioral intentions and changes. METHODS: A random sample of 35 participants from 4 ACRIN sites were qualitatively interviewed 1-2 years postscreen. We used a structured interview guide based on Health Belief Model and Self-Regulation Model constructs. Content analyses were conducted with NVivo 8. RESULTS: Most participants endorsed high-risk perceptions for lung cancer and smoking-related diseases, but heightened concern about these risks did not appear to motivate participants to seek screening. Risk perceptions were mostly attributed to participants' heavy smoking histories; former smokers expressed greatly reduced risk. Lung cancer and smoking-related diseases were perceived as very severe although participants endorsed low worry. Current smokers had low confidence in their ability to quit, and none reported quitting following their initial screen. CONCLUSIONS: Lung screening did not appear to be a behavior change cue to action, and high-risk perceptions did not translate into quitting behaviors. Cognitive and emotional dissonance and avoidance strategies may deter engagement in smoking behavior change. Smoking cessation and prevention interventions during lung screening should explore risk perceptions, emotions, and quit confidence.

Support service use and interest in support services among distressed family caregivers of lung cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined support service use and interest in support services among distressed family caregivers of patients recently entering comprehensive cancer care facilities. METHODS: Primary family caregivers of lung cancer patients (N=83) were recruited from three medical centers within 12 weeks of the patient's new visit to the oncology clinic. All family caregivers were screened for psychological distress, and those reporting significant anxiety or depressive symptoms were eligible for this study. Caregivers completed a baseline assessment of support service use (i.e., use of mental health services and complementary and alternative medicine [CAM]) and interest in support services. Support service use was also assessed 3 months later. RESULTS: Although all caregivers reported clinically meaningful distress, only 26% used mental health and 39% used CAM services during the 3-month study period. Patients' receipt of chemotherapy was positively associated with caregivers' mental health service use, whereas greater education and receiving assistance with caregiving tasks were associated with CAM use. Forty percent of caregivers who did not use CAM at baseline were interested in CAM. In addition, 29% of caregivers who did not receive mental health services at baseline were interested in professional psychosocial support, and 29% of caregivers who did not receive staff assistance with practical needs at baseline were interested in this service. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that distressed family caregivers of lung cancer patients underuse mental health services and that a sizable minority are interested in professional help with psychosocial and practical needs.

Teachable moments for promoting smoking cessation: the context of cancer care and survivorship.

BACKGROUND: There has been a call for comprehensive cancer care that gives greater consideration to changing lifestyle risk factors such as smoking to improve prognosis and long-term health. Cancer diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship offer challenges and opportunities ("teachable moments") to promote smoking cessation. METHODS: This review provides a rationale for the importance of smoking cessation programs in the cancer context, highlights practice guidelines for the delivery of these interventions, summarizes the challenges to smoking cessation unique to cancer patients, and recommends approaches to capitalize on the cancer context to promote smoking cessation. RESULTS: Barriers to smoking cessation by patients with cancer include heavy nicotine dependence, urgency of cessation, fatalistic attitudes about cessation benefits, cancer-related psychological distress, treatment factors, and the presence of smokers in the social network. Opportunities to promote cessation include the transition from inpatient to outpatient care, involvement in cancer patient care by family members who smoke, and distribution of clinical feedback (eg, test results). CONCLUSIONS: Teachable moments in the cancer context are not being fully utilized to promote smoking cessation. Evidence-based guidelines can assist cancer care teams in promoting cessation.