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.

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.

Cancer patients' experiences with medicinal cannabis-related care.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about medical cannabis (MC)-related care for patients with cancer using MC. METHODS: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted in a convenience sample of individuals (n = 24) with physician-confirmed oncologic diagnoses and state/district authorization to use MC (Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Oregon, New York, and Washington, DC) from April 2017 to March 2019. Standard qualitative techniques were used to assess the degree of MC-related health care oversight, MC practices, and key information sources. RESULTS: Among 24 participants (median age, 57 years; range, 30-71 years; 16 women [67%]), MC certifications were typically issued by a professional new to a patient's care after a brief, perfunctory consultation. Patients disclosed MCuse to their established medical teams but received little medical advice about whether and how to use MC. Patients with cancer used MC products as multipurpose symptom management and as cancer-directed therapy, sometimes in lieu of standard-of-care treatments. Personal experimentation, including methodical self-monitoring, was an important source of MC know-how. Absent formal advice from medical professionals, patients relied on nonmedical sources for MC information. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer used MC with minimal medical oversight. Most received MC certifications through brief meetings with unfamiliar professionals. Participants desired but were often unable to access high-quality clinical information about MC from their established medical teams. Because many patients are committed to using MC, a product sustained by a growing industry, medical providers should familiarize themselves with the existing data for MM and its limitations to address a poorly met clinical need.

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.

Burnout in psychosocial oncology clinicians: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have examined burnout in psychosocial oncology clinicians. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize what is known about the prevalence and severity of burnout in psychosocial clinicians who work in oncology settings and the factors that are believed to contribute or protect against it. METHOD: Articles on burnout (including compassion fatigue and secondary trauma) in psychosocial oncology clinicians were identified by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Web of Science Core Collection. RESULTS: Thirty-eight articles were reviewed at the full-text level, and of those, nine met study inclusion criteria. All were published between 2004 and 2018 and included data from 678 psychosocial clinicians. Quality assessment revealed relatively low risk of bias and high methodological quality. Study composition and sample size varied greatly, and the majority of clinicians were aged between 40 and 59 years. Across studies, 10 different measures were used to assess burnout, secondary traumatic stress, and compassion fatigue, in addition to factors that might impact burnout, including work engagement, meaning, and moral distress. When compared with other medical professionals, psychosocial oncology clinicians endorsed lower levels of burnout. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: This systematic review suggests that psychosocial clinicians are not at increased risk of burnout compared with other health care professionals working in oncology or in mental health. Although the data are quite limited, several factors appear to be associated with less burnout in psychosocial clinicians, including exposure to patient recovery, discussing traumas, less moral distress, and finding meaning in their work. More research using standardized measures of burnout with larger samples of clinicians is needed to examine both prevalence rates and how the experience of burnout changes over time. By virtue of their training, psychosocial clinicians are well placed to support each other and their nursing and medical colleagues.

Algorithm-based decision support for symptom self-management among adults with Cancer: results of usability testing.

BACKGROUND: It is essential that cancer patients understand anticipated symptoms, how to self-manage these symptoms, and when to call their clinicians. However, patients are often ill-prepared to manage symptoms at home. Clinical decision support (CDS) is a potentially innovative way to provide information to patients where and when they need it. The purpose of this project was to design and evaluate a simulated model of an algorithm-based CDS program for self-management of cancer symptoms. METHODS: This study consisted of three phases; development of computable algorithms for self-management of cancer symptoms using a modified ADAPTE process, evaluation of a simulated model of the CDS program, and identification of design objectives and lessons learned from the evaluation of patient-centered CDS. In phase 1, algorithms for pain, constipation and nausea/vomiting were developed by an expert panel. In phase 2, we conducted usability testing of a simulated symptom assessment and management intervention for self-care (SAMI-Self-Care) CDS program involving focus groups, interviews and surveys with cancer patients, their caregivers and clinicians. The Acceptability E-scale measured acceptability of the program. In phase 3, we developed design objectives and identified barriers to uptake of patient-centered CDS based on the data gathered from stakeholders. RESULTS: In phase 1, algorithms were reviewed and approved through a consensus meeting and majority vote. In phase 2, 24 patients & caregivers and 13 clinicians participated in the formative evaluation. Iterative changes were made in a simulated SAMI-Self-Care CDS program. Acceptability scores were high among patients, caregivers and clinicians. In phase 3, we formulated CDS design objectives, which included: 1) ensure patient safety, 2) communicate clinical concepts effectively, 3) promote communication with clinicians, 4) support patient activation, and 5) facilitate navigation and use. We identified patient barriers and clinician concerns to using CDS for symptom self-management, which were consistent with the chronic care model, a theoretical framework used to enhance patient-clinician communication and patient self-management. CONCLUSION: Patient safety and tool navigation were critical features of CDS for patient self-management. Insights gleaned from this study may be used to inform the development of CDS resources for symptom self-management in patients with other chronic conditions.

Retrospective review of serotonergic medication tolerability in patients with neuroendocrine tumors with biochemically proven carcinoid syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Patients with carcinoid tumors frequently could benefit from the pharmacologic treatment of depression and anxiety. However, many prescribers avoid serotonergic medications due to the theoretical risk of exacerbating carcinoid syndrome. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with carcinoid tumors and elevated serotonin levels (as measured by 24-hour urine 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid [5-HIAA]) at Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center who initiated treatment with serotonergic antidepressants after a carcinoid diagnosis from 2003 to 2016. Each medication regimen was categorized based on the presence of adverse interactions as defined by clinical worsening of symptoms of carcinoid syndrome in the absence of progressive disease that temporally correlated with a serotonergic medication trial. RESULTS: A total of 73 serotonergic regimens received by 52 patients were included in the primary analysis. Among these medication trials, 8.2% of the regimens (6 regimens) were categorized as being associated with a likely adverse interaction, 61.6% of the regimens (45 regimens) were categorized as having no adverse reaction, 9.6% of the regimens (7 regimens) were categorized as an unlikely adverse reaction, and 20.6% of the regimens (15 regimens) were categorized as unknown. It is interesting to note that none of the 73 trials resulted in a carcinoid crisis requiring emergency care or hospitalization. Only 3 patients discontinued serotonergic medications due to worsening carcinoid syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Serotonergic medications appear to be a safe option for the treatment of depressive and anxiety symptoms in the majority of patients with neuroendocrine tumors and carcinoid syndrome. In the current study, <10% of patients developed a combination of flushing, diarrhea, and bloating after the initiation of serotonergic medications. Clinicians can begin with low doses, monitor these symptoms, and reduce the dose or discontinue the medication if necessary. Cancer 2017;123:2735-42. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Patient and caregiver perspectives on decision support for symptom and quality of life management during cancer treatment: Implications for eHealth.

OBJECTIVES: Adequate symptom and quality-of-life (SQL) management is a priority during cancer treatment. eHealth is a timely way to enhance patient-engagement, facilitate communication, and improve health outcomes. The objectives of this study were to describe patient and caregivers' perspectives for providing, processing, and managing SQL data to enhance communication and identify desired components for decision support. METHODS: Data were collected from 64 participants through questionnaires and focus groups. Analysis was conducted using NVivo. Open and axial coding was completed, grouping commonalities and large constructs into nodes to identify and synthesize themes. RESULTS: Face-to-face meetings with clinicians were the prime time to communicate, and patients strove to understand treatment options and the effect on SQL by bringing caregivers to their visits, taking notes, tracking symptoms, and creating portable health records. Patients/caregivers struggled to self-manage their symptoms and were uncertain when to contact clinicians when experiencing uncontrolled symptoms. Most participants identified eHealth solutions for decision support. However, 38% of participants (n = 24) rarely used computers and identified non-eHealth options for decision support. Core components for both eHealth and non-eHealth systems were access to (1) cancer information, (2) medical records, (3) peer support, and (4) improved support and understanding on when to contact clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Patients were faced with an overwhelming amount of information and relied on their caregivers to help navigate the complexities of cancer care and self-manage SQL. Health technologies can provide informational support; however, decision support needs to span multiple venues to avoid increasing disparities caused by a digital divide.

Impact of fertility preservation counseling and treatment on psychological outcomes among women with cancer: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: For many female cancer survivors, the preservation of reproductive potential is central to quality of life (QOL), and concerns regarding infertility may affect treatment decisions. Despite the existence of several consensus guidelines supporting routine fertility preservation consultation, to the authors' knowledge little is known regarding psychological outcomes in female cancer patients who undergo fertility preservation counseling/consultation (FPC), with or without fertility preservation (FP). METHODS: This literature review examined the effect of FPC alone, or with FP, on psychological outcomes including satisfaction, decisional regret, and QOL. PubMed and PsychINFO were systematically searched for English-language publications from the earliest available publication date of each database through March 2015. Among 111 unique articles concerning oncofertility, 13 met inclusion criteria: peer-reviewed articles reporting primary data regarding satisfaction and psychological outcomes among women who underwent FPC alone or with FP. RESULTS: A majority of women receiving FPC reported that the possibility of FP was instrumental to improved coping. Receiving FPC reduced long-term regret and dissatisfaction concerning fertility, and was associated with improved physical QOL and trends toward improved psychological QOL. Women also desired prompt, standardized, and written information addressing perceived unmet needs specific to oncofertility. Offering FPC was perceived as critical regardless of age or parity. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of the authors' knowledge, little research to date has addressed the impact of FPC alone, or with FP, on QOL in women with cancer. Clinicians should recognize the existing evidence base supporting the psychological benefit of prompt FPC. Future research must be conducted to elucidate the long-term psychosocial effects of FP.

Patterns of psychiatric medication use among nationally representative long-term cancer survivors and controls.

BACKGROUND: Investigations of long-term cancer survivors (LTCS) indicate that this population is not appreciably different from cancer-naive peers with respect to several neuropsychiatric domains. The current study sought to determine whether differences in psychiatric medication use might help to explain the negative findings. METHODS: In a nationally representative sample, 5692 subjects were queried for cancer history, psychiatric diagnoses, and psychotropic medication use. The LTCS were defined as those individuals who were ≥5 years from diagnosis and whose cancer was in remission or cured. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were obtained from multivariable logistic regression models evaluating the relationship between cancer status and use of psychiatric medications. The interaction between case/control status and psychiatric diagnoses was also tested in a logistic regression model to predict psychotropic medication use. RESULTS: A total of 225 participants met the criteria for LTCS and 3953 met the criteria for cancer-naive controls (CNC). The LTCS were no more likely than CNC to carry a psychiatric diagnosis. Despite the LTCS reporting somewhat greater psychotropic medication use compared with the CNC (28.8% vs 22.3%), unadjusted and adjusted differences did not reach statistical significance, possibly due to sample size. The interaction between case/control status and carrying a psychiatric diagnosis was not found to be significantly associated with receiving a psychiatric medication. CONCLUSIONS: LTCS and CNC demonstrated comparable rates of psychiatric prescription medication use. The relationship between taking a psychiatric medication and carrying a psychiatric diagnosis was not found to be significantly different between the case and control groups. These findings contribute to an emerging hypothesis that in general LTCS are not a particularly psychiatrically vulnerable group.

Advanced cancer as a risk for major depressive episodes.

OBJECTIVE: Major depression adversely affects health communication, quality of life, and survival in patients with advanced cancer. Prior research provides limited insight into how patients with advanced cancer differ from the general population in risk for developing a major depressive episode (MDE). This study aims to determine whether advanced cancer poses distinct risks for initial and recurrent MDEs. METHODS: Advanced cancer patients (N = 628) from Coping with Cancer were compared with propensity-weighted general population controls (N = 9282) from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. RESULTS: Patients with advanced cancer were more likely than comparisons to have an initial MDE [OR = 27.3, 95% CI = (14.8-50.4); p < 0.001] but no more likely than comparisons to have a recurrent MDE [OR = 1.5, 95% CI = (0.9-2.6); p = 0.160]. Nearly two thirds (64.4%) of current MDEs in patients were initial onset; the vast majority (91.8%) of current MDEs in comparisons were recurrent. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced cancer increases risk of an initial MDE but appears not to enhance risk of a recurrent MDE. This suggests the importance of screening widely for depression in patients with advanced cancer as opposed to targeting screening to presumably high-risk subgroups of those with psychiatric histories.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.