Treatment-related changes in insomnia, anticipatory pleasure, and depression symptoms: A proof-of-concept study with cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors have elevated rates of insomnia and depression. Insomnia increases risk for depression onset, and the Integrated Sleep and Reward (ISR) Model suggests that impairments in reward responding (e.g., ability to anticipate and/or experience pleasure) plays a central role in this relationship. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is efficacious for treating chronic insomnia and reducing depression in cancer survivor populations. The effects of CBT-I on anticipatory and consummatory pleasure are theoretically and clinically meaningful, yet remain unexamined. PATIENTS/METHODS: This secondary analysis of a pilot RCT (N = 40 cancer survivors with insomnia) explicated changes in anticipatory and consummatory pleasure and depression symptoms following a 4-session, synchronous, virtual CBT-I program versus enhanced usual care (referral to a behavioral sleep medicine clinic + sleep hygiene handout). Linear mixed models examined changes in anticipatory and consummatory pleasure and depression symptoms as predictors of changes in insomnia severity from baseline to post-intervention and 1-month follow-up. RESULTS: CBT-I buffered against deterioration in anticipatory pleasure but not consummatory pleasure or depression symptoms. Across conditions, increased anticipatory pleasure was associated with insomnia reduction through 1-month follow-up, even after adjusting for changes in depression symptoms. CONCLUSION: CBT-I may improve reward processing deficits in cancer survivors with insomnia. Findings provide support for the ISR Model and implicate pleasure as an important target for insomnia and depression.

A Multi-step Approach to Adapting a Mind-Body Resiliency Intervention for Fear of Cancer Recurrence and Uncertainty in Survivorship (IN FOCUS).

BACKGROUND: For cancer survivors, there is a paucity of fear of recurrence (FOR) interventions that integrate empirically supported mind-body and psychological skills for managing FOR and are delivered in scalable formats. OBJECTIVE: To adapt an evidence-based resiliency intervention to address FOR among cancer survivors. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team of researchers, clinicians, and patient stakeholders followed an iterative intervention adaptation process (ORBIT). In Step 1, we sought to define key FOR management skills through a literature review and feedback from stakeholders. In Step 2, we integrated findings into a treatment manual and refined procedures for in-person delivery to groups of cancer survivors, defined as adults who had completed primary cancer treatment for non-metastatic cancer. In Step 3, we conducted a single arm trial to assess initial acceptability and change in FOR severity with 23 cancer survivors (N=4 intervention groups). In Step 4, we conducted additional qualitative interviews with 28 cancer survivors (N=6 focus groups stratified by FOR severity, N=15 individual interviews) to define adaptive and maladaptive strategies for coping with FOR and to identify preferences for delivery. In Step 5, we refined the treatment manual and procedures for testing in a future pilot randomized feasibility trial. RESULTS: We identified critical feedback using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. The single arm trial suggested preliminary feasibility and sustained reductions in FOR severity, yet need for refinement (i.e., eligibility, delivery modality), prompting additional qualitative interviews for further targeting. The resulting intervention (IN FOCUS) is comprised of virtual, synchronous, group-delivered sessions that offer an integrated approach to FOR management by teaching cognitive-behavioral techniques, meditation, relaxation training, adaptive health behaviors, and positive psychology skills. Sessions are targeted by applying skills to FOR and associated healthcare engagement. CONCLUSIONS: IN FOCUS is a targeted intervention for teaching mind-body resiliency skills to groups of cancer survivors with elevated FOR. Next steps are testing feasibility in a pilot randomized trial.

The Survivorship Sleep Program (SSP): A synchronous, virtual cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia pilot program among cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: For cancer survivors, insomnia is prevalent, distressing, and persists for years if unmanaged. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is an effective treatment yet can be difficult to access and may require modification to address survivorship-specific barriers to sleep. In this 2-phase study, the authors adapted and assessed the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effects of synchronous, virtual CBT-I adapted for cancer survivors (the Survivorship Sleep Program [SSP]). METHODS: From April to August 2020, cancer survivors with insomnia (N = 10) were interviewed to refine SSP content and delivery. From October 2020 to March 2021, 40 survivors were recruited for a randomized controlled trial comparing 4 weekly SSP sessions with enhanced usual care (EUC) (CBT-I referral plus a sleep hygiene handout). Feasibility and acceptability were assessed by enrollment, retention, attendance, fidelity, survey ratings, and exit interviews. Insomnia severity (secondary outcome), sleep quality, sleep diaries, and fatigue were assessed at baseline, postintervention, and at 1-month follow-up using linear mixed models. RESULTS: The SSP included targeted content and clinician-led, virtual delivery to enhance patient centeredness and access. Benchmarks were met for enrollment (56% enrolled/eligible), retention (SSP, 90%; EUC, 95%), attendance (100%), and fidelity (95%). Compared with EUC, the SSP resulted in large, clinically significant improvements in insomnia severity (Cohen d = 1.19) that were sustained at 1-month follow-up (Cohen d = 1.27). Improvements were observed for all other sleep metrics except sleep diary total sleep time and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Synchronous, virtually delivered CBT-I targeted to cancer survivors is feasible, acceptable, and seems to be efficacious for reducing insomnia severity. Further testing in larger and more diverse samples is warranted.

Moderators of a resiliency group intervention for frontline clinicians during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: To mitigate the psychological burdens of COVID-19 for frontline clinicians (FCs), we adapted an existing evidence-based resiliency program, Stress Management and Resilience Training Relaxation Response Program (SMART-3RP), for FCs. This analysis explores moderators of stress coping to determine which subgroups of FCs benefited most from SMART-3RP. METHODS: 102 FCs from Mass General Brigham hospitals engaged in the adapted SMART-3RP. Assessments were completed at group entry (Week 0) and completion (Week 4). The primary outcome was stress coping, and we examined 15 possible baseline moderators. We fit linear mixed effects regression models and assessed potential baseline moderators using a likelihood ratio test. We report model-based estimates and confidence intervals for each moderator-by-time interaction (i.e., differential effect), where positive/negative values indicate more/less improvement in average perceived stress coping. RESULTS: Stress coping improved from Week 0 to Week 4 (mean improvement [95% CI] = 0.9 [0.6 to 1.2]). FCs with higher anxiety (differential effect [95% CI] = 0.3 [0.1 to 0.4]), depression (0.4 [0.2 to 0.6]), and loneliness (0.4 [0.1 to 0.6]), but lower levels of mindfulness (CAMS-Rfocus: 1.0 [0.4 to 1.6]; CAMS-Raccept: 1.3 [0.7 to 2.0]) and self-compassion (0.4, [0.1 to 0.8]) at baseline experienced greater benefits in perceived stress coping from the SMART-3RP. Baseline health uncertainty along with sociodemographic and work characteristics did not moderate stress coping. DISCUSSION: Results highlight particular sub-populations of FCs that may benefit more from a stress management intervention, especially during emergency responses (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic).