Developing pathways, a hope-enhancing intervention for metastatic lung cancer patients receiving cancer treatment

Life Goal Domains, Traits, and Setting Process in the Collaboration between Healthcare Professionals and Cancer Survivors: A Scoping Review

Objectives

: This study aimed to describe the classification of goal domains, goal traits, and the goal-setting process as revealed by previous life goal-setting practices of healthcare professionals collaborating with cancer survivors.

Methods

: The design was a scoping review. The MEDLINE, Academic Search Premier, and CINAHL databases were searched and mapped for papers with descriptions of goal domains, goal traits, and the goal-setting process. Goal domains were classified as life goals that were health-related, psychological, social, achievement-related, and leisure goals. Goal traits were classified based on specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and timed (SMART) criteria. The goal-setting process was classified based on the frameworks of goal-setting phases (preparation, formulation, follow-up) and their components.

Results

: In total, 229 papers were identified, and 24 papers were included in the final analysis. All papers included health-related goals, followed by psychological and social goals. All goal domains were included in 41.7% of the papers. Relevant goals were the most common and timed goals were the least common. All papers included either of the components that comprise the preparation or formulation phases. We found that 12.5% of papers did not include any of the three components of the follow-up phase.

Conclusions

: The life goals collaboratively set between cancer survivors and healthcare professionals were characterized by the following: psychological and social goal domains, numerous goal domains, more relevant goals and fewer timed goals, low proportion of patient education in the preparation phase, and high proportion of evaluation of progress or achievement in the follow-up phase.

"Pathways": A hope-enhancing intervention for patients undergoing treatment for advanced lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

Observational data suggest hope is associated with the quality of life and survival of people with cancer. This trial examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary outcomes of "Pathways," a hope intervention for people in treatment for advanced lung cancer.

METHODS

Between 2020 and 2022, we conducted a single-arm trial of Pathways among participants who were 3-12 weeks into systemic treatment. Pathways consisted of two individual sessions delivered during infusions and three phone calls in which participants discussed their values, goals, and goal strategies with a nurse or occupational therapist. Participants completed standardized measures of hope and goal interference pre- and post-intervention. Feasibility was defined as ≥60% of eligible patients enrolling, ≥70% of participants completing three or more sessions, ≥70% of participants completing post-assessments, and mean acceptability ratings ≥7 out of 10 on intervention relevance, helpfulness, and convenience. Linear regression fixed effects models with covariates modeled pre-post changes in complete case analysis and multiple imputation models.

RESULTS

Fifty two participants enrolled: female (59.6%), non-Hispanic White (84.6%), rural (75.0%), and with low educational attainment (51.9% high school degree or less). Except for enrollment (54%), feasibility and acceptability markers were surpassed (77% adherence, 77% retention, acceptability ratings ≥8/10). There was moderate improvement in hope and goal interference from pre-to post-intervention (d = 0.51, p < 0.05 for hope; d = -0.70, p < 0.005 for goal interference).

CONCLUSIONS

Strong feasibility, acceptability, and patient-reported outcome data suggest Pathways is a promising intervention to increase hope and reduce cancer-related goal interference during advanced lung cancer treatment.

Evaluation of Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM) in people with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with immunotherapies or targeted therapies: protocol for a single-arm, mixed-methods pilot study

INTRODUCTION

People with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immunotherapies (IT) or targeted therapies (TT) may have improved outcomes in a subset of people who respond, raising unique psychological concerns requiring specific attention. These include the need for people with prolonged survival to reframe their life plans and tolerate uncertainty related to treatment duration and prognosis. A brief intervention for people with advanced cancer, Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM), could help people treated with IT or TT address these concerns. However, CALM has not been specifically evaluated in this population. This study aims to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of CALM in people with advanced NSCLC treated with IT or TT and obtain preliminary evidence regarding its effectiveness in this population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Twenty people with advanced NSCLC treated with IT or TT will be recruited from Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Participants will complete three to six sessions of CALM delivered over 3-6 months. A prospective, single-arm, mixed-methods pilot study will be conducted. Participants will complete outcome measures at baseline, post-intervention, 3 months and 6 months, including Patient Health Questionnaire, Death and Dying Distress Scale, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General and Clinician Evaluation Questionnaire. The acceptability of CALM will be assessed using patient experiences surveys and qualitative interviews. Feasibility will be assessed by analysis of recruitment rates, treatment adherence and intervention delivery time.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been granted by the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/82047/PMCC). Participants with cancer will complete a signed consent form prior to participation, and carers and therapists will complete verbal consent. Results will be made available to funders, broader clinicians and researchers through conference presentations and publications. If CALM is found to be acceptable in this cohort, this will inform a potential phase 3 trial.

Goals and goal perceptions in patients with advanced stage lung cancer: a mixed methods study

PURPOSE

Goals provide insight into what is important to an individual. We describe the development and application of a mixed methods approach to elicit goals and perceptions about goals in patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

Patients receiving first-line treatment for advanced lung cancer participated in semi-structured interviews about their goals. Participants self-generated goals, then selected and ranked their three most important goals and provided Likert scale ratings of goal-related perceptions (e.g., attainability, locus of control). Independent raters coded goals into content domains. One month later, participants reported perceived progress toward goals and facilitators of and barriers to progress.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 75, M_age = 64.5 years, 59% female) identified goals across eight domains: social/role/relationship, everyday/practical, leisure/pleasure, psychological/existential/spiritual, major life changes or achievements, cancer treatment response/disease outcomes, palliative outcomes, and behavioral health improvement. Of all goals identified (N = 352), 72% of patients had at least one social/role/relationship goal, 68% had a leisure/pleasure goal, and 29% had a cancer treatment response goal. On average, participants considered their goals to be attainable, perceived a high degree of control over reaching goals, anticipated making "some" progress in the short term, and perceived a high likelihood of reaching goals in the future. Facilitators of progress included mental fortitude, feeling physically well, and social support. Barriers included cancer-related side effects, practical challenges, and COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

A majority of participant goals focused on meaningful engagement and living well. Goals were largely viewed as attainable and under participants' control. Cancer clinicians may consider how to support patients in working toward valued goals in conjunction with oncology care.

Hope therapy

Research over the past three decades has established that hope is related to positive outcomes. Hope therapy was originally developed to optimize successful goals pursuits by increasing hopeful thought. Here, we briefly review the current state of hope therapy research and offer directions for future investigations. We note that hope therapy has been adapted to be delivered in different formats, by providers from various professional backgrounds, and to participants presenting with a variety of chronic health conditions. We suggest there is a need to reach a consensus about what characterizes hope therapy. Further, we note the need for well-designed trials to test potential mechanisms of change. We believe that these future directions will result in a more efficacious hope therapy that can be widely disseminated.

The practice of hope in public health interventions: a qualitative single-case study

This study examines hope practices in the context of participation in a public health intervention. Theoretically, the study builds upon Cheryl Mattingly’s notion of hope as a practice, which renders the possibility of examining participants actions, interactions and challenges with participating. This analytical lens contributes knowledge about how interventions are incorporated into participants’ hopes for a future life and the consequences of intervening in peoples’ everyday lives. The study builds on empirical material from a pilot study of the primary preventive intervention known as TOF (Tidlig Opsporing og Forebyggelse—a Danish acronym for ‘Early Detection and Prevention’) which aimed to identify high risk individuals and provide targeted preventive services. A by-product of a larger qualitative study, itself based on the TOF pilot study in 2019, this single-case study illustrates how participants’ life situation influence how they interpret and manage activities in a public health intervention. The study shows how the practice of hope in public health interventions is closely linked to participants’ own interpretations of how participation can lead to a life worth living. The findings, which show that participants’ needs, and life situation influence the ways in which they respond to an intervention, adds to the complexity in intervention research. Further, the study illustrates some of the ethical challenges that arise when researchers intervene in people’s everyday life. It reinforces the need for ongoing critical reflection and attention to be directed at how those being studied articulate and practice hope.