A tiered multidisciplinary approach to the psychosocial care of adult cancer patients integrated into routine care: the PROMPT study (a cluster-randomised controlled trial)

Management of Anxiety and Depression in Adult Survivors of Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on the management of anxiety and depression in adult cancer survivors.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary expert panel convened to update the guideline. A systematic review of evidence published from 2013-2021 was conducted.

RESULTS

The evidence base consisted of 17 systematic reviews ± meta analyses (nine for psychosocial interventions, four for physical exercise, three for mindfulness-based stress reduction [MBSR], and one for pharmacologic interventions), and an additional 44 randomized controlled trials. Psychological, educational, and psychosocial interventions led to improvements in depression and anxiety. Evidence for pharmacologic management of depression and anxiety in cancer survivors was inconsistent. The lack of inclusion of survivors from minoritized groups was noted and identified as an important consideration to provide high-quality care for ethnic minority populations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended to use a stepped-care model, that is, provide the most effective and least resource-intensive intervention based on symptom severity. All oncology patients should be offered education regarding depression and anxiety. For patients with moderate symptoms of depression, clinicians should offer cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), behavioral activation (BA), MBSR, structured physical activity, or empirically supported psychosocial interventions. For patients with moderate symptoms of anxiety, clinicians should offer CBT, BA, structured physical activity, acceptance and commitment therapy, or psychosocial interventions. For patients with severe symptoms of depression or anxiety, clinicians should offer cognitive therapy, BA, CBT, MBSR, or interpersonal therapy. Treating clinicians may offer a pharmacologic regimen for depression or anxiety for patients who do not have access to first-line treatment, prefer pharmacotherapy, have previously responded well to pharmacotherapy, or have not improved following first-line psychological or behavioral management.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines.

Effectiveness of a Psychosocial Care Quality Improvement Strategy to Address Quality of Life in Patients With Cancer: The HuCare2 Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial

IMPORTANCE

Many patients with cancer who would benefit from psychosocial care do not receive it. Implementation strategies may favor the integration of psychosocial care into practice and improve patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of the Humanization in Cancer Care (HuCare) Quality Improvement Strategy vs standard care as improvement of at least 1 of 2 domains (emotional or social function) of patient health-related quality of life at baseline and 3 months. A key secondary aim included investigation of the long-term effect.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

HuCare2 was a multicenter, incomplete, stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trial, conducted from May 30, 2016, to August 28, 2019, in three 5-center clusters of cancer centers representative of hospital size and geographic location in Italy. The study was divided into 5 equally spaced epochs. Implementation sequence was defined by a blinded statistician; the nature of the intervention precluded blinding for clinical staff. Participants included consecutive adult outpatients with newly diagnosed cancer of any type and stage starting medical cancer treatment.

INTERVENTIONS

The HuCare Quality Improvement Strategy comprised (1) clinician communication training, (2) on-site visits for context analysis and problem-solving, and (3) implementation of 6 evidence-based recommendations.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the difference between the means of changes of individual scores in emotional or social functions of health-related quality of life detected at baseline and 3-month follow-up (within each group) and during the postintervention epoch compared with control periods (between groups). Long-term effect of the intervention (at 12 months) was assessed as a secondary outcome. Intention-to-treat analysis was used.

RESULTS

A total of 762 patients (475 [62.3%] women) were enrolled (400 HuCare Quality Improvement Strategy and 362 usual care); mean (SD) age was 61.4 (13.1) years. The HuCare Quality Improvement Strategy significantly improved emotional function during treatment (odds ratio [OR], 1.13; 95% CI, 1.04-1.22; P = .008) but not social function (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.89-1.09; P = .80). Effect on emotional function persisted at 12 months (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.00-1.10; P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this trial, the HuCare Quality Improvement Strategy significantly improved the emotional function aspect of health-related quality of life during cancer treatment and at 12 months, indicating a change in clinician behavior and in ward organization. These findings support the need for strategies to introduce psychosocial care; however, more research is needed on factors that may maximize the effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03008993.

Intra-cluster correlations from the CLustered OUtcome Dataset bank to inform the design of longitudinal cluster trials

BACKGROUND

Sample size calculations for longitudinal cluster randomised trials, such as crossover and stepped-wedge trials, require estimates of the assumed correlation structure. This includes both within-period intra-cluster correlations, which importantly differ from conventional intra-cluster correlations by their dependence on period, and also cluster autocorrelation coefficients to model correlation decay. There are limited resources to inform these estimates. In this article, we provide a repository of correlation estimates from a bank of real-world clustered datasets. These are provided under several assumed correlation structures, namely exchangeable, block-exchangeable and discrete-time decay correlation structures.

METHODS

Longitudinal studies with clustered outcomes were collected to form the CLustered OUtcome Dataset bank. Forty-four available continuous outcomes from 29 datasets were obtained and analysed using each correlation structure. Patterns of within-period intra-cluster correlation coefficient and cluster autocorrelation coefficients were explored by study characteristics.

RESULTS

The median within-period intra-cluster correlation coefficient for the discrete-time decay model was 0.05 (interquartile range: 0.02-0.09) with a median cluster autocorrelation of 0.73 (interquartile range: 0.19-0.91). The within-period intra-cluster correlation coefficients were similar for the exchangeable, block-exchangeable and discrete-time decay correlation structures. Within-period intra-cluster correlation coefficients and cluster autocorrelations were found to vary with the number of participants per cluster-period, the period-length, type of cluster (primary care, secondary care, community or school) and country income status (high-income country or low- and middle-income country). The within-period intra-cluster correlation coefficients tended to decrease with increasing period-length and slightly decrease with increasing cluster-period sizes, while the cluster autocorrelations tended to move closer to 1 with increasing cluster-period size. Using the CLustered OUtcome Dataset bank, an RShiny app has been developed for determining plausible values of correlation coefficients for use in sample size calculations.

DISCUSSION

This study provides a repository of intra-cluster correlations and cluster autocorrelations for longitudinal cluster trials. This can help inform sample size calculations for future longitudinal cluster randomised trials.

Improving survivorship care: Perspectives of cancer survivors 75 years and older

PURPOSE

This work describes perspectives of older adult cancer survivors about improvements that should be considered during the early period of survivorship. Findings will be useful in program development of age-appropriate services following completion of cancer treatment for older adults.

METHODS

A national survey was conducted across ten Canadian provinces to understand follow-up experiences of cancer survivors one to three years post-treatment. The survey included open-ended questions enabling respondents to offer insight into their experiences. This publication presents analysis of responses from older adults (75+ years) about suggestions for improving survivorship care.

RESULTS

In total, 3274 older adults (75+ years) responded to the survey and 1424 responded to the question about improvements. Fifty-five percent of the older adults were male, 28% had experienced metastatic disease and 75% reported comorbid conditions. A total of 640 respondents offered 932 suggestions in the areas of service delivery (n = 763, 81.9%), support (n = 108, 11.6%), and practical assistance (n = 61, 6.5%). Improvements in information/communication (n = 291) and follow-up care (n = 180) accounted for the highest number of suggestions regarding service delivery. Thematic analysis revealed three key messages about improvement: 'offer me needed support', 'make access easy for me', and 'show me you care'.

CONCLUSION

Suggestions for improvement in survivorship care by older adults treated for cancer emphasize need for changes in the approaches taken by health care providers in interactions and organization of care delivery. Proactive provision of information, detailed schedules for follow-up care, and ease of access to post-treatment care are needed.

Unmasking Anxiety: A Qualitative Investigation of Health Professionals; Perspectives of Mask Anxiety in Head and Neck Cancer

BACKGROUND

To ensure precision of treatment, patients requiring radiation therapy for treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC) are stabilized using a fitted thermoplastic immobilization mask. Despite evidence that many patients experience significant anxiety when restrained in the mask, there is a lack of proven interventions to prevent or manage mask-related anxiety. The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services implementation framework promotes consideration of context and culture when developing interventions to ensure successful implementation if proven effective. Health professionals (HPs) play a crucial role in the management of patients' psychological concerns, yet no studies have explored their perspectives of mask anxiety and how it should be managed. The aim of this study, therefore, was to elicit and analyse HPs' perspectives of mask anxiety, using the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework, to guide the development of implementation-ready interventions to reduce mask anxiety.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 HPs involved in the care of HNC patients, including radiation oncologists, radiation therapists, nurses, and psychologists, from nine hospitals in NSW, Australia. Framework analysis methods were used.

RESULTS

Participants were on average 40 years old (range, 27-56), the majority were female (75%), and they had worked from 1 to 22 years with HNC patients. Six emergent themes were identified: (1) Mask anxiety is a significant problem but is easily missed; (2) Context matters; (3) Trust is critical; (4) Choice and control facilitate adjustment; (5) Psychological strategies are valued; and (6) Culture matters. Subgroup analysis also highlighted differences in perspectives between specialties.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants identified key principles underlying successful intervention. Two significant barriers to mask-anxiety intervention were identified: (1) a lack of empirical evidence surrounding its prevalence and predictors and (2) contextual and systematic hurdles making the health system potentially unresponsive to change. These data suggest a need for further descriptive studies and careful development of interventions which will address these hurdles.

HORIZONS protocol: a UK prospective cohort study to explore recovery of health and well-being in adults diagnosed with cancer

INTRODUCTION

Understanding the impact of cancer and its treatment on people's everyday lives will help prepare people for what to expect, enable health professionals to predict likely recovery trajectories and shape care management according to needs. HORIZONS will recruit people awaiting treatment and follow them up at regular intervals to assess recovery of health and well-being.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

What impact does cancer diagnosis and treatment have on people's lives in the short, medium and long term? What are people's health and well-being outcomes, experiences and self-management activities over time across different cancer types and what influences these? How do people connect with and relate to others in mobilising resources that enable them to self-manage the consequences of cancer and treatment?

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

HORIZONS is a multicentre, prospective cohort study exploring recovery of health and well-being in 3000 people diagnosed with breast cancer (<50 years), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or gynaecological cancer. Recruitment will take place across National Health Service (NHS) sites in the UK between September 2016 and March 2019, before primary treatment starts. Participants will be identified through clinical teams and invited to complete questionnaires including assessments of quality of life, symptoms and functioning (Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors; European Organisation for Research and Treatment Consortium Core quality of life questionnaire, EORTC-QLQ-C30), health status (EuroQol-5 dimensions, EQ-5D), self-efficacy, social support, social networks and lifestyle. Clinical data will also be collected. Descriptive statistics will characterise outcomes. Changes over time will be investigated. Factors that may influence recovery and self-management will be included in regression models to determine which influence health and well-being and self-management.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics and Health Research Authority approvals granted (IRAS Project ID: 202342, REC reference number 16/NW/0425). Adopted onto the National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network portfolio. We will engage with our Scientific Advisory Board, Tumour Specific Expert Panels, User Reference Group, Macmillan and the University of Southampton to ensure maximum publicity and benefit.

Psychological support for patients with cancer: evidence review and suggestions for future directions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Psychological distress and mental health comorbidity are common in cancer. Various therapeutic frameworks have been used for interventions to improve psychological wellbeing and quality of life in cancer patients with mixed results. This article reviews contributions to that literature published since January 2017.

RECENT FINDINGS

The majority of new psychological intervention research in cancer has used cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or mindfulness-based interventions. CBT has been considered a gold-standard intervention and recent evidence justifies continuation of this. Recent reviews call into question the validity of evidence for mindfulness-based interventions. A smaller number of trials using acceptance and commitment therapy, meta-cognitive therapy, dignity therapy and coaching have emerged, and whereas findings are promising, additional fully powered trials are required. Weaker evidence exists for counselling, support-based and narrative therapy interventions.

SUMMARY

Efficacious, timely and acceptable psychological interventions are a necessary component of comprehensive cancer care. There is some way to go before the evidence conclusively points towards which interventions work for which cancer groups and for which specific outcomes. Methodological limitations must be addressed in future trials; at the forefront remains the need for fully powered, head-to-head comparison trials.

A cross-sectional audit of current practices and areas for improvement of distress screening and management in Australian cancer services: is there a will and a way to improve?

BACKGROUND

It is unknown how many distressed patients receive the additional supportive care recommended by Australian evidence-based distress management guidelines. The study identifies the (1) distress screening practices of Australian cancer services; (2) barriers to improving practices; and (3) implementation strategies which are acceptable to service representatives interested in improving screening practices.

METHOD

Clinic leads from 220 cancer services were asked to nominate an individual involved in daily patient care to complete a cross-sectional survey on behalf of the service. Questions related to service characteristics; screening and management processes; and implementation barriers. Respondents indicated which implementation strategies were suitable for their health service.

RESULTS

A total of 122 representatives participated from 83 services (51%). The majority of respondents were specialist nurses or unit managers (60%). Approximately 38% of representatives' services never or rarely screen; 52% who screen do so for all patients; 55% use clinical interviewing only; and 34% follow referral protocols. The most common perceived barriers were resources to action screening results (74%); lack of time (67%); and lack of staff training (66%). Approximately 65% of representatives were interested in improving practices. Of the 8 implementation strategies, workshops (85%) and educational materials (69%) were commonly selected. Over half (59%) indicated a multicomponent implementation program was preferable.

CONCLUSIONS

Although critical gaps across all guideline components were reported, there is a broad support for screening and willingness to improve. Potential improvements include additional services to manage problems identified by screening, more staff time for screening, additional staff training, and use of patient-report measures.

Enhancing coping skills for persons with cancer utilizing mastery enhancement: a pilot randomized clinical trial

The purpose of this project was to develop a short-term, theory-based intervention for patients with self-reported limited self-efficacy to perform coping behaviors. Cancer patients with low coping self-efficacy were randomly assigned to a treatment (N = 66) or control condition (N = 68). The treatment, Mastery Enhancement Therapy, was based on self-regulation and self-efficacy theories. Measures of coping self-efficacy, functional status, depression, quality of life, and adjustment were administered at baseline, after session two, after the final (fourth) session, and at 3 months post-treatment. Control participants completed the measures at about the same time intervals. Treatment participants reported highly significant immediate post-treatment improvement in self-efficacy for coping compared to controls, although controls improved by 3 months post-treatment. However, treatment participants with lower levels of functional status benefited more than controls on depression and adjustment at follow-up. Mastery Enhancement Therapy is a time-limited treatment that increases coping efficacy and subsequently adjustment during active medical treatment, and appears to warrant a large-scale RCT with patients with below average coping self-efficacy and moderate to high symptoms.

Systematic review showed that stepped-wedge cluster randomized trials often did not reach their planned sample size

OBJECTIVE

To determine how often stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trials reach their planned sample size, and what reasons are reported for choosing a stepped-wedge trial design.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a PubMed literature search (period 2012 to 2017) and included articles describing the results of a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial. We calculated the percentage of studies reaching their prespecified number of participants and clusters, and we summarized the reasons for choosing the stepped-wedge trial design as well as difficulties during enrollment.

RESULTS

Forty-six individual stepped-wedge studies from a total of 53 articles were included in our review. Of the 35 studies, for which recruitment rate could be calculated, 69% recruited their planned number of participants, with 80% having recruited the planned number of clusters. Ethical reasons were the most common motivation for choosing the stepped-wedge trial design. Most important difficulties during study conduct were dropout of clusters and delayed implementation of the intervention.

CONCLUSION

About half of recently published stepped-wedge trials reached their planned sample size indicating that recruitment is also a major problem in these trials. Still, the stepped-wedge trial design can yield practical, ethical, and methodological advantages.

The long-lasting relationship of distress on radiation oncology-specific clinical outcomes

Purpose

The diagnosis and treatment of cancer can have significant mental health ramifications. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network currently recommends using a distress screening tool to screen patients for distress and facilitate referrals to social service resources. Its association with radiation oncology–specific clinical outcomes has remained relatively unexplored.

Methods and materials

With institutional review board approval, National Comprehensive Cancer Network distress scores were collected for patients presenting to our institution for external beam radiation therapy during a 1-year period from 2015 to 2016. The association between distress scores (and associated problem list items and process-related outcomes) and radiation oncology–related outcomes, including inpatient admissions during treatment, missed treatment appointments, duration of time between consultation and treatment, and weight loss during treatment, was considered.

Results

A total of 61 patients who received either definitive (49 patients) or palliative (12 patients) treatment at our institution and completed a screening questionnaire were included in this analysis. There was a significant association between an elevated distress score (7+) and having an admission during treatment (36% vs 11%; P = .04). Among the patients treated with definitive intent, missing at least 1 appointment (71% vs 26%; P = .03) and having an admission during treatment (57% vs 10%; P = .009) were significantly associated with our institutional definition of elevated distress. We found no correlation between distress score and weight loss during treatment or a prolonged time between initial consult and treatment start.

Conclusions

High rates of distress are common for patients preparing to receive radiation therapy. These levels may affect treatment compliance and increase rates of hospital admissions. There remains equipoise in the best method to address distress in the oncology patient population. These results may raise awareness of the consequences of distress among radiation oncology patients. Specific interventions to improve distress need further study, but we suggest a more proactive approach by radiation oncologists in addressing distress.

Anxiety and depression in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis and comparison of change from baseline after treatment with guselkumab vs. adalimumab: results from the Phase 3 VOYAGE 2 study

BACKGROUND

Anxiety and depression are clinically significant comorbidities associated with psoriasis. Improvements in psoriasis are known to decrease anxiety and depression. Guselkumab, an anti-interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody, has demonstrated efficacy and safety for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

OBJECTIVE

Assess improvements in anxiety and depression with guselkumab vs. placebo and adalimumab using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).

METHODS

In VOYAGE 2, a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and adalimumab-controlled study, patients received placebo (through week 16 followed by crossover to guselkumab), guselkumab, or adalimumab through week 24. HADS consists of two subscales measuring anxiety (HADS-A) and depression (HADS-D), with scores ranging from 0 to 21 and higher scores indicating more severe symptoms. Scores ≥8 indicate instrument-defined anxiety or depression. Severity of psoriasis was assessed using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI).

RESULTS

Among 989 patients randomized (with baseline HADS measurements), mean HADS-A and HADS-D scores were 6.8 ± 4.2 and 5.3 ± 4.2, respectively; 38.6% of patients reported HADS-A ≥8 and 27.7% HADS-D ≥8 at baseline. At week 16, a significantly greater proportion of guselkumab patients with baseline HADS-A or HADS-D ≥8 reported HADS-A <8 (51.4% vs. 25.9%; P < 0.001) or HADS-D <8 (59.2% vs. 27.0%; P < 0.001) vs. placebo patients. At week 24, a greater proportion of guselkumab patients with baseline HADS-A or HADS-D ≥8 reported HADS-A <8 (58.4% vs. 42.9%; P = 0.028) or HADS-D <8 (59.8% vs. 46.4%; P = 0.079) vs. adalimumab patients. PASI improvements correlated with improvement in anxiety (r = 0.27; P < 0.0001) and depression (r = 0.25; P < 0.0001) scores in patients with baseline HADS-A or HADS-D ≥8. Greater improvements in HADS were also observed at week 16 in guselkumab-treated patients vs. placebo using a more stringent cut-off of HADS ≥11.

CONCLUSION

Guselkumab treatment was associated with greater improvements in symptoms of anxiety and depression scores in patients with psoriasis compared with placebo and adalimumab.

A study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of an interactive web-based intervention: CancerCope

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 35% of patients with cancer experience clinically significant distress, and unmet psychological supportive care needs are prevalent. This study describes the protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an internet-based psychological intervention for distressed patients with cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In phase I, the intervention was developed on an interactive web platform and pilot tested for acceptability using a qualitative methodology with 21 patients with cancer. Phase II is an RCT underway with patients with or at risk of elevated psychological distress comparing: (1) static patient education website with (2) individualised web-delivered cognitive behavioural intervention (CancerCope). Participants were recruited through the Queensland Cancer Registry and Cancer Council Helpline and met the following inclusion criteria: (1) recently diagnosed with cancer; (2) able to read and speak English; (3) no previous history of head injury, dementia or psychiatric illness; (4) no other concurrent cancer; (5) phone and internet access; (5) scored ≥4 on the Distress Thermometer. Participants are assessed at four time points: baseline/recruitment and 2, 6 and 12 months after recruitment and intervention commencement. Of the 163 participants recruited, 50% met caseness for distress. The area of highest unmet supportive care needs were psychological followed by physical and daily living needs. Primary outcomes are psychological and cancer-specific distress and unmet psychological supportive care needs. Secondary outcomes are positive adjustment, quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the Griffith University Human Research Ethics Committee (Approval: PSY/70/13/HREC) and the Metro South Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/13/QPAH/601). All participants provide informed consent prior to taking part in the study. Once completed, this study will provide recommendations about the efficacy of web-based cognitive behavioural interventions to facilitate better psychosocial adjustment for people with cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ANZCTR (ACTRN12613001026718).