Changing multiple health behaviors in cancer survivors: smoking and exercise

#4Corners4Health Social Media Cancer Prevention Campaign for Emerging Adults: Protocol for a Randomized Stepped-Wedge Trial

BACKGROUND

Many emerging adults (EAs) are prone to making unhealthy choices, which increase their risk of premature cancer morbidity and mortality. In the era of social media, rigorous research on interventions to promote health behaviors for cancer risk reduction among EAs delivered over social media is limited. Cancer prevention information and recommendations may reach EAs more effectively over social media than in settings such as health care, schools, and workplaces, particularly for EAs residing in rural areas.

OBJECTIVE

This pragmatic randomized trial aims to evaluate a multirisk factor intervention using a social media campaign designed with community advisers aimed at decreasing cancer risk factors among EAs. The trial will target EAs from diverse backgrounds living in rural counties in the Four Corners states of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah.

METHODS

We will recruit a sample of EAs (n=1000) aged 18 to 26 years residing in rural counties (Rural-Urban Continuum Codes 4 to 9) in the Four Corners states from the Qualtrics' research panel and enroll them in a randomized stepped-wedge, quasi-experimental design. The inclusion criteria include English proficiency and regular social media engagement. A social media intervention will promote guideline-related goals for increased physical activity, healthy eating, and human papillomavirus vaccination and reduced nicotine product use, alcohol intake, and solar UV radiation exposure. Campaign posts will cover digital and media literacy skills, responses to misinformation, communication with family and friends, and referral to community resources. The intervention will be delivered over 12 months in Facebook private groups and will be guided by advisory groups of community stakeholders and EAs and focus groups with EAs. The EAs will complete assessments at baseline and at 12, 26, 39, 52, and 104 weeks after randomization. Assessments will measure 6 cancer risk behaviors, theoretical mediators, and participants' engagement with the social media campaign.

RESULTS

The trial is in its start-up phase. It is being led by a steering committee. Team members are working in 3 subcommittees to optimize community engagement, the social media intervention, and the measures to be used. The Stakeholder Organization Advisory Board and Emerging Adult Advisory Board were formed and provided initial input on the priority of cancer risk factors to target, social media use by EAs, and community resources available. A framework for the social media campaign with topics, format, and theoretical mediators has been created, along with protocols for campaign management.

CONCLUSIONS

Social media can be used as a platform to counter misinformation and improve reliable health information to promote health behaviors that reduce cancer risks among EAs. Because of the popularity of web-based information sources among EAs, an innovative, multirisk factor intervention using a social media campaign has the potential to reduce their cancer risk behaviors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05618158; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05618158.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/50392.

Lifestyle, clinical and histological indices-based prediction models for survival in cancer patients: a city-wide prospective cohort study in China

PURPOSE

We developed a nomogram to predict 3-year, 5-year and 7-year cancer survival rates of cancer patients.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 20,491 surviving patients first diagnosed with cancer in Guangzhou from 2010 to 2019. They were divided into a training and a validation group. Lifestyle, clinical and histological parameters (LCH) were included in multivariable Cox regression. Akaike information criterion was used to select prediction factors for the nomogram. The discrimination and calibration of models were assessed by concordance index (C-index), area under time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve (time-dependent AUC), and calibration plots. We used net reclassification index (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) to compare the clinical utility of LCH prediction model with the prediction model based on lifestyle factors (LF).

RESULTS

13 prediction factors including age, sex, BMI, smoking status, physical activity, sleep duration, regular diet, tumor grading, TNM stage, multiple primary cancer and anatomical site were included in the LCH model. The LCH model showed satisfactory discrimination and calibration (C-index = 0.81 (95% CI 0.80-0.82) for training group and 0.80 (0.79-0.81) for validation group, both time-dependent AUC > 0.70). The LF model including smoking status, physical activity, sleep duration, regular diet, and BMI showed less satisfactory discrimination (C-index = 0.60 (95% CI 0.59-0.61) for training and 0.60 (0.58-0.62) for validation group). The LCH model had better accuracy and discriminative ability than the LF model, as indicated by positive NRI and IDI values.

CONCLUSIONS

The LCH model shows good accuracy, clinical utility and precise prognosis prediction, and may serve as a tool to predict cancer survival of cancer patients.

Study Protocol for the Breathe Easier Trial: A Pilot RCT of a Dyad-Based, Multiple-Behavior Intervention for Improving Physical and Emotional Health in Survivors Facing Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Research targeting survivors of lung cancer has yet to adequately address the management of physical deconditioning and unresolved symptoms (dyspnea, fatigue). The objective of the Breathe Easier trial is to test the feasibility and preliminary effects of a theory-based, multiple-behavior intervention (physical activity, smoking reduction for current smokers, stress management) targeting survivors of localized non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC, stages I-III) and their supportive partners.

METHODS

This pilot RCT will enroll 30 dyads (60 participants). Each dyad will consist of one survivor and one partner (defined as a family member or friend) Dyads will be randomized to the Intervention Group (IG) or the Attention Control Group (AC). IG members will receive the 12-week, home-based intervention based on the individual and family self-management theory, which targets improvements in self-efficacy, social support, and self-regulation. Improvement in lifestyle behaviors is a proximal outcome. Improvements in physical and emotional health are distal outcomes. Breathe Easier (IG) includes educational content written in plain language as well as breathing exercises and meditations; SMART goal setting; daily text messaging; and weekly telephone calls with trained staff. The AC program includes relevant National Institutes of Health publications plus weekly telephone chats. Members who currently smoke will also receive an evidence-based smoking cessation resource.

DISCUSSION

Breathe Easier focuses on changes in multiple behaviors in dyads coping with a diagnosis of NSCLC (stages I-III) with the overall purpose of improving physical and emotional health. Findings will provide additional evidence of the feasibility and preliminary effects of this intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05956782; This trial was registered retrospectively.

Factors Affecting a Healthy Diet Based on the Integrated Model for Behavioral Change in Patients with Gastric Cancer: Cross-Sectional Study

Objective

To investigate the factors affecting a healthy diet in patients with gastric cancer.

Methods

Data from 146 consecutive patients with gastric cancer were collected based on the integrated model for behavior change. Core theory constructs were operationalized with decisional balance on a healthy diet, self-efficacy in fruit and vegetable (F&V) intake and diet planning, coping planning and self-leadership, and stages of change in F&V intake and adhering to a diet plan.

Results

Higher self-efficacy in F&V intake and diet planning were associated with a higher readiness for change in F&V intake (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for self-efficacy, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01–1.04) and for adhering to a diet plan (aOR for self-efficacy, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01–1.04; aOR for diet planning, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01–1.04). Coping planning was a determinant of readiness for change in F&V intake (aOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01–1.04). Self-leadership in behavioral awareness and volition (aOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01–1.03) and task motivation (aOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00–1.03) were determinants of readiness for change in adhering to a diet plan.

Conclusions

Self-efficacy and coping planning were determinants of readiness for change in F&V intake in patients with gastric cancer. Self-efficacy and self-leadership were determinants of readiness for change in adhering to a diet plan in patients with gastric cancer. Improving self-efficacy, coping planning, and self-leadership is essential for changing behaviors to adopt a healthy diet. Nurses caring for patients with gastric cancer should identify strategies that improve self-efficacy in F&V intake and diet planning.

Evidence Gaps in Cancer Survivorship Care: A Report from the 2019 National Cancer Institute Cancer Survivorship Workshop

Today, there are more than 16.9 million cancer survivors in the United States; this number is projected to grow to 22.2 million by 2030. While much progress has been made in understanding cancer survivors needs and in improving survivorship care since the seminal 2006 Institute of Medicine report From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition, there is a need to identify evidence gaps and research priorities pertaining to cancer survivorship. Thus, in April 2019, the National Cancer Institute convened grant-funded extramural cancer survivorship researchers, representatives of professional organizations, cancer survivors, and advocates for a one-day in-person meeting. At this meeting, and in a subsequent webinar aimed at soliciting input from the wider survivorship community, evidence gaps and ideas for next steps in the following six areas, identified from the 2006 Institute of Medicine report, were discussed: surveillance for recurrence and new cancers, management of long-term and late physical effects, management of long-term and late psychosocial effects, health promotion, care coordination, and financial hardship. Identified evidence gaps and next steps across the areas included the need to understand and address disparities among cancer survivors, to conduct longitudinal studies as well as longer-term (>5 years post-diagnosis) follow-up studies, to leverage existing data, and to incorporate implementation science strategies to translate findings into practice. Designing studies to address these broad evidence gaps, as well as those identified in each area, will expand our understanding of cancer survivors' diverse needs, ultimately leading to the development and delivery of more comprehensive evidence-based quality care.