Health behavior theory constructs and smoking and cessation-related behavior among survivors of ten cancers nine years after diagnosis: A report from the American Cancer Society's Study of Cancer Survivors-I

Associations of Daily Versus Nondaily Smoking, Tobacco-Related Risk Perception, and Cancer Diagnosis Among Adults in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study

INTRODUCTION

Nondaily smoking has become increasingly common among cigarette smokers. Our objective was to determine whether current daily versus nondaily smoking differed by tobacco-related risk perceptions (TRRPs), demographic factors, and cancer history.

METHODS

Participants were all adults in Waves 1-3 of the longitudinal cohort Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study who were current smokers at Wave 3 (N = 8307). The primary analysis was weighted logistic regression of daily versus nondaily smoking at Wave 3. TRRP measures were cigarette harm perception, worry that tobacco products will damage one's health, belief that smoking cigarettes causes [lung/bladder/mouth/liver] cancer, and nondaily cigarette harm perception (Likert-type scale). Other measures included demographic factors, other tobacco product use, minor at time of first cigarette, and cancer survivor status (yes/no).

RESULTS

Among current smokers, daily versus nondaily smoking was significantly associated with being a minor at time of first cigarette (OR = 1.54, p < .001), TRRPs (OR = 0.83, p < .001; OR = 1.40, p < .001; and OR = 1.17, p = .009 [harm perception, worry, and nondaily cigarette harm perception, respectively]), and interaction between cancer survivor status and belief that smoking causes cancer (p < .001). TRRPs among current smokers did not differ significantly between cancer survivors and respondents without a cancer history.

CONCLUSIONS

Respondents with lower harm perception, higher worry, and higher nondaily cigarette harm perception were more likely to be daily versus nondaily smokers. Respondents with higher belief that smoking causes cancer or who were cancer survivors were less likely to be daily (versus nondaily) smokers compared to respondents with low belief and no cancer history.

IMPLICATIONS

This study is unique in that it examined associations of smoking cigarettes daily versus nondaily with tobacco-related risk perceptions and cancer survivorship-comparing cancer survivors to those without a cancer history. Given the increasing prevalence of nondaily smoking as compared with daily smoking in the general population, and the prognostic significance of smoking after cancer diagnosis, these findings fill a clinically important gap in the literature and provide a foundation for further research.

Associations between Cigarette Smoking and Health-Related Quality of Life in Adult Survivors of Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer

This cross-sectional, secondary data analysis examines the association between cigarette smoking and self-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adult survivors of Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer. Pooled data for survivors of Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer (N = 1495) were drawn from the 2016 and 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey. Binary logistic regression models were utilized to examine independent associations between each of the four HRQoL domains (i.e., self-related general health, activity limitation days, poor physical, and mental health days) and cigarette smoking. Of the 1495 Adolescent and Young Adult Onset Cancer Survivors (AYAO-CS) in this study, approximately 30% reported currently smoking cigarettes. Relative to never smokers, the odds of reporting fair/poor general health were significantly higher for current and former smokers: (OR = 3.95, 95% CI: 2.08-7.50) and (OR = 2.51, 95% CI: 1.46-4.32), respectively. Likewise, current smokers were significantly more likely to report frequent days of poor physical health (OR = 2.79, 95% CI: 1.38-5.65). The study findings suggest a significant cross-sectional association between cigarette smoking and poor health-related quality of life in adult survivors of adolescent and young adult cancer. These findings, although cross-sectional, underscore the need for prospective studies to examine the longitudinal association between HRQoL and cigarette smoking among cancer survivors. Findings also help establish both the need for smoking cessation programs and the importance of effective strategies for addressing HRQoL issues among cancer survivors.

COVID-19 and Tweets About Quitting Cigarette Smoking: Topic Model Analysis of Twitter Posts 2018-2020

Background

The risk of infection and severity of illness by SARS-CoV-2 infection is elevated for people who smoke cigarettes and may motivate quitting. Organic public conversations on Twitter about quitting smoking could provide insight into quitting motivations or behaviors associated with the pandemic.

Objective

This study explored key topics of conversation about quitting cigarette smoking and examined their trajectory during 2018-2020.

Methods

Topic model analysis with latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) identified themes in US tweets with the term “quit smoking.” The model was trained on posts from 2018 and was then applied to tweets posted in 2019 and 2020. Analysis of variance and follow-up pairwise tests were used to compare the daily frequency of tweets within and across years by quarter.

Results

The mean numbers of daily tweets on quitting smoking in 2018, 2019, and 2020 were 133 (SD 36.2), 145 (SD 69.4), and 127 (SD 32.6), respectively. Six topics were extracted: (1) need to quit, (2) personal experiences, (3) electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), (4) advice/success, (5) quitting as a component of general health behavior change, and (6) clinics/services. Overall, the pandemic was not associated with changes in posts about quitting; instead, New Year’s resolutions and the 2019 e-cigarette or vaping use–associated lung injury (EVALI) epidemic were more plausible explanations for observed changes within and across years. Fewer second-quarter posts in 2020 for the topic e-cigarettes may reflect lower pandemic-related quitting interest, whereas fourth-quarter increases in 2020 for other topics pointed to a late-year upswing.

Conclusions

Twitter posts suggest that the pandemic did not generate greater interest in quitting smoking, but possibly a decrease in motivation when the rate of infections was increasing in the second quarter of 2020. Public health authorities may wish to craft messages for specific Twitter audiences (eg, using hashtags) to motivate quitting during pandemics.

Tobacco Use and Tobacco Treatment Referral Response of Patients With Cancer: Implementation Outcomes at a National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Center

PURPOSE

Smoking after a cancer diagnosis is linked to cancer-specific and all-cause mortality, among other adverse outcomes. Yet, 10%-20% of US cancer survivors are current smokers. Implementation of evidence-based tobacco treatment in cancer care facilities is widely recommended, yet rarely accomplished. This study focuses on the early outcomes of a population-based tobacco treatment program integrated within an National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The sample consists of 26,365 patients seen at the cancer center during the first 18 months of program implementation. The study is a retrospective chart review of patients' tobacco use and, among current users, patients' treatment referral response.

RESULTS

More than 99% of patients were screened for tobacco use. Current (past month) use was observed in 21.05% of patients; cigarettes were the most popular product. Only 17.22% of current users accepted a referral for tobacco treatment; among current users who declined, the majority were not ready to quit (65.84%) or wanted to quit on their own (27.01%). Multiple demographic variables were associated with tobacco use and treatment referral response outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Despite cancer diagnosis presenting a teachable moment for tobacco cessation, patients with cancer may not be ready to quit or engage with treatment. Clinically proven strategies to increase motivation, prompt quit attempts, and encourage treatment use should be key components of tobacco treatment delivery to patients with cancer.

Perceptions of e-cigarette harm among cancer survivors: Findings from a nationally representative survey

BACKGROUND

The growth in e-cigarette use may be driven by the perception that they are a safer, healthier alternative to conventional cigarettes. However, their long-term health implications are not well known and use is discouraged by most cancer societies. It is currently unclear how cancer survivors perceive the risks associated with e-cigarette and how this may influence use in this population.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) (Years 2017-2019). Our primary study outcome was the perception of harm associated with e-cigarettes compared to traditional cigarettes among adults with and without a self-reported history of cancer. We used logistic regression analyses assessing the association of a cancer history with the perception that e-cigarettes are as much or more harmful than cigarettes.

RESULTS

A total of 11,846 respondents (weighted population estimate 243,728,483) were included. Of these, 26.6% reported a history of cancer. The proportion of cancer survivors who perceived e-cigarettes to be as much or more harmful than conventional cigarettes was similar to non-cancer respondents (70.6% vs 68.3%, P = 0.35). There was no difference in perception of harm among cancer and non-cancer respondents, adjusted for sociodemographic factors (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.6-1.1). Past (OR 9.06, 95% Cl 5.06-16.20) and never e-cigarette use (OR 23.40, 95% Cl 13.56-40.38) as well as having a history of cardiopulmonary disease (OR 1.28, 95% Cl 1.05-1.56) was associated with higher odds of perceiving e-cigarettes to be as much or more harmful.

CONCLUSION

Cancer survivors commonly perceive e-cigarettes to be as much or more harmful than traditional cigarettes though these findings are similar to perceptions among adults without a history of cancer. There is a strong association with avoidance of e-cigarette products among those who perceive them to be harmful.

The State of the Science on Cancer Diagnosis as a "Teachable Moment" for Smoking Cessation: A Scoping Review

Theoretically, cancer diagnosis has potential to spur health behavior changes in physical activity, diet, substance use, medication adherence and the like. The Teachable Moment heuristic is a parsimonious, transtheoretical framework for understanding the conditions under which behavior change might occur, with constructs that include affective, cognitive, and social factors. Application of the Teachable Moment to smoking cessation after cancer diagnosis might aid selection of predictors in observational studies and inform how to optimally design interventions to promote quit attempts and sustain abstinence, as many smoking cessation interventions for cancer survivors do not yield positive outcomes. This scoping review of 47 studies that span nearly 20 years of literature examines measurement of the Teachable Moment constructs and what empirical support they have in explaining cancer survivors' smoking behavior. From this review, it appears the construct of affective response is more widely explored than risk perceptions, social role, and self-concept. Strong, negative affective responses (e.g., anxiety, general distress) may be a powerful contributor to continued smoking after cancer diagnosis. Risk perceptions may also play a role in smoking behavior, such that never and former smokers espouse stronger perceptions of smoking-related risks than current smokers. Finally, due to a paucity of studies, the role of cancer survivors' self-concept (e.g., identity as a "cancer survivor") and changes in their social role (e.g., employee, athlete) are unclear contributors to their smoking behavior. In summary, the Teachable Moment holds promise in its application to smoking cessation after cancer diagnosis, though more direct research is needed.

Associations between e-cigarette and combustible cigarette use among U.S. cancer survivors: implications for research and practice

PURPOSE

Prior studies established significant associations between e-cigarette use and combustible cigarette smoking in the general population; however, little is known about such associations among cancer survivors. Thus, the current study examined possible associations between e-cigarette use and combustible cigarette smoking among U.S. cancer survivors.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data were drawn from the 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey. Binary logistic regression was used to analyze the associations between e-cigarette user status and combustible cigarette-smoking status in a sample of 4680 cancer survivors, controlling for alcohol use and sociodemographic factors. Analyses were weighted for unequal probability of sample selection to reflect national cancer survivor population estimates.

RESULTS

Prevalence for current e-cigarette use and combustible cigarette smoking for cancer survivors was 2.57% and 16.16%, respectively. In the adjusted analyses, cancer survivors who reported current e-cigarette use, compared to never-users, had greater odds of being current combustible cigarette smokers (odds ratio [OR] = 11.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.38-25.93). Likewise, former e-cigarette users, compared to never-users, had greater odds of being current combustible cigarette smokers (OR = 15.90, 95% CI = 10.68-23.36).

CONCLUSION

Among cancer survivors in the USA, e-cigarette use had a positive and highly significant association with combustible cigarette smoking.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

In order to prevent multiple and substitute use of nicotine-delivery products, prevention interventions and cessation programs designed for cancer survivors should specifically target both current combustible cigarette smokers and non-smokers who report former and current e-cigarette use.

Topic Modeling of Smoking- and Cessation-Related Posts to the American Cancer Society's Cancer Survivor Network (CSN): Implications for Cessation Treatment for Cancer Survivors Who Smoke

Introduction

Smoking is a risk factor in at least 18 cancers, and approximately two-thirds of cancer survivors continue smoking following diagnosis. Text mining of survivors' online posts related to smoking and quitting could inform strategies to reduce smoking in this vulnerable population.

Methods

We identified posts containing smoking/cessation-related keywords from the Cancer Survivors Network (CSN), an online cancer survivor community of 166 000 members and over 468 000 posts since inception. Unsupervised topic model analysis of posts since 2000 using Latent Dirichlet Allocation extracted 70 latent topics which two subject experts inspected for themes based on representative terms. Posterior analysis assessed the distribution of topics within posts, and the range of themes discussed across posts.

Results

Less than 1% of posts (n = 3998) contained smoking/cessation-related terms, and covered topics related to cancer diagnoses, treatments, and coping. The most frequent smoking-related topics were quit smoking methods (5.4% of posts), and the environment for quitters (2.9% of posts), such as the stigma associated with being a smoker diagnosed with cancer and lack of empathy experienced compared to nonsmokers. Smoking as a risk factor for one's diagnosis was a primary topic in only 1.7% of smoking/cessation-related posts.

Conclusions

The low frequency of smoking/cessation-related posts may be due to expected criticism/stigma for smoking but may also suggests a need for health care providers to address smoking and assist with quitting in the diagnostic and treatment process. Topic model analysis revealed potential barriers that should be addressed in devising clinical or population-level interventions for cancer survivors who smoke.

Implications

Although smoking is a major risk factor for cancer, little is known about cancer patients' or survivors' views or concerns about smoking and quitting. This study used text mining of posts to an online community of cancer patients and survivors to investigate contexts in which smoking or quitting is discussed. Results indicated that smoking and quitting discussions were relatively rare, but nevertheless provide insight into barriers that may need to be addressed in cessation interventions for survivors.

Psychosocial Issues in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer: an Updated Review with a Focus on Clinical Interventions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are frequent and diverse psychosocial issues that afflict patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) across the illness trajectory, prompting a focus on clinical interventions to prevent and mitigate psychosocial distress. We sought to characterize current understanding on the cause, effects, and interplay of various psychosocial factors in HNC and summarize updated, evidence-based interventions.

RECENT FINDINGS

The psychosocial experience of patients with HNC is characterized by a disproportionately high incidence of depression, suicide, continued substance dependence/abuse, and distress related to relationship conflict, social isolation, disfigurement, and damage to self-image. As we move towards a more thorough understanding and greater appreciation of the relationship between HNC and patient quality of life (QoL), future research focuses on implementation of effective, accessible clinical interventions to alleviate psychosocial distress in this population.

Treating Nicotine Dependence and Preventing Smoking Relapse in Cancer Patients

INTRODUCTION

Despite the well-documented harmful effects of smoking, many cancer patients continue to smoke. Smoking cessation is critical to address in this population given the associated increase in treatment toxicity, risk of second primary tumors, decrease in treatment response and higher disease-specific and all-cause mortality with continued smoking following a cancer diagnosis. This review seeks to summarize the latest recommendations and guidelines on smoking cessation treatment for patients diagnosed with cancer, and the evidence behind those recommendations.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed the latest evidence for smoking cessation treatments for cancer patients and the clinical guidelines and recommendation available for oncologists and health care providers. The unique aspects of nicotine dependence among patients diagnosed with cancer, and key challenges and barriers that cancer survivors and health care providers experience when considering smoking cessation treatments, and available clinical resources, are also discussed. Lastly, the authors summarize future directions in the field of smoking cessation treatment for cancer patients.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

While there are areas of improvement in research of smoking cessation treatment for cancer patients, critical under-explored areas remain. Nonetheless, providers should adhere to the NCCN guidelines and offer a brief counseling intervention to motivate patients to quit smoking when appropriate resources are not available.

Smoking cessation in cardiac patients: the influence of action plans, coping plans and self-efficacy on quitting smoking

Smoking cessation is the most effective action for cardiac patients who smoke to improve their prognosis, yet more than one-half of cardiac patients continue to smoke after hospital admission. This study examined the influence of action plans, coping plans and self-efficacy on intention to quit and smoking cessation in cardiac patients. Cardiac patients completed a baseline questionnaire (N = 245) assessing demographic characteristics, smoking behavior, intention, self-efficacy, relapse self-efficacy and action and coping plans. Six months later (N = 184) continued abstinence from smoking was assessed. Self-efficacy predicted intention to quit smoking and was an indirect predictor of continued abstinence, through intention. Intention to quit smoking and making action plans both directly influenced continued abstinence. Future interventions to facilitate smoking cessation in cardiac patients should put strong emphasis on enhancing self-efficacy and on making specific action plans to increase the likelihood of smoking cessation.

Reinforcing the role of psycho-social oncology in global cancer prevention: applying psycho-oncology research in programmes and practice

Over the past decade, global action to address the emerging crisis in non-communicable diseases (NCDs) has escalated. Central to these efforts has been the support and influence of the World Health Organisation and the United Nations with the 2000 civil societies represented by the Non-Communicable Disease Alliance. In particular this reached expression in the world's first High Level Meeting on NCDs by the United Nations leading to the 2011 Political Declaration urging a coordinated global response to NCDs. Where then does psycho-oncology sit in this global context? Psycho-oncology practitioners and their collective, the International Psycho-Oncology Society (IPOS), have traditionally been situated within a patient focus and context. However, through linkages with community-based and non-government cancer organisations' agencies, psycho-oncology research and practice has played a key role in reducing cancer risk, improving cancer survivorship, and influencing social and cultural change to eliminate disease-related stigma. As a discipline, psycho-oncology has contributed to widespread recognition of patient-centred care in cancer and along with a broad acceptance and endorsement of the IPOS International Standard. However psycho-oncology is less well accepted in nation-state cancer plans and herein lies opportunity. This special issue includes research across the illness continuum from cancer prevention to screening and early detection, and then to tertiary prevention with lifestyle considerations for cancer survivors. Importantly this demonstrates the capacity within psycho-oncology to develop new understandings of cancer as not only a disease but also a context linked to individual, community, and society health and well-being. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.