A Pilot Mind-Body Resiliency Intervention Targeting Fear of Recurrence among Cancer Survivors

Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of IN FOCUS: A Mind-Body Resiliency Intervention for Fear of Cancer Recurrence

INTRODUCTION

Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is prevalent and distressing among survivors of cancer. Evidence-based mind-body and cognitive-behavioral skills lack integration and testing in scalable formats.

OBJECTIVE

This pilot randomized controlled trial (NCT04876599) tested a synchronous, virtual mind-body group resiliency intervention for FCR (IN FOCUS).

METHOD

Adults with elevated FCR (FCR Inventory severity ≥ 16; 16-21 = elevated, 22-36 = clinically elevated) after completing primary treatment for non-metastatic cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to eight weekly sessions of IN FOCUS or usual care (UC; synchronous, virtual community group support referral). Feasibility metrics included ≥ 70% retention per arm (primary outcome), ≥ 75% attendance in ≥ 6 sessions, ≥ 75% adherence to relaxation skills practice ≥ 3 days per week and by delivery fidelity (% content covered in video-recorded sessions). Acceptability was assessed quantitatively via ratings of enjoyableness, convenience, helpfulness, odds of future use, and satisfaction (benchmark ≥ 80% of ratings ≥ 4 on 1-5 Likert scale) and qualitatively via individual exit interviews. Linear mixed models explicated slopes in FCR (secondary) and resiliency (exploratory; Current Experiences Scale) from baseline to 2 months (primary endpoint) and 5 months using intention-to-treat.

RESULTS

From July 2021 to March 2022, 64 survivors enrolled (25-73 years old, M = 7 years since diagnosis). IN FOCUS was feasible and acceptable (91% retention; attendance median = 7 sessions, 97% relaxation practice adherence, 95% content fully covered; 82% of acceptability ratings ≥ 4). Interviews (n = 59) revealed benefits in both arms. By 2 months, compared to UC, IN FOCUS reduced FCR to a medium-to-large effect (Mdiff = -2.4; 95% CI = -4.2, -0.7; d = 0.66). By 5 months, FCR effects had attenuated (Mdiff = -0.16, 95% CI -1.97, 1.65; d = -0.04), although levels of resiliency had increased with a medium-to-large effect (Mdiff = 10.0; 95% CI = 4.9, 15.1; d = 0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

For survivors of non-metastatic cancer, a synchronous, virtual mind-body resiliency program for FCR is feasible, acceptable, and seemingly beneficial compared to a community group referral.

Development and feasibility of a virtual, synchronous mind-body resiliency intervention for fathers of children and youth with special healthcare needs

Background

Fathers of children and youth with special healthcare needs (FCYSHCN) are an overlooked population at risk for chronic stress. Mind-body practices offer a patient-centered approach to foster coping and resiliency, yet low engagement from fathers in existing programs suggests adaptation is needed. This multiphase study examines the feasibility of a synchronous, virtual mind-body intervention adapted for FCYSHCN.

Methods

31 FCYSHCN were recruited online via community partners and recruitment portals in an academic medical center in Boston, MA. Phase 1 consisted of individual interviews (N = 17) to determine fathers' stressors, coping strategies, program needs, and suggested adaptations to the intervention protocol. The Phase 2 single arm pilot feasibility trial (N = 14) consisted of eight weekly 60-minute group sessions delivered virtually. Primary feasibility metrics were attendance (benchmark: mean=6 sessions) and electronic survey completion at baseline and post-intervention. Acceptability was assessed using post-session ratings of program satisfaction (4-point Likert scale; scores ≥3 coded as helpful) and helpfulness (e.g., group structure). Exploratory outcomes included validated measures of stress coping, resiliency, parental stress, depression, anxiety, which were analyzed using paired-samples t-tests (alpha=.05) to generate effect sizes (η2).

Results

In Phase 1, FCYSHCN discussed primary stressors (e.g., perceived inadequacy as a father) and multifaceted impacts of these stressors on physical, cognitive, emotional, and social wellbeing. Fathers also described coping strategies deemed helpful (e.g., humor) and unhelpful (e.g., "shutting down" from others). Qualitative findings informed intervention modifications. In Phase 2, most FCYSHCN (79%) attended ≥ 6 intervention sessions (mean=7). Follow-up survey completion was high (86%). Session satisfaction was high, with 7/8 sessions rated as helpful by most fathers. Program components deemed most helpful were the group structure, virtual delivery, exposure to a variety of relaxation and meditation skills, and the length of sessions. Although we were not powered to observe pre-post change, stress coping improved (p = .02, η2 = 0.42) and confidence increased in applying relaxation (p = .04, η2 = 0.34) and assertiveness techniques (p = .05, η2 = 0.31).

Conclusions

The first mind-body resiliency program for FCYSHCN is feasible and acceptable. Further testing is warranted in randomized trials with diverse samples of fathers, an appropriate comparison arm, and longitudinal assessments of psychosocial and biobehavioral outcomes.

Depression and anxiety among patients treated for bladder cancer: examining clinical, demographic, and psychosocial predictors

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

The significant impact of bladder cancer and treatment on patient health related quality of life (HRQoL) and emotional wellbeing has been documented. Increasing evidence from cancer research emphasizes the importance of examining patients supportive care needs and received social support as factors that could influence their emotional adjustment. The purpose of the study was to assess the demographic and clinical predictors of depression and anxiety among bladder cancer patients and its associations with patient reported supportive care needs and perceived availability of social support.

METHODS

A cross-sectional design was used to investigate the study questions. Bladder cancer patients were recruited from the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network (BCAN) to complete a questionnaire that included the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), bladder cancer patient need survey (BCNAS-32), and the social provisions scale (SPS). The inclusion criteria restricted our sample to include bladder cancer patients who were English speakers, aged 18-85 years, and were able and willing to provide informed consent. Patients who had metastatic disease, cancer recurrence, or other primary cancers at the time of assessment were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

Participants included 159 bladder cancer patients. The mean age was 62±9.4 years and 51% were male. Almost two-thirds (62%) of patients reported a diagnosis of muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), 25% patient reported clinically significant levels of anxiety, 17% reported clinically significant levels of depression, and 13% and 17% reported abnormal borderline abnormal levels for anxiety and depression, respectively. Univariate regression analyses revealed significant associations between HADS total score, HADS depression and anxiety subscales, patient age, physical functioning/daily living needs, sexuality needs, and perceived social support with higher total scores, anxiety, and depression scores associated with younger age, higher unmet needs, and lower levels of social support. Multivariate regression analyses, showed similar findings confirming the associations depicted by the univariate regression analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Bladder cancer patients experience significant levels of depression and anxiety and these levels are associated with patient age, supportive care unmet needs and lack of social support. Patient focused interventions could be tailored to address these issues with the goal to improve patient HRQoL and emotional adjustment.

Do cancer curvivors and metavivors have distinct needs for stress management intervention? Retrospective analysis of a mind-body survivorship program

PURPOSE

Cancer "curvivors" (completed initial curative intent treatment with surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and/or other novel therapies) and "metavivors" (living with metastatic or chronic, incurable cancer) experience unique stressors, but it remains unknown whether these differences impact benefits from mind-body interventions. This study explored differences between curvivors and metavivors in distress (depression, anxiety, worry) and resiliency changes over the course of an 8-week group program, based in mind-body stress reduction, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and positive psychology.

METHODS

From 2017-2021, 192 cancer survivors (83% curvivors; 17% metavivors) completed optional online surveys of resiliency (CES) and distress (PHQ-8, GAD-7, PSWQ-3) pre- and post- participation in an established clinical program. Mixed effect regression models explored curvivor-metavivor differences at baseline and in pre-post change.

RESULTS

Compared to curvivors, metavivors began the program with significantly more resilient health behaviors (B = 0.99, 95% CI[0.12, 1.86], p = .03) and less depression (B = -2.42, 95%CI[-4.73, -0.12], p = .04), with no other significant differences. Curvivors experienced significantly greater reductions in depression (curvivor-metavivor difference in strength of change = 2.12, 95% CI [0.39, 3.83], p = .02) over the course of the program, with no other significant differences. Neither virtual delivery modality nor proportion of sessions attended significantly moderated strength of resiliency or distress change.

CONCLUSION

Metavivors entering this mind-body program had relatively higher well-being than did curvivors, and both groups experienced statistically comparable change in all domains other than depression. Resiliency programming may thus benefit a variety of cancer survivors, including those living with incurable cancer.

Is digital intervention for fear of cancer recurrence beneficial to cancer patients?: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of digital and face-to-face interventions in reducing fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) among individuals with cancer.

METHODS

This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for evaluating the efficacy of psychological interventions for FCR published between July 2018 and December 2021. We searched for research papers using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane and assessed their quality using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials.

RESULTS

Of the 2113 identified studies, we analyzed 17 samples (N = 1482) from 14 studies, of which 13 were RCTs. The overall sample showed a moderate effect size (Hedges' g = 0.607; 0.356 to 0.858; p < 0.001; I2  = 81.29%) in FCR reduction. The overall effect size was 0.621 (95% CI, 0.276 to 0.966; p < 0.001; I2  = 81.78%) for face-to-face interventions and 0.517 (95% CI, 0.093 to 0.941; p = 0.017; I2  = 83.19%) for digital interventions. The difference between the two effect sizes was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests that digital interventions are moderately effective in reducing FCR, similar to face-to-face interventions. However, given the high degree of heterogeneity, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution. Further studies are required to identify the most effective digital interventions and the populations that may benefit from them.

The Association of Illness-related Uncertainty With Mental Health in Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases

OBJECTIVE

Patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs) face illness-related uncertainty, but little is known about the psychological profiles and psychosocial and health needs associated with uncertainty among adults with SARDs.

METHODS

Patients from the Massachusetts General Hospital with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV), IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD), and systemic sclerosis (SSc) completed the Mishel Uncertainty in Illness Scale, 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire depression scale, 7-item General Anxiety Disorder scale, Sickness Impact Profile, and a survey of psychosocial needs. The associations of uncertainty and self-reported needs with depression, anxiety, and sickness impact were assessed.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-two patients with AAV (n = 41, 31%), IgG4-RD (n = 61, 46%), or SSc (n = 30, 23%) participated. The mean age was 64 years, 52% were female, and 83% were White. Greater illness-related uncertainty was positively correlated with higher levels of depression (r = 0.43, P < 0.001), anxiety (r = 0.33, P < 0.001), and sickness impact (r = 0.28, P = 0.001). We observed variations in these measures across SARDs, such that uncertainty was more strongly associated with depression and sickness impact in AAV or SSc compared to IgG4-RD. The primary needs that patients endorsed were services for managing physical symptoms (53%), self-care (37%), and emotional concerns (24%), with greater needs strongly associated with greater illness-related uncertainty.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with SARDs, illness-related uncertainty is correlated with levels of depression, anxiety, and sickness impact, as well as psychosocial needs. Findings also implicate the need for targeted interventions to address uncertainty and needs among subgroups of patients with different illness profiles.

Baseline characteristics of adults with neurofibromatosis enrolled on a psychosocial randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Neurofibromatosis (NF) is an incurable genetic neurological condition. Psychosocial interventions that promote resiliency are a promising approach to address the high emotional distress and low quality of life (QoL) associated with NF. However, no studies have examined the psychosocial needs of treatment-seeking adults with NF. Our goal was to explore, using data from the largest efficacy trial of a psychosocial intervention for NF, differences in QoL, emotional distress, resiliency, and pain-related outcomes compared to other chronic medical populations and within subtypes (NF1, NF2, schwannomatosis; SCHW).

METHODS

Enrolled participants (N = 228) were geographically diverse adults with NF and elevated stress. We performed secondary analysis on baseline measures of QoL, emotional distress, resiliency, and pain-related outcomes. We reported descriptive statistics and normative comparisons to understand the psychosocial characteristics of the overall sample and performed between-group analyses to explore differences within NF type.

RESULTS

Our sample endorsed worse QoL, emotional distress, resilience, and pain-related outcomes than similar chronic illness populations. Within NF types, participants with NF1 reported lower QoL and resilience compared to those with NF2. Participants with SCHW reported higher pain intensity than those with NF1. Participants with SCHW reported higher pain interference and lower physical QoL compared to those with NF1 and NF2.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the urgent need for psychosocial interventions targeting deficits in QoL, emotional distress, resilience, and pain-related outcomes in adults with NF. We recommend efforts to enhance sample diversity, prepare clinicians to provide high-levels of support, and attune skills training to each NF type.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03406208; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03406208 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/72ZoTDQ6h ).

Managing cancer and living meaningfully (CALM) in adults with malignant glioma: a proof-of-concept phase IIa trial

BACKGROUND

Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM) is an evidence-based, brief, semi-structured psychotherapy designed to help patients with advanced cancer cope with the practical and profound challenges of their illness. However, no study to date has investigated its feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness in adults with malignant glioma, despite the well-documented incidence of psychological distress in this vulnerable and underserved population.

METHODS

Fourteen patients with glioma and elevated symptoms of depression and/or death anxiety enrolled in the trial: 83% glioblastoma, 75% female, Mage = 56 years (SD = 15.1; range = 27-81). Feasibility was assessed based on established metrics. Acceptability was measured by post-session surveys and post-intervention interviews. Preliminary intervention effects were explored using paired t-tests, comparing psychological distress at baseline and post-intervention.

RESULTS

Of the 14 enrolled patients, 12 were evaluable. Nine completed the study (75% retention rate). Three patients withdrew due to substantial disease progression which affected their ability to participate. Participants reported high perceived benefit, and all recommended the program to others. Baseline to post-intervention assessments indicated reductions in death anxiety, generalized anxiety, and depression, and increases in spirituality. Quality of life and fear of cancer recurrence remained stable throughout the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

CALM appears feasible for use with adults with malignant glioma. Enrollment and retention rates were high and comparable to psychotherapy trials for patients with advanced cancer. High perceived benefit and reductions in symptoms of death anxiety, generalized anxiety, and depression were reported by participants. These findings are extremely encouraging and support further study of CALM in neuro-oncology.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04646213 registered on 11/27/2020.

Testing psychosocial mediators of a mind-body resiliency intervention for cancer survivors

Purpose

Group-based mind–body interventions such as the Stress Management and Resiliency Training-Relaxation Response Resiliency Program (SMART-3RP) hold promise for enhancing resiliency among cancer survivors. Mechanisms underlying improvements in psychological outcomes are theoretically established but remain unexamined empirically.

Methods

Adult cancer survivors (n = 105) participating in the SMART-3RP completed surveys of resiliency and five hypothesized mediators: coping (ability to relax physical tension and assertive social support-seeking), mindfulness, positive affect, and worry. Pre-post intervention changes were assessed using repeated-measures t-tests. Bivariate correlations between change scores and a more conservative within-person parallel mediation model tested covariance between resiliency and mediators.

Results

Participants experienced moderate to large improvements in all patient-reported outcomes (ds = 1.01–0.46). Increased resiliency was significantly associated with increases in mindfulness, positive affect, and assertive social support-seeking (rs = 0.36–0.50); smaller associations with increased relaxation and decreased worry were not significant. Mindfulness and positive affect explained the largest proportion of variance in resiliency increase in the full multivariate model.

Conclusions

Cancer survivors completing the SMART-3RP had increased resiliency, which was associated with improvements in mindfulness, positive affect, and the ability to assertively seek social support. Enhancing mindfulness and positive affect were critical components for enhancing resiliency. Implications for resiliency interventions with cancer survivors are discussed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07022-5.

Distress among Korean Cancer Survivors: A Latent Profile Analysis

This study aimed to classify cancer survivors' latent profile analysis (LPA) according to the problem list and identify the differences in distress between subgroups. Furthermore, this study identified differences between subgroups based on their demographic and clinical characteristics. A self-reported cross-sectional survey was administered to 446 adult cancer survivors in Korea. A distress thermometer and problem list were used, and four domains of the problem list were used to perform LPA and create subgroups. Quade's non-parametric analysis of covariance was used to determine the difference in distress between the profiles. The three identified subgroups of the problem list were: "low problem group" (36.7%), "high problem group" (49.1%), and "family only low problem group" (14.2%). The analysis showed that there was a difference in the distress level according to the sub-profile of the problem list (F = 43.69, p < 0.001). In interventions for distress, integrative interventions that are not limited to one area are necessary, and cultural characteristics as well as the problem list relevant to cancer survivors should be considered.

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.

Randomized Waitlist-Control Trial of a Web-Based Stress-Management and Resiliency Program for Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors: Protocol for the Bounce Back Study

Background

The emotional health of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors is compromised both during and after cancer treatment. Targeted programs designed to support AYAs’ ability to cope with stress in the years following treatment completion are lacking. Mind-body programs may ameliorate the negative psychological and emotional effects of stress and assist AYAs with managing the psychosocial challenges of early survivorship.

Objective

Our randomized waitlist-control trial aims to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a virtual group program (Bounce Back) to promote stress management and resiliency among posttreatment AYAs.

Methods

Bounce Back is a stress management and resiliency program delivered via videoconference by a trained mental health clinician. Sessions were adapted from an evidence-based mind-body program (Stress Management and Resiliency Training - Relaxation Response Resiliency Program [SMART-3RP]) grounded in relaxation response elicitation, mindfulness, cognitive behavioral therapy, and positive psychology. Seventy-two AYAs (diagnosed with cancer between ages 14 years and 29 years and had completed cancer treatment within the last 5 years) were randomly assigned to the Bounce Back program or waitlist-control group and completed assessments at baseline, 3 months postbaseline, and 6 months postbaseline. The primary aim of the study is to determine the feasibility and acceptability of the Bounce Back program. Descriptive statistics, including means, frequencies, and ranges supplemented by qualitative exit interview feedback will be used to characterize the sample and to summarize feasibility and acceptability. The exploratory aims are to evaluate the preliminary effects of the program on stress coping and psychosocial outcome measures (ie, anxiety, depression) collected across the 3 time points.

Results

This study was funded by the National Cancer Institute in July 2017. Study procedures were approved by the Dana-Farber Harvard Cancer Center Institutional Review Board in October 2018 (Protocol 18-428). The randomized trial was conducted from July 2019 to March 2021. Quantitative data collection is complete, and qualitative exit interview data collection is ongoing. Results are expected to be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at local, national, or international meetings in the coming years.

Conclusions

Few evidence-based programs exist that tackle the key transitional issues faced by AYA cancer survivors. Future analyses will help us determine the feasibility and acceptability of the Bounce Back program and its impact on AYA stress coping and psychological well-being.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03768336; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03768336

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/34033

COVID-19 uncertainty and sleep: the roles of perceived stress and intolerance of uncertainty during the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic brings unprecedented uncertainty and stress. This study aimed to characterize general sleep status among Chinese residents during the early stage of the outbreak and to explore the network relationship among COVID-19 uncertainty, intolerance of uncertainty, perceived stress, and sleep status.

METHODS

A cross-sectional correlational survey was conducted online. A total of 2534 Chinese residents were surveyed from 30 provinces, municipalities, autonomous regions of China and regions abroad during the period from February 7 to 14, 2020, the third week of lockdown. Final valid data from 2215 participants were analyzed. Self-report measures assessed uncertainty about COVID-19, intolerance of uncertainty, perceived stress, and general sleep status. Serial mediation analysis using the bootstrapping method and path analysis were applied to test the mediation role of intolerance of uncertainty and perceived stress in the relationship between uncertainty about COVID-19 and sleep status.

RESULTS

The total score of sleep status was 4.82 (SD = 2.72). Age, place of residence, ethnicity, marital status, infection, and quarantine status were all significantly associated with general sleep status. Approximately half of participants (47.1%) reported going to bed after 12:00 am, 23.0% took 30 min or longer to fall asleep, and 30.3% slept a total of 7 h or less. Higher uncertainty about COVID-19 was significantly positively correlated with higher intolerance of uncertainty (r = 0.506, p < 0.001). The mediation analysis found a mediating role of perceived stress in the relationship between COVID-19 uncertainty and general sleep status (β = 0.015, 95%C.I. = 0.009-0.021). However, IU was not a significant mediator of the relationship between COVID-19 uncertainty and sleep (β = 0.009, 95%C.I. = - 0.002-0.020). Moreover, results from the path analysis further showed uncertainty about COVID-19 had a weak direct effect on poor sleep (β = 0.043, p < 0.05); however, there was a robust indirect effect on poor sleep through intolerance of uncertainty and perceived stress.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that intolerance of uncertainty and perceived stress are critical factors in the relationship between COVID-19 uncertainty and sleep outcomes. Results are discussed in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and practical policy implications are also provided.

Targeted eHealth Intervention to Reduce Breast Cancer Survivors' Fear of Recurrence: Results from the FoRtitude Randomized Trial

Background

Fear of recurrence (FoR) is a prevalent concern among breast cancer survivors (BCS), yet few accessible interventions exist. This study evaluated a targeted eHealth intervention, “FoRtitude,” to reduce FoR using cognitive behavioral skills training and telecoaching.

Methods

BCS (N  = 196) were recruited from an academic medical center and 3 National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program community sites, had stage 0-III breast cancer, were 1-10 years postprimary treatment, with moderate to high FoR and familiarity with the internet. Using the Multiphase Optimization Strategy, participants were independently randomly assigned to 3 cognitive behavioral skills (relaxation, cognitive restructuring, worry practice) vs an attention control condition (health management content [HMC]) and to telecoaching (motivational interviewing) vs no telecoaching. Website content was released across 4 weeks and included didactic lessons, interactive tools, and a text-messaging feature. BCS completed the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory at baseline and at 4 and 8 weeks. Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory scores over time were compared using mixed-effects models. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

Results

FCRI scores [SD] decreased statistically significantly from baseline to postintervention (T0 = 53.1 [17.4], T2 = 41.9 [16.2], P < .001). The magnitude of reduction in FCRI scores was comparable across cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) and attention control HMC conditions and was predicted by increased self-efficacy. Telecoaching was associated with lower attrition and greater website use (mean adherence score [SD] = 26.6 [7.2] vs 21.0 [10.5], P < .001).

Conclusions

BCS experienced statistically significant reductions in FoR postintervention, but improvements were comparable between CBT and attention controls. Telecoaching improved adherence and retention. Future research is needed on optimal integration of CBT and HMC, dose, and features of eHealth delivery that contributed to reducing FoR. In the COVID-19 era, remote delivery has become even more essential for reaching survivors struggling with FoR.

A Comprehensive Resiliency Framework: Theoretical Model, Treatment, and Evaluation

BACKGROUND

There is heterogeneity in conceptualizations of resiliency, and there is, to date, no established theoretically driven resiliency assessment measure that aligns with a targeted resiliency intervention. We operationalize resiliency as one's ability to maintain adaptive functioning in response to the ongoing, chronic stress of daily living, and we use a novel resiliency measure that assesses the target components of an evidence based resiliency intervention. We present our resiliency theory, treatment model, and corresponding assessment measure (Current Experience Scale; CES).

METHODS

To establish the psychometric properties of the CES, we report the factor structure and internal consistency reliability (N = 273). Among participants in our resiliency intervention (N = 151), we explored construct validity in terms of associations with theoretical model constructs, a validated resiliency measure, and sensitivity to change from before to after the intervention.

RESULTS

Results indicated that a 23-item, 6-factor solution was a good fit to the data (RMSEA = .08, CFI = .97; TLI =.96) and internal consistency was good (α = .81 to .95). The CES showed correlations in the expected direction with resiliency model constructs (all p's < .001) and significant post intervention improvements.

CONCLUSION

Our resiliency theory, treatment model, and outcome appear aligned; the CES demonstrated promise as a psychometrically sound outcome measure for our resiliency intervention and may be used in future longitudinal studies and resiliency building interventions to assess individuals' resiliency to adapt to ongoing stress.