Displaying 1 - 18 of 18
BACKGROUND: Although epidemiological research demonstrates that there is an association between lifestyle factors and risk of breast cancer recurrence, progression of disease, and mortality, no comprehensive lifestyle change clinical trials have been conducted to determine if changing multiple risk factors leads to changes in biobehavioral processes and clinical outcomes in women with breast cancer. This article describes the design, feasibility, adherence to the intervention and data collection, and patient experience of a comprehensive lifestyle change clinical trial (CompLife). METHODS: CompLife is a randomized, controlled trial of a multiple-behavior intervention focusing on diet, exercise, and mind-body practice along with behavioral counseling to support change. The initial exposure to the intervention takes place during the 4 to 6 weeks of radiotherapy (XRT) for women with stage III breast cancer and then across the subsequent 12 months. The intervention group will have 42 hours of in-person lifestyle counseling during XRT (7-10 hours a week) followed by up to 30 hours of counseling via video connection for the subsequent 12 months (weekly sessions for 6 months and then monthly for 6 months). The primary outcome is disease-free survival. Multiple secondary outcomes are being evaluated, including: (1) biological pathways; (2) overall survival; (3) patient-reported outcomes; (4) dietary patterns/fitness levels, anthropometrics, and body composition; and (5) economic outcomes. Qualitative data of the patient experience in the trial is collected from exit interviews, concluding remarks, direct email correspondences, and web postings from patients. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients have been recruited and randomized to the trial to date. Accrual of eligible patients is high (72%) and dropout rates extremely low (5%). Attendance to the in-person sessions is high (95% attending greater than 80% of sessions) as well as to the 30 hours of video counseling (88% attending more than 70% of sessions). Adherence to components of the behavior change intervention is high and compliance with the intensive amount of data collection is exceptional. Qualitative data collected from the participants reveals testimonials supporting the importance of the comprehensive nature of intervention, especially the mind-body/mindfulness component and social support, and meaningful lifestyle transformations. CONCLUSION: Conducting a comprehensive, multicomponent, lifestyle change clinical trial for women with breast was feasible and collection of biobehavioral outcomes successful. Adherence to behavior change was high and patient experience was overwhelmingly positive.
BACKGROUND: Although epidemiological research demonstrates that there is an association between lifestyle factors and risk of breast cancer recurrence, progression of disease, and mortality, no comprehensive lifestyle change clinical trials have been conducted to determine if changing multiple risk factors leads to changes in biobehavioral processes and clinical outcomes in women with breast cancer. This article describes the design, feasibility, adherence to the intervention and data collection, and patient experience of a comprehensive lifestyle change clinical trial (CompLife). METHODS: CompLife is a randomized, controlled trial of a multiple-behavior intervention focusing on diet, exercise, and mind-body practice along with behavioral counseling to support change. The initial exposure to the intervention takes place during the 4 to 6 weeks of radiotherapy (XRT) for women with stage III breast cancer and then across the subsequent 12 months. The intervention group will have 42 hours of in-person lifestyle counseling during XRT (7-10 hours a week) followed by up to 30 hours of counseling via video connection for the subsequent 12 months (weekly sessions for 6 months and then monthly for 6 months). The primary outcome is disease-free survival. Multiple secondary outcomes are being evaluated, including: (1) biological pathways; (2) overall survival; (3) patient-reported outcomes; (4) dietary patterns/fitness levels, anthropometrics, and body composition; and (5) economic outcomes. Qualitative data of the patient experience in the trial is collected from exit interviews, concluding remarks, direct email correspondences, and web postings from patients. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients have been recruited and randomized to the trial to date. Accrual of eligible patients is high (72%) and dropout rates extremely low (5%). Attendance to the in-person sessions is high (95% attending greater than 80% of sessions) as well as to the 30 hours of video counseling (88% attending more than 70% of sessions). Adherence to components of the behavior change intervention is high and compliance with the intensive amount of data collection is exceptional. Qualitative data collected from the participants reveals testimonials supporting the importance of the comprehensive nature of intervention, especially the mind-body/mindfulness component and social support, and meaningful lifestyle transformations. CONCLUSION: Conducting a comprehensive, multicomponent, lifestyle change clinical trial for women with breast was feasible and collection of biobehavioral outcomes successful. Adherence to behavior change was high and patient experience was overwhelmingly positive.
PURPOSE: Research in the area of cultural response pattern on questionnaires in the oncological setting and direct cross-cultural comparisons are lacking. This study examined response pattern in the reporting of depressive symptoms in Chinese and US women with breast cancer. We hypothesized that Chinese women are less likely to endorse positive affect items compared to their US counterparts. Additionally, we explored cultural differences in the association between positive affect and QOL. METHODS: Secondary analyses of baseline assessments of two mind-body intervention studies for women with breast cancer undergoing radiotherapy in the USA (N = 62) and China (N = 97) are presented. All participants completed measures of depressive symptoms (CES-D) and cancer-specific QOL (FACT-B). We examined cultural differences on positive and negative affect items on the CES-D. RESULTS: Controlling for demographic factors, ANCOVA revealed a significant cultural difference in positive (F = 7.99, p = 0.005) but not negative affect (p = 0.82) with Chinese women reporting lower positive affect compared to US women (Chinese = 6.97 vs. US = 8.31). There was also a significant cultural difference (F = 3.94, p = 0.03) in the association between positive affect and QOL so that lower positive affect was more strongly associated with worse emotional well-being in Chinese (beta = 0.57, p < 0.0001) than US women (beta = 0.35, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Chinese women reported lower positive affect compared to US women and lower levels of positive affect were more strongly associated with worse QOL. Special attention is needed when examining mental health in different cultures to ascertain effective delivery of clinical services to those in need.
OBJECTIVE: It has been speculated that cancer survivors in Asia may have lower quality of life (QOL) compared with their Western counterparts. However, no studies have made international comparisons in QOL using a comprehensive measure. This study aimed to compare Chinese breast cancer survivors' QOL with US counterparts and examine if demographic and medical factors were associated with QOL across groups. METHOD: The sample consisted of 159 breast cancer patients (97 Chinese and 62 American) who completed the Functional Assessment for Cancer Therapy Breast Cancer (FACT-B) scale before the start of radiotherapy in Shanghai, China and Houston, USA. RESULTS: Higher income was associated with higher QOL total scores in both Chinese and American cancer patients, but QOL was not significantly associated with other factors including age, education, disease stage, mastectomy, and chemotherapy. Consistent with hypotheses, compared to their US counterparts, Chinese breast cancer survivors reported lower QOL and all four subdimensions including functional well-being (FWB), physical well-being (PWB), emotional well-being (EWB), and social well-being (SWB); they also reported more breast cancer-specific concerns (BCS). Differences were also clinically significant for Functional Assessment for Cancer Therapy General (FACT-G) scale total scores and the FWB subscale. After controlling for demographic and medical covariates, these differences remained except for the SWB and BCS. Furthermore, Chinese breast cancer survivors receiving chemotherapy reported significantly lower FACT-G scores than those who did not, but this difference did not emerge among US breast cancer survivors. DISCUSSION: Chinese breast cancer survivors reported poorer QOL on multiple domains compared to US women. Findings indicate that better strategies are needed to help improve the QOL of Chinese breast cancer survivors, especially those who underwent chemotherapy.
In recent years, the term integrative medicine has gained acceptance in medical academia. The Consortium of Academic Health Centers for Integrative Medicine defines this term as "the practice of medicine that reaffirms the importance of the relationship between practitioner and patient, focuses on the whole person, is informed by evidence, and makes use of all appropriate therapeutic approaches, healthcare professionals, and disciplines to achieve optimal health and healing."1 Integrative oncology has been specifically described as both a science and a philosophy that focuses on the complex health of people with cancer and proposes an array of approaches to accompany the conventional therapies of surgery, chemotherapy, molecular therapeutics, and radiotherapy to facilitate health.2 The SIO and its Medline-indexed journal ( Journal of the Society of Integrative Oncology ), founded by leading oncologists and oncology professionals from major cancer centers and organizations, promote quality research and appropriate application of useful, adjunctive complementary modalities (〈http://www.IntegrativeOnc. org〉). The SIO assembled a panel of experts in oncology and integrative medicine to evaluate the current level of evidence regarding complementary therapies in the care of cancer patients. To help health care professionals make evidence-based treatment decisions in integrative oncology, the panel made specific recommendations based on the strength of the evidence and the risks/ benefits ratio. These practice guidelines, developed by the authors and endorsed by the Executive Committee of the SIO, address principles for clinical encounters, followed by individual classes of treatment modalities. There is an essential difference between "complementary" and " alternative" therapies. "Alternative" therapies are typically promoted as a substitute for mainstream care. By definition, alternative therapies have not been scientifically proven, often have no scientific foundation, and have sometimes even been disproved. However, complementary medicine makes use of unconventional treatment modalities and approaches that are nonsurgical and nonpharmaceutical but that have known efficacy. When combined with mainstream care, these modalities can enhance effectiveness and reduce adverse symptoms. The use of complementary and alternative therapies by cancer patients is common, and given that complementary therapies can be helpful in symptom control, but the substitution of therapies with no evidence of safety and/or efficacy can delay or impede treatment, we strongly recommend that medical professionals routinely inquire as to the use of such therapies during the initial evaluation of cancer patients. The extensive use of complementary and alternative therapies can also challenge and frustrate both health care professionals and patients, leading to a gap in communication that negatively affects the patient-provider relationship. This communication gap may also arise from the patient's perception that health care professionals are indifferent to or object to the use of unconventional therapies, a perception that can lead to a loss of trust within the therapeutic bond. Health care professionals, who remain open to inquiries and aware of subtle, nonverbal messages from patients, can create an environment where patients feel free to openly discuss all choices in their care. Evidence suggests that patients supported in this manner are less likely to pursue potentially dangerous alternative therapies and are more likely to adhere to conventional, evidence-based treatment programs. We strongly recommend that qualified professionals provide guidance in an open, evidence-based, and patient-centric manner with those who use or are interested in pursuing complementary or alternative medicine so that they can approach these therapies appropriately. Patients should be informed of the conventional treatment approach, the nature of specific alternative therapies, the realistic expectations, and the potential risks and benefits. © 2009 BC Decker Inc.
Hypothesis This study examines moderators and mediators of a yoga intervention targeting quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes in women with breast cancer receiving radiotherapy.Methods Women undergoing 6 weeks of radiotherapy were randomized to a yoga (YG; n = 53) or stretching (ST; n = 56) intervention or a waitlist control group (WL; n = 54). Depressive symptoms and sleep disturbances were measured at baseline. Mediator (posttraumatic stress symptoms, benefit finding, and cortisol slope) and outcome (36-item Short Form [SF]-36 mental and physical component scales [MCS and PCS]) variables were assessed at baseline, end-of-treatment, and 1-, 3-, and 6-months posttreatment. Results Baseline depressive symptoms (P = .03) and sleep disturbances (P < .01) moderated the Group x Time effect on MCS, but not PCS. Women with high baseline depressive symptoms in YG reported marginally higher 3-month MCS than their counterparts in WL (P = .11). Women with high baseline sleep disturbances in YG reported higher 3-months MCS than their counterparts in WL (P < .01) and higher 6-month MCS than their counterparts in ST (P = .01). YG led to greater benefit finding than ST and WL across the follow-up (P = .01). Three-month benefit finding partially mediated the effect of YG on 6-month PCS. Posttraumatic stress symptoms and cortisol slope did not mediate treatment effect on QOL. Conclusion Yoga may provide the greatest mental-health-related QOL benefits for those experiencing pre-radiotherapy sleep disturbance and depressive symptoms. Yoga may improve physical-health-related QOL by increasing ability to find benefit in the cancer experience.
Being diagnosed with a life-threatening disease such as cancer and undergoing treatment can cause unwanted distress and interferes with quality of life. Uncontrolled stress can have a negative effect on a number of biological systems and processes leading to negative health outcomes. While some distress is normal, it is not benign and must be addressed, as failure to do so may compromise health and QOL outcomes. We present the evidence for the role of stress in cancer biology and mechanisms demonstrating how distress is associated with worse clinical outcomes. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network states that all patients be screened with the single-item distress thermometer and to also indicate the source of distress and to get appropriate referral. In addition to the many conventional approaches for managing distress from the fields of psychology and psychiatry, many patients are seeking strategies to manage their distress that are outside conventional medicine such as mind-body techniques. Mind-body techniques such as meditation, yoga, tai chi, and qigong have been found to lower distress and lead to improvements in different aspects of quality of life. It is essential that the standard of care in oncology include distress screening and the delivery of different techniques to help patients manage the psychosocial challenges of diagnosis and treatment of cancer.
Mind-body practices are defined as a variety of techniques designed to enhance the mind's capacity to affect bodily function and symptoms. A large percentage of the population, and especially people with cancer, participate in mind-body programs to help relieve stress, improve quality of life, and modulate physiological systems. At The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, we are conducting a number of clinical trials examining the biobehavioral effects of mind-body programs such as Tibetan Yoga, Hatha Yoga, meditation, and Qigong. Initial studies have found that these programs help to improve aspects of patient quality of life during and after treatment. More research is needed in this area with the use of appropriate control groups and thorough examination of the potential mediators of the benefits of the interventions to truly know the efficacy of these programs. It is clear that different mind-body practices have their place in oncology care. However, it is still uncertain which programs are most effective, and it will likely turn out that different programs are useful for different people at different times within the treatment and recovery trajectory. The key for health care professionals and patients is to encourage participation in some type of mind-body program to help improve aspects of quality of life.
Mind-body practices are defined as a variety of techniques designed to enhance the mind's capacity to affect bodily function and symptoms. A large percentage of the population, and especially people with cancer, participate in mind-body programs to help relieve stress, improve quality of life, and modulate physiological systems. At The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, we are conducting a number of clinical trials examining the biobehavioral effects of mind-body programs such as Tibetan Yoga, Hatha Yoga, meditation, and Qigong. Initial studies have found that these programs help to improve aspects of patient quality of life during and after treatment. More research is needed in this area with the use of appropriate control groups and thorough examination of the potential mediators of the benefits of the interventions to truly know the efficacy of these programs. It is clear that different mind-body practices have their place in oncology care. However, it is still uncertain which programs are most effective, and it will likely turn out that different programs are useful for different people at different times within the treatment and recovery trajectory. The key for health care professionals and patients is to encourage participation in some type of mind-body program to help improve aspects of quality of life.
OBJECTIVE: To describe self-reported menopausal symptom priorities and their association with demographics and other symptoms among participants in an intervention trial for vasomotor symptoms (VMS). METHODS: Cross-sectional study embedded in the MsFLASH 02 trial, a three-by-two factorial design of yoga vs. exercise vs. usual activity and omega-3-fatty acid vs. placebo. At baseline, women (n = 354) completed hot flush diaries, a card sort task to prioritize symptoms they would most like to alleviate, and standardized questionnaires. RESULTS: The most common symptom priorities were: VMS (n = 322), sleep (n = 191), concentration (n = 140), and fatigue (n = 116). In multivariate models, women who chose VMS as their top priority symptom (n = 210) reported significantly greater VMS severity (p = 0.004) and never smoking (p = 0.012), and women who chose sleep as their top priority symptom (n = 100) were more educated (p </= 0.001) and had worse sleep quality (p < 0.001). ROC curves identified sleep scale scores that were highly predictive of ranking sleep as a top priority symptom. CONCLUSIONS: Among women entering an intervention trial for VMS and with relatively low prevalence of depression and anxiety, VMS was the priority symptom for treatment. A card sort may be a valid tool for quickly assessing symptom priorities in clinical practice and research.
BACKGROUND: Research suggests that stress-reduction programs tailored to the cancer setting help patients cope with the effects of treatment and improve their quality of life. Yoga, an ancient Eastern science, incorporates stress-reduction techniques that include regulated breathing, visual imagery, and meditation as well as various postures. The authors examined the effects of the Tibetan yoga (TY) practices of Tsa lung and Trul khor, which incorporate controlled breathing and visualization, mindfulness techniques, and low-impact postures in patients with lymphoma. METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with lymphoma who were undergoing treatment or who had concluded treatment within the past 12 months were assigned to a TY group or to a wait-list control group. Patients in the TY group participated in 7 weekly yoga sessions, and patients in the wait-list control group were free to participate in the TY program after the 3-month follow-up assessment. RESULTS: Eighty nine percent of TY participants completed at least 2-3 three yoga sessions, and 58% completed at least 5 sessions. Patients in the TY group reported significantly lower sleep disturbance scores during follow-up compared with patients in the wait-list control group (5.8 vs. 8.1; P < 0.004). This included better subjective sleep quality (P < 0.02), faster sleep latency (P < 0.01), longer sleep duration (P < 0.03), and less use of sleep medications (P < 0.02). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of intrusion or avoidance, state anxiety, depression, or fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: The participation rates suggested that a TY program is feasible for patients with cancer and that such a program significantly improves sleep-related outcomes. However, there were no significant differences between groups for the other outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The current randomized trial examined the effects of a Tibetan yoga program (TYP) versus a stretching program (STP) and usual care (UC) on sleep and fatigue in women with breast cancer who were undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: Women with stage (American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM) I to III breast cancer who were undergoing chemotherapy were randomized to TYP (74 women), STP (68 women), or UC (85 women). Participants in the TYP and STP groups participated in 4 sessions during chemotherapy, followed by 3 booster sessions over the subsequent 6 months, and were encouraged to practice at home. Self-report measures of sleep disturbances (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), fatigue (Brief Fatigue Inventory), and actigraphy were collected at baseline; 1 week after treatment; and at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: There were no group differences noted in total sleep disturbances or fatigue levels over time. However, patients in the TYP group reported fewer daily disturbances 1 week after treatment compared with those in the STP (difference, -0.43; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -0.82 to -0.04 [P = .03]) and UC (difference, -0.41; 95% CI, -0.77 to -0.05 [P = .02]) groups. Group differences at the other time points were maintained for TYP versus STP. Actigraphy data revealed greater minutes awake after sleep onset for patients in the STP group 1 week after treatment versus those in the TYP (difference, 15.36; 95% CI, 7.25-23.48 [P = .0003]) and UC (difference, 14.48; 95% CI, 7.09-21.87 [P = .0002]) groups. Patients in the TYP group who practiced at least 2 times a week during follow-up reported better Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and actigraphy outcomes at 3 months and 6 months after treatment compared with those who did not and better outcomes compared with those in the UC group. CONCLUSIONS: Participating in TYP during chemotherapy resulted in modest short-term benefits in sleep quality, with long-term benefits emerging over time for those who practiced TYP at least 2 times a week. Cancer 2018;124:36-45. (c) 2017 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: The current randomized trial examined the effects of a Tibetan yoga program (TYP) versus a stretching program (STP) and usual care (UC) on sleep and fatigue in women with breast cancer who were undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: Women with stage (American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM) I to III breast cancer who were undergoing chemotherapy were randomized to TYP (74 women), STP (68 women), or UC (85 women). Participants in the TYP and STP groups participated in 4 sessions during chemotherapy, followed by 3 booster sessions over the subsequent 6 months, and were encouraged to practice at home. Self-report measures of sleep disturbances (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), fatigue (Brief Fatigue Inventory), and actigraphy were collected at baseline; 1 week after treatment; and at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: There were no group differences noted in total sleep disturbances or fatigue levels over time. However, patients in the TYP group reported fewer daily disturbances 1 week after treatment compared with those in the STP (difference, -0.43; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -0.82 to -0.04 [P = .03]) and UC (difference, -0.41; 95% CI, -0.77 to -0.05 [P = .02]) groups. Group differences at the other time points were maintained for TYP versus STP. Actigraphy data revealed greater minutes awake after sleep onset for patients in the STP group 1 week after treatment versus those in the TYP (difference, 15.36; 95% CI, 7.25-23.48 [P = .0003]) and UC (difference, 14.48; 95% CI, 7.09-21.87 [P = .0002]) groups. Patients in the TYP group who practiced at least 2 times a week during follow-up reported better Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and actigraphy outcomes at 3 months and 6 months after treatment compared with those who did not and better outcomes compared with those in the UC group. CONCLUSIONS: Participating in TYP during chemotherapy resulted in modest short-term benefits in sleep quality, with long-term benefits emerging over time for those who practiced TYP at least 2 times a week. Cancer 2018;124:36-45. (c) 2017 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this study was to establish the feasibility of a couple-based Vivekananda Yoga (VKC) intervention in lung cancer patients and caregivers. Secondly, we examined preliminary efficacy regarding quality of life (QOL) outcomes. METHOD: In this single-arm feasibility trial, patients with lung cancer undergoing radiotherapy and their caregivers participated in a 15-session VKC program that focused on the interconnectedness of the dyad. We assessed pre-and post-intervention levels of fatigue, sleep disturbances, psychological distress, overall QOL, spirituality, and relational closeness. We tracked feasibility data, and participants completed program evaluations. RESULTS: We approached 28 eligible dyads of which 15 (53%) consented and 9 (60%) completed the intervention. Patients (mean age = 73 years, 63% female, all stage III) and caregivers (mean age = 62 years, 38% female, 63% spouses) completed a mean of 10 sessions and 95.5% of them rated the program as very useful. Paired t tests revealed a significant increase in patients' mental health (d = 0.84; P = .04) and a significant decrease in caregivers' sleep disturbances (d = 1.44; P = .02). Although not statistically significant, for patients, effect sizes for change scores were medium for benefit finding and small for distress (d = 0.65 and 0.37, respectively). For caregivers, medium effects were found for improvement in physical functioning (d = 0.50). CONCLUSION: This novel supportive care program appears to be safe, feasible, acceptable, and subjectively useful for lung cancer patients and their caregivers and lends support for further study.
BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this study was to establish the feasibility of a couple-based Vivekananda Yoga (VKC) intervention in lung cancer patients and caregivers. Secondly, we examined preliminary efficacy regarding quality of life (QOL) outcomes. METHOD: In this single-arm feasibility trial, patients with lung cancer undergoing radiotherapy and their caregivers participated in a 15-session VKC program that focused on the interconnectedness of the dyad. We assessed pre-and post-intervention levels of fatigue, sleep disturbances, psychological distress, overall QOL, spirituality, and relational closeness. We tracked feasibility data, and participants completed program evaluations. RESULTS: We approached 28 eligible dyads of which 15 (53%) consented and 9 (60%) completed the intervention. Patients (mean age = 73 years, 63% female, all stage III) and caregivers (mean age = 62 years, 38% female, 63% spouses) completed a mean of 10 sessions and 95.5% of them rated the program as very useful. Paired t tests revealed a significant increase in patients' mental health (d = 0.84; P = .04) and a significant decrease in caregivers' sleep disturbances (d = 1.44; P = .02). Although not statistically significant, for patients, effect sizes for change scores were medium for benefit finding and small for distress (d = 0.65 and 0.37, respectively). For caregivers, medium effects were found for improvement in physical functioning (d = 0.50). CONCLUSION: This novel supportive care program appears to be safe, feasible, acceptable, and subjectively useful for lung cancer patients and their caregivers and lends support for further study.