Search

PURPOSE: Cancer patients who smoke may experience significant stigma due both to their disease, and negative attitudes and beliefs regarding smoking. We investigated whether internalized stigma differed between currently smoking cancer patients diagnosed with lung or head and neck cancers, other smoking related cancers, and non smoking-related cancers, and whether internalized stigma was associated with psychological distress. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis used baseline data on 293 participants enrolled in a multi-site randomized smoking cessation intervention trial of patients with recently diagnosed cancer. Internalized stigma was assessed using five Internalized Shame items from the Social Impact of Disease Scale. Smoking-related cancers included lung, head and neck, esophageal, bladder, kidney, liver, pancreatic, colorectal, anal, small intestinal, gastric, and cervical. We used multivariable linear regression to examine whether mean internalized stigma levels differed between individuals with lung and head and neck cancers, other smoking-related cancers, and non smoking-related cancers, adjusting for potential confounders. We further examined the association of internalized stigma with depression, anxiety, and perceived stress, overall and among cancer type groups. RESULTS: Thirty-nine percent of participants were diagnosed with lung or head and neck cancer, 21% with another smoking-related cancer, and 40% with a non smoking-related cancer. In multivariable-adjusted models, participants with lung or head and neck cancers (11.6, 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 10.8-12.2; p < 0.0001) or other smoking-related cancers (10.7, 95% CI = 9.8-11.7; p = 0.03) had higher mean internalized stigma scores compared to those non-smoking-related cancers (9.3, 95% CI = 8.6-10.0). We observed similar positive associations between internalized stigma and depressive symptoms, anxiety, and perceived stress among participants with smoking-related and non smoking-related cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Among smokers, those with smoking-related cancers experienced the highest levels of internalized stigma, and greater internalized stigma was associated with greater psychological distress across cancer types. Providers should assess patients for internalized and other forms of stigma, refer patients for appropriate psychosocial support services, and address stigma in smoking cessation programs.

Exercise is recommended for all patients with cancer, but there has been limited study of exercise habits in patients across the spectrum of illness. This pragmatic survey aimed to identify the unmet supportive care needs, self-reported symptoms, and exercise habits among both cancer survivors and patients living with advanced disease to determine adherence to exercise guidelines and to identify barriers and opportunities to improve exercise. An anonymous cross-sectional self-administered paper survey was distributed to patients with cancer presenting for oncology clinic visits at an academic cancer center. Survey measures included presence of symptoms and health problems in addition to weekly time spent exercising, change in exercise levels since diagnosis, interest in exercise, and self-reported barriers. Participants reporting at least 150 min of exercise per week were characterized as adherent to guidelines. Among 640 survey respondents, 570 (89%) completed questions about exercise. Only 44% of cancer survivors and 34% of patients living with advanced disease met current guidelines. Survivors who met exercise guidelines had a lower prevalence of fatigue and memory impairments, but this finding was not seen among patients with advanced cancer. Over 70% of patients with advanced disease and 47% of survivors reported decreasing exercise post-diagnosis compared to pre-diagnosis. Prominent barriers to exercise among both groups included burden of illness and time constraints but interest in increasing exercise was high. There is an opportunity to improve exercise and related outcomes among a large percentage of both cancer survivors and patients living with advanced disease.

Parents of children with Autism experience high levels of stress. Resiliency is the ability to cope and adapt when faced with stressful events. This randomized, waitlist controlled pilot trial examines the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of an adapted virtual mind–body group intervention for parents of children with ASD. The intervention was feasible and acceptable. The immediate treatment group showed no difference in distress and greater improvement in resiliency and stress reactivity/coping relative to the delayed treatment group, (M difference 5.78; p = .038 and M difference 7.78; p = .001 respectively). Findings showed promising feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy for parents of children with ASD.

Background Individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) experience increased cancer mortality due to inequities in cancer treatment. Psychiatric care at cancer diagnosis may improve care delivery, yet models for integrating psychiatry and cancer care are lacking. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a person-centered collaborative care trial for SMI and cancer. Subjects, materials, and methods We developed the Bridge intervention for patients with SMI (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and severe major depression) and cancer. Bridge includes proactive identification of SMI, person-centered care from a psychiatrist and case manager, and collaboration with oncology. We conducted a 12-week, single-group trial in patients with SMI and a new breast, gastrointestinal, lung, or head/neck cancer. We assessed the feasibility of patient identification, enrollment and study completion; evaluated acceptability and perceived benefit with exit interviews with patients, caregivers, and oncology clinicians; and examined change in psychiatric symptoms with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Results From November 2015 to April 2016, 30/33 eligible patients (90.9%) enrolled, and 25/29 (86.2%) completed assessments at all timepoints, meeting feasibility criteria. Of 24 patients, 23 (95.8%) found meeting with the psychiatrist helpful; 16/19 caregivers (84.2%) shared that Bridge addressed key caregiving challenges. Oncology clinicians evaluated Bridge as "very" or "most" useful for 94.3% of patients. Exit interviews with all participant groups suggested that Bridge fostered patient-clinician trust, increased access to psychiatric treatment, and enabled patients to initiate and complete cancer treatment. Psychiatric symptoms on the BPRS improved from baseline to 12 weeks. Conclusion Bridge is a feasible and acceptable care delivery model for patients with SMI, their caregivers, and oncology clinicians. Randomized trials are warranted to assess the efficacy of improving cancer outcomes in this underserved population. Implications for practice Serious mental illness affects 13 million U.S. adults who experience increased cancer mortality. To improve outcomes, new models of integrated oncology and mental health care are urgently needed. This study found that it was feasible to identify, enroll, and retain patients with serious mental illness and a new cancer in a trial of integrated mental health and cancer care (Bridge). Patients, caregivers, and oncologists reported that Bridge facilitated the initiation and completion of cancer care. Randomized trials are warranted to investigate the impact on cancer outcomes. Trial procedures may inform consent, engagement, and trial retention for patients with mental illness.

Background The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of a tailored cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) mobile application (app) to treat anxiety in patients with incurable cancer. Materials and Methods Patients with incurable cancers (n = 145) who reported elevated anxiety symptoms at two cancer centers were randomized to receive either the CBT mobile app for anxiety or a mobile health education program (control) delivered via tablet computers, which patients self-administered over 12 weeks. To assess anxiety, depression symptoms, and quality of life (QOL), we used the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A, primary outcome), Clinical Global Impression Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General at baseline and 12 weeks. Analysis of covariance models were calculated to assess intervention effects on patient outcomes. Results Patients (73.8% female; 91.0% white; mean age = 56.45 years, SD = 11.30) in both study groups reported improvements in anxiety, depression symptoms, and QOL from baseline to postassessment, with no significant differences in any outcome measure between groups. Secondary analyses showed that, among the subgroup of patients with severe baseline anxiety, those randomized to the CBT app had greater improvements on the HAM-A (Mean Difference = 7.44, standard error [SE] = 3.35, p = .037) and HADS-Anxiety Subscale (Mean Difference = 4.44, SE = 1.60, p = .010) compared with the control group. Conclusion Both the tailored CBT app for anxiety and the health education program were associated with improvements in anxiety, mood, and QOL, but these outcomes did not differ between study groups. The CBT app was more beneficial than health education for patients with severe baseline anxiety.

Research on adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer has flourished over the past decade, underscoring the unique medical and psychosocial needs of this vulnerable group. A cancer diagnosis during adolescence and young adulthood intersects with the developmental trajectory of AYAs, derailing critical physical, social, and emotional development. AYAs face these abrupt life changes needing age-appropriate information and resources to offset these challenges. Greater attention is needed to address AYA-specific concerns on reproductive and sexual health, financial security and independence, emotional well-being, social support, and end-of-life care. If these unique needs are unaddressed, this can adversely affect AYAs’ health care engagement and overall quality of life, increasing their risk for cancer-related morbidity and early mortality. In particular, health care decisions made during treatment have important implications for AYA patients’ future health. Oncology clinicians are well positioned to address AYA patients’ concerns by anticipating and addressing the challenges this age group is likely to face. In this paper, we explore several core topics that affect AYAs’ quality of life and that can be challenging to address. Starting from the moment of diagnosis, through cancer treatment and post-treatment survivorship, and into end of life, each section highlights critical developmental-centric life domains that are affected by the cancer experience. Specifically, we discuss resources, tools, and strategies to navigate these challenging conversations. Taking a risk-reduction approach that invites two-way communication and facilitates referral to age-appropriate resources would help destigmatize these experiences and, in turn, would support the provision of compassionate and effective age-concordant care to this vulnerable group.

PURPOSE: To describe and compare the prevalence of mental health access, preference, and use among pediatric cancer survivors and their siblings. To identify factors associated with mental health access and use among survivors. METHODS: 698 survivors in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (median age=39.4; median years from diagnosis=30.8) and 210 siblings (median age=40.4) were surveyed. Outcomes included having mental health insurance coverage, delaying care due to cost, perceived value of mental health benefits, and visiting a mental health provider in the past year. RESULTS: There were no differences in mental health access, preferences, and use between survivors and siblings (p>0.05). Among respondents with a history of distress, most reported not having seen a mental health provider in the past year (80.9% survivors vs. 77.1% siblings; p=0.60). Uninsured survivors were more likely to defer mental health services due to cost (24.6% vs. 8.4%; p

Highlights • We explored stress, distress, and smoking in a cessation trial for cancer patients. • Patients reported decreases in stress and distress over time in both study groups. • Anxiety negatively impacted smoking cessation success at 6-mo follow-up., Introduction Cancer patients who smoke report more stress and psychological distress than patients who do not smoke. It is unclear how these emotional symptoms may modify smoking behavior in cancer patients. We examined the influence of a smoking cessation intervention for cancer patients on stress and distress, and the effects of these symptoms on smoking abstinence. Methods Mixed-methods secondary analysis of data from the Smokefree Support Study, a two-site randomized controlled trial examining the efficacy of Intensive (IT; n = 153) vs. Standard Treatment (ST; n = 150) for smoking cessation in newly diagnosed cancer patients. Stress coping, perceived stress, distress, and anxiety were self-reported at baseline, 3, and 6 months. Abstinence was biochemically-confirmed at 6 months. A subset of patients (n = 72) completed qualitative exit-interviews. Results Patients were on average, 58 years old, 56% female, and smoked a median of 10 cigarettes/day. There were no significant treatment group × time interactions or main effects of treatment group on stress or distress measures (p’s > 0.05), however there were significant main effects of time suggesting symptom improvements on each measure in both study groups (p’s

Introduction: FL is the most common indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the Western world. FL may cause disease-related symptoms, and patients with high-risk disease usually require systemic therapy. BR is commonly used as first-line therapy for high-risk FL, and the addition of bortezomib to a BR backbone has been studied (Evens A et al. Clin Can Res 2020). Little is known about how these therapeutic options impact patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL). To fill this gap, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were administered to patients enrolled on E2408 to quantify symptom burden and effects of BR versus BVR induction on HRQL. Methods: Patients (n=258) randomized to receive 6 cycles of BR or BVR induction completed PROs assessing neurotoxicity (FACT/GOG-Ntx) at the beginning of each treatment cycle. Additional PROs measuring fatigue (FACT-F), lymphoma-specific concerns (FACT-Lym) and HRQL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General; FACT-G) were completed at baseline, mid-treatment (MT; cycle 3/4) and end of induction (EOI; cycle 6). Paired t-test was used to assess PRO score changes from baseline to MT and EOI within BR or BVR group. Two-sample t-test was used to compare change scores between groups at MT and EOI, respectively. Univariate analyses with a linear model identified patient baseline characteristics and clinical factors (age, sex, stage, performance status, # extra nodal sites, FLIPI, GELF, bone marrow involvement, elevated LDH, palpable splenomegaly, B-symptoms, CRIS) associated with PRO change scores from baseline to EOI, adjusting for treatment group. A multivariate model was built with backward variable selection approach for each of the PROs. Results: As shown in Figure 1, compared with baseline, patients randomized to BVR reported significantly worse FACT/GOG-Ntx scores at cycle 4, which continued to end of induction (FACT/GOG-Ntx change scores -2.91 to -3.73; p < 0.001). Neurotoxicity remained stable for patients treated with BR (Ntx change scores -0.02 to -0.55). FACT-Fatigue scores indicated worse fatigue at MT compared to baseline for patients receiving BVR (-2.7, p Univariate analyses among all patients identified older age and the absence of palpable splenomegaly at baseline as associated with worse FACT-Lym, FACT-Fatigue, and FACT-G change scores, signifying less improvement in lymphoma-related symptoms, fatigue and HRQL from baseline to end of induction (p Conclusions: Despite worse treatment-related symptoms throughout induction, the addition of bortezomib was associated with comparable overall HRQL to those treated with BR. Both treatments were associated with a reduction in lymphoma-related symptoms from baseline to end of induction, likely contributing to stable HRQL throughout treatment despite treatment-related symptoms. Findings also suggest that a subgroup of patients, particularly those who are older, may experience fewer improvements in lymphoma-related symptoms. This underscores the potential need for closer monitoring and clinical management of these patients. Collectively, results are likely to be encouraging for patients experiencing lymphoma-related symptoms, for whom the symptom burden associated with treatment may be worth the trade-off given the potential for improved disease-related symptom control. Disclosures Evens: Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Research To Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mylteni: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Advani:Celgene, Forty Seven, Inc., Genentech/Roche, Janssen Pharmaceutical, Kura, Merck, Millenium, Pharmacyclics, Regeneron, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Cell Medica, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, KitePharma, Kyowa, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda: Consultancy. Ansell:Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding. Winter:Norvartis: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; Ariad/Takeda: Consultancy; CVS/Caremark: Consultancy; Delta Fly Pharma: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Epizyme: Other: DSMB; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: advisory board; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: advisory board. Cella:FACIT.org: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: President; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pled Pharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Clovis: Research Funding; Alexion: Research Funding; Apellis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Kiniksa: Consultancy; IDDI: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; ASAHI KASEI PHARMA CORP.: Consultancy; Oncoquest: Consultancy; Mei Pharma: Consultancy; Ipsen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Evidera: Consultancy; DSI: Consultancy, Research Funding; BlueNote: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; PROMIS Health Org: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other. Kahl:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche Laboratories Inc: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding. Wagner:Celgene Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Connect Multiple Myeloma Registry: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

BackgroundNondaily smoking is an increasingly prevalent smoking pattern that poses substantial health risks. ObjectiveWe tested the feasibility of using a smartphone app with positive psychology exercises to support smoking cessation in nondaily smokers. MethodsIn this prospective, single-group pilot study, nondaily smokers (n=30) used version 1 of the Smiling Instead of Smoking (SiS) app for 3 weeks while undergoing a quit attempt. The app assigned daily happiness exercises, provided smoking cessation tools, and made smoking cessation information available. Participants answered surveys at baseline and 2, 6, 12, and 24 weeks after their chosen quit day and participated in structured user feedback sessions 2 weeks after their chosen quit day. ResultsApp usage during the prescribed 3 weeks of use was high, with an average 84% (25.2/30) of participants using the app on any given day. App use was largely driven by completing happiness exercises (73%, 22/30) of participants per day), which participants continued to complete even after the end of the prescribed period. At the end of prescribed use, 90% (27/30) of participants reported that the app had helped them during their quit attempt, primarily by reminding them to stay on track (83%, 25/30) and boosting their confidence to quit (80%, 24/30) and belief that quitting was worthwhile (80%, 24/30). Happiness exercises were rated more favorably than user-initiated smoking cessation tools, and 80% (24/30) of participants proactively expressed in interviews that they liked them. App functionality to engage social support was not well received. Functionality to deal with risky times was rated useful but was rarely used. Within-person changes from baseline to the end of prescribed use were observed for several theorized mechanisms of behavior change, all in the expected direction: confidence increased (on a 0-100 scale, internal cues: b=16.7, 95% CI 7.2 to 26.3, P=.001; external cues: b=15.8, 95% CI 5.4 to 26.1, P=.004), urge to smoke decreased (on a 1-7 scale, b=−0.8, 95% CI −1.3 to −0.3, P=.002), and perceptions of smoking became less positive (on a 1-5 scale, psychoactive benefits: b=−0.5, 95% CI −0.9 to −0.2, P=.006; pleasure: b=−0.4, 95% CI −0.7 to −0.01, P=.03; on a 0-100 scale, importance of pros of smoking: b=−11.3, 95% CI −18.9 to −3.8, P=.004). Self-reported abstinence rates were 40% (12/30) and 53% (16/30) of participants 2 and 24 weeks post quit, respectively, with 30% (9/30) biochemically validated as abstinent 2 weeks post quit. ConclusionsA smartphone app using happiness exercises to aid smoking cessation was well received by nondaily smokers. Given the high nonadherence and dropout rates for technology-delivered interventions reported in the literature, the high engagement with positive psychology exercises is noteworthy. Observed within-person changes and abstinence rates are promising and warrant further development of this app.

Objective To test the acceptability and effectiveness of a disability prevention intervention, Positive Minds-Strong Bodies (PMSB), offered by paraprofessionals to mostly immigrant elders in four languages. Design Randomized trial of 307 participants, equally randomized into intervention or enhanced usual care. Setting Community-based organizations in Massachusetts, New York, Florida, and Puerto Rico serving minority elders. Data collected at baseline, 2, 6, and 12 months, between May 2015 and March 2019. Participants English-, Spanish-, Mandarin-, or Cantonese-speaking adults, age 60+, not seeking disability prevention services, but eligible per elevated mood symptoms and minor to moderate physical dysfunction. Interventions Ten individual sessions of cognitive behavioral therapy (PM) concurrently offered with 36 group sessions of strengthening exercise training (SB) over 6 months compared to enhanced usual care. Measurements Acceptability defined as satisfaction and attendance to >50% of sessions. Effectiveness determined by changes in mood symptoms (HSCL-25 and GAD-7), functional performance (SPPB), self-reported disability (LLFDI), and disability days (WHODAS 2.0). Results Around 77.6% of intervention participants attended over half of PM Sessions; 53.4% attended over half of SB sessions. Intent-to-treat analyses at 6 months showed significant intervention effects: improved functioning per SPPB and LLFDI, and lowered mood symptoms per HSCL-25. Intent-to-treat analyses at 12 months showed that effects remained significant for LLFDI and HSCL-25, and disability days (per WHODAS 2.0) significantly decreased 6-month after the intervention. Conclusions PMSB offered by paraprofessionals in community-based organizations demonstrates good acceptability and seems to improve functioning, with a compliance-benefit effect showing compliance as an important determinant of the intervention response.

Aims Among people with cancer, dual alcohol and tobacco use increases risk for morbidity and mortality. Most smoking cessation clinical trials with this patient population have excluded individuals with problematic alcohol use. This investigation examined whether problematic alcohol use affects smoking cessation in cancer patients. Methods Mixed-methods secondary analysis of data from the Smokefree Support Study, a randomized-controlled trial examining the efficacy of Intensive (IT; n = 153) vs. Standard Treatment (ST; n = 150) for smoking cessation in newly diagnosed cancer patients. Problematic alcohol use was assessed at enrollment using the Cut-Down-Annoyed-Guilty-Eye-Opener (CAGE), weekly frequency of alcohol use and binge drinking measures. Alcohol use was categorized as: no current alcohol use, moderate and problematic use. The primary outcome was biochemically-confirmed cigarette abstinence at 6-months. A subset of patients (n = 72) completed qualitative exit-interviews. Results Among all participants, biochemically-confirmed cigarette abstinence rates were 25% (n = 32), 28% (n = 27), and 36% (n = 20) for participants reporting no current alcohol use, moderate use, and problematic use, respectively (p = 0.33). In logistic regression analysis, neither problematic alcohol use (AOR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.35–2.67, p = .94) nor the problematic use by study arm interaction (AOR = 2.22, 95% CI = 0.59–8.39, p = .24) were associated with biochemically-confirmed 6-month abstinence. Qualitatively, participants reported that drinking alcohol triggers urges to smoke. Conclusion Newly diagnosed cancer patients reporting problematic alcohol use were not less likely to quit smoking than those without. Additional research is needed to investigate whether problematic alcohol users may benefit from smoking and alcohol behavior change interventions at the time of cancer diagnosis.

Giselle K Perez,1 Dean G Cruess,2 Nicole M Strauss,3 1Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, 2Department of Psychology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, 3Mongan Institute for Health Policy, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) is prevalent among college-aged women. Although HPV vaccines decrease women’s risk for cervical cancer, the vaccination rates remain inadequate. Objective: This study explored the utility of an information–motivation–behavioral skills (IMB) intervention in promoting HPV vaccination knowledge, motivation, and intentions among college-aged women. Methods: In Spring/Fall 2012, 62 participants were randomly assigned to a single-session intervention or attention control and were assessed baseline, post-intervention, and at 1month. Results: The participants demonstrated adequate baseline vaccine knowledge, low HPV/cancer knowledge, and ambivalence about the vaccination. Post-intervention, the IMB arm demonstrated increased HPV/cancer and vaccination knowledge, motivation, and intentions. There were no group differences in vaccination at 1month; however, the odds of wanting to get vaccinated increased sevenfold in the IMB arm. Conclusion: These results provide preliminary support for an IMB-based intervention in increasing vaccination knowledge, motivation, and intentions among at-risk women. Future research examining the efficacy of longer trials with larger, diverse populations is warranted. Keywords: human papillomavirus, HPV, vaccination, cervical cancer, Gardasil, IMB

Background Despite the well-established risks of persistent smoking, 10–30% of cancer patients continue to smoke after diagnosis. Evidence-based tobacco treatment has yet to be integrated into routine oncology care. This paper describes the protocol, manualized treatment, evaluation plan, and overall study design of comparing the effectiveness and cost of two treatments across two major cancer centers. Methods/design A two-arm, two-site randomized controlled comparative effectiveness trial is testing the hypothesis that an Intensive Treatment (IT) intervention is more effective than a Standard Treatment (ST) intervention in helping recently diagnosed cancer patients quit smoking. Both interventions include 4 weekly counseling sessions and FDA-approved smoking cessation medication advice. The IT includes an additional 4 biweekly and 3 monthly booster sessions as well as dispensal of the recommended FDA-approved smoking cessation medication at no cost. The trial is enrolling patients with suspected or newly diagnosed cancer who have smoked a cigarette in the past 30 days. Participants are randomly assigned to receive the ST or IT condition. Tobacco cessation outcomes are assessed at 3 and 6 months. The primary study outcome is 7-day point prevalence biochemically-validated tobacco abstinence. Secondary study outcomes include the incremental cost-effectiveness of the IT vs. ST. Discussion This trial will answer key questions about delivering tobacco treatment interventions to newly diagnosed cancer patients. If found to be efficacious and cost-effective, this treatment will serve as a model to be integrated into oncology care settings nation-wide, as we strive to improve treatment outcomes and quality of life for cancer patients.

Background. Black smokers have demonstrated greater lung cancer disease burden and poorer smoking cessation outcomes compared with whites. Lung cancer screening represents a unique opportunity to promote cessation among smokers; however, little is known about the differential impact of screening on smoking behaviors among black and white smokers. Using data from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), we examined the racial differences in smoking behaviors after screening. Methods. We examined racial differences in smoking behavior and cessation activity among 6,316 white and 497 black (median age, 60 and 59 years, respectively) NLST participants who were current smokers at screening using a follow-up survey on 24-hour and 7-day quit attempts, 6-month continuous abstinence, and the use of smoking cessation programs and aids at 12 months after screening. Using multiple regression analyses, we examined the predictors of 24-hour and 7-day quit attempts and 6-month continuous abstinence. Results. At 12 months after screening, blacks were more likely to report a 24-hour (52.7% vs. 41.2%, p < .0001) or 7-day (33.6% vs. 27.2%, p = .002) quit attempt. However, no significant racial differences were found in 6-month continuous abstinence (5.6% blacks vs. 7.2% whites). In multiple regression, black race was predictive of a higher likelihood of a 24-hour (odds ratio [OR], 1.6, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2–2.0) and 7-day (OR, 1.5, 95% CI, 1.1–1.8) quit attempt; however, race was not associated with 6-month continuous abstinence. Only a positive screening result for lung cancer was significantly predictive of successful 6-month continuous abstinence (OR, 2.3, 95% CI, 1.8–2.9). Conclusion. Although blacks were more likely than whites to have 24-hour and 7-day quit attempts, the rates of 6-month continuous abstinence did not differ. Targeted interventions are needed at the time of lung cancer screening to promote abstinence among all smokers.

IMPORTANCE: Persistent smoking may cause adverse outcomes among patients with cancer. Many cancer centers have not fully implemented evidence-based tobacco treatment into routine care. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of sustained telephone counseling and medication (intensive treatment) compared with shorter-term telephone counseling and medication advice (standard treatment) to assist patients recently diagnosed with cancer to quit smoking. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This unblinded randomized clinical trial was conducted at Massachusetts General Hospital/Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Adults who had smoked 1 cigarette or more within 30 days, spoke English or Spanish, and had recently diagnosed breast, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, gynecological, head and neck, lung, lymphoma, or melanoma cancers were eligible. Enrollment occurred between November 2013 and July 2017; assessments were completed by the end of February 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Participants randomized to the intensive treatment (n = 153) and the standard treatment (n = 150) received 4 weekly telephone counseling sessions and medication advice. The intensive treatment group also received 4 biweekly and 3 monthly telephone counseling sessions and choice of Food and Drug Administration–approved cessation medication (nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, or varenicline). MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was biochemically confirmed 7-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were treatment utilization rates. RESULTS: Among 303 patients who were randomized (mean age, 58.3 years; 170 women [56.1%]), 221 (78.1%) completed the trial. Six-month biochemically confirmed quit rates were 34.5% (n = 51 in the intensive treatment group) vs 21.5% (n = 29 in the standard treatment group) (difference, 13.0% [95% CI, 3.0%-23.3%]; odds ratio, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.13-3.27]; P

e19062 Background: Ethnic/racial minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients remain underrepresented in cancer clinical trials (CCT), challenging the accuracy and generalizability of findings. While oncologists’ recommendations influence trial participation, we know little about their perspectives on recommending CCT to underrepresented patients. Methods: From 9/16-5/19 we conducted a sequential mixed methods study to assess oncologists’ attitudes toward recommending underrepresented patients for CCT. We performed individual interviews with 17 oncologists, developed a survey instrument, and surveyed a randomly selected sample of 98 oncologists (from ASCO, NCORP, MGH; RR = 31.2%). Descriptive statistics summarized attitudes, practices and challenges with trial enrollment of underrepresented patients. Results: Content analysis of interviews (age = 46.9, female = 37.5%, white = 75.0%) revealed overall support for CCT. Indeed, 84.4% of survey respondents (age = 53.3, female = 31.3%, white = 78.6%) considered CCT as central to their professional identity. Yet, 37.5% agreed CCT placed undue burden on oncologists. Oncologists’ concerns around informed consent and perceived lack of clinical/personal equipoise discouraged recommending CCT participation to vulnerable patients. Interviews revealed that nearly all believed that patients with certain vulnerabilities (e.g., literacy, social, financial barriers) had needs that conflicted with CCT demands, increasing the potential for harm. Oncologists were less likely to recommend CCT to patients who do not reliably report side effects (91.2%), demonstrate difficulty comprehending the costs/benefits of CCT (88.7%), lack support (87.6%), live far away (76.3%), or face insurance obstacles (73.2%). Notably, 67.7% affirmed they presented trials with varying enthusiasm based on perceived patient challenges; 32.4% deemed it hard to justify enrolling patients if efficacious standard treatment options exist outside of trials. Oncologists desired navigation support (63.3%) to offset concerns and facilitate trial discussion/enrollment. Conclusions: Findings confirm that oncologists value CCT; however, they experience conflict when considering CCT for patients with pre-existing hardships. Time constraints interfere with oncologists’ ability to adequately address and overcome perceived challenges to participation. Our findings underscore the need for programs that integrate informational support with patient navigation to increase enrollment of underrepresented patients into CCT.

Previous work suggests that, compared to white adults, black adults have lower perceived risk for smoking-related diseases (SRDs), which may influence cessation behavior and health outcomes; however, racial differences in SRD risk perceptions among high-risk patients (i.e., a group that exhibits elevated risk for SRDs) following lung screening remain unknown. This paper thus examined differences in risk perceptions for lung cancer and other SRDs among black and white National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) participants. We administered a 10-item measure of perceived lifetime risk of lung cancer and other SRD (Smoking Risk Perceptions Scale; SRPS) to NLST participants at 1 year following lung screening to (1) establish the internal consistency of the SRPS for both black and white participants, (2) compare smoking-related disease risk perceptions between black and white participants, and (3) identify predictors of risk perceptions for black and white participants using multivariable linear regression models. We determined the SRPS items loaded onto two factors (personal and comparative risks; Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93 and 0.95 for 1743 white and 194 black participants, respectively), thus demonstrating high internal consistency for both black and white adults. Compared to white participants, black adults demonstrated lower SRD risk perceptions (SRPS range = 10–50, mean difference = 2.55, SE = 0.50, p

Background In efforts to inform clinical screening and development of survivorship care services, we sought to characterize patterns of health care needs among cancer survivors by (a) identifying and characterizing subgroups based on self-reported health care needs and (b) assessing sociodemographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors associated with these subgroups. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional self-administered survey among patients presenting for routine follow-up care for early-stage cancer at our academic medical center. Latent class cluster analysis was used to identify clusters of survivors based on survivorship care needs within seven domains. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to assess factors associated with these clusters. Results Among 292 respondents, the highest unmet needs were related to the domains of side effects (53%), self-care (51%), and emotional coping (43%). Our analysis identified four clusters of survivors: (a) low needs (n = 123, 42%), (b) mainly physical needs (n = 46, 16%), (c) mainly psychological needs (n = 57, 20%), and (d) both physical and psychological needs (n = 66, 23%). Compared with cluster 1, those in clusters 2, 3, and 4 were younger (p Conclusion Unmet needs among cancer survivors are prevalent; however, a substantial group of survivors report low or no health care needs. The wide variation in health care needs among cancer survivors suggests a need to screen all patients, followed by tailored interventions in clinical care delivery and research. Implications for Practice The characterization of patients as having few needs, predominantly physical needs, predominantly psychological needs, or substantial needs that are both physical and psychological provides a productive framework for clinical care of cancer survivors and to guide further research in this field. Further research is needed to define the tailored information and services appropriate for each group of patients and to define optimal screening tools to efficiently identify the needs of individuals in oncology practice.

IMPORTANCE: Cancer survivors face ongoing health issues and need access to affordable health care, yet studies examining health care access and affordability in this population are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate health care access and affordability in a national sample of cancer survivors compared with adults without cancer and to evaluate temporal trends during implementation of the Affordable Care Act. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used data from the National Health Interview Survey from 2010 through 2016 to conduct a population-based study of 30 364 participants aged 18 years or older. We grouped participants as cancer survivors (n = 15 182) and those with no reported history of cancer, whom we refer to as control respondents (n = 15 182), matched on age. We excluded individuals reporting a cancer diagnosis prior to age 18 years and those with nonmelanoma skin cancers. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We compared issues with health care access (eg, delayed or forgone care) and affordability (eg, unable to afford medications or health care services) between cancer survivors and control respondents. We also explored trends over time in the proportion of cancer survivors reporting these difficulties. RESULTS: Of the 30 364 participants, 18 356 (57.4%) were women. The mean (SD) age was 63.5 (23.5) years. Cancer survivors were more likely to be insured (14 412 [94.8%] vs 13 978 [92.2%], P

PURPOSE: Survivors of childhood cancer require life-long outpatient healthcare, which may be impacted by health insurance. This study sought to understand survivors’ utilization of outpatient healthcare provider services. METHODS: The study examined cross-sectional survey data using an age-stratified sample from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study of self-reported annual use of outpatient services. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify risk factors associated with utilization of services. RESULTS: 698 survivors were surveyed, median age 36.3 years (range 22.2–62.6), median time from diagnosis 28.8 years (range 23.1–41.7). Almost all (93%) of survivors had at least one outpatient visit during the previous year; 81% of these visits were with a primary care providers (PCP), 54.5% were with specialty care physicians, 30.3% were with nurse practitioner/physician’s assistants (NP/PA), and 14.2% were with survivorship clinic providers. Survivors with severe to life-threatening chronic health conditions had greater odds of utilizing a specialty care physician (OR=5.15, 95% CI 2.89–9.17) or a survivor clinic (OR=2.93, 95% CI 1.18–7.26) than those with no chronic health conditions. Having health insurance increased the likelihood of seeking care from NP/PA (Private, OR=2.76, 95% CI 1.37–5.58; Public, OR=2.09, 95% CI 0.85–5.11), PCP (Private, OR=7.82, 95% CI 3.80–13.10; Public, OR=7.24, 95% CI 2.75–19.05), and specialty care (Private, OR=2.96, 95% CI 1.48–5.94; Public, OR=2.93, 95% CI 1.26–6.84) compared to without insurance. CONCLUSION: Most childhood cancer survivors received outpatient care from PCP, but a minority received care from a survivorship clinic provider. Having health insurance increased the likelihood of outpatient care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Targeted interventions in the primary care setting may improve risk-based, survivor-focused care for this vulnerable population.

6640 Background: Costs of cancer care may impact access to therapy, adherence, and distress among patients. However, the degree to which patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) wish to discuss financial issues when making treatment decisions is unknown. Methods: In a single arm feasibility trial, 40 women with newly diagnosed or progressive MBC completed a 1-page survey regarding goals and priorities for discussion with the oncology team. The survey included 17 potential priorities for discussion in the domains: treatment options, symptom management, emotional concerns, planning for the future, and lifestyle. We evaluated participants’ interest in prioritizing discussion of financial issues and sociodemographic and clinical correlates of this preference. We examined the relationship between desire to discuss financial issues and both distress on the Distress Thermometer (DT) and satisfaction with cancer care using Fisher’s exact test. Results: Among 40 participants, 11 (28%) reported interest in discussing financial issues when making treatment decisions, 29 (72%) were not interested. Average age was 57 (range 31-73), and the majority were white (85%) and college graduates (66%). Only 18% of white patients were interested in addressing cost, while 83% of non-white patients were interested (p < 0.01). Those with a college education were less likely to prioritize financial discussion compared to no college (16% vs. 47%, p = 0.04). Patients interested in discussing cost were more likely to have a household income < $50,000 (50% vs. 22% > $50,000, n.s.) and to have Medicaid (50% vs. 25% other insurance, n.s.). Additionally, patients with higher levels of distress (35% vs. 21% DT < 4, n.s.) and those on novel targeted or biologic therapy (42% vs. 21% other therapy, n.s.) were more likely to prioritize discussion of costs. Desire to discuss cost was not related to satisfaction with care. Conclusions: A substantial minority of patients with MBC, particularly those from less advantaged backgrounds, wish to discuss financial issues at time of treatment decisions. Financial toxicity research should recognize that not all patients desire this discussion and evaluate methods to screen for financial concerns and barriers to care.

11622 Background: Individualized treatment planning is a critical part of quality cancer care, but how best to achieve this for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is unclear. We evaluated the feasibility, acceptability and impact of using a simple and scalable “Individualized Goals of Care Discussion Guide” (IGCDG) to facilitate patient-provider communication at the time of treatment decisions. Methods: We developed the IGCDG based on structured interviews with MBC patients and input from experts in cancer care, decision sciences, psychology and palliative care. We then conducted a single arm feasibility trial among patients with newly diagnosed or progressive MBC. Prior to clinic, patients received the IGCDG, an 8-page MBC informational brochure and 1-page questionnaire regarding treatment preferences, personal goals and priorities for care planning. The completed questionnaire was provided to the oncology team at the patient’s visit. Pre and post assessment included the Distress Thermometer (DT), Patient Satisfaction with Cancer Care Scale and the Control Preferences Scale. Feasibility was defined as: 1) accrual of > 50%, 2) attrition rate < 32%, and 3) < 50% of patients experiencing increased distress following the intervention. Results: Among 60 eligible patients, 42 participated (70% accrual), 40 completed all surveys (2% attrition), and only 7 (18%) reported increased distress. Mean age was 57 (range 31 – 79), 85% were white, 7% black, 5% Hispanic, 66% were college graduates, and 40% reported high baseline distress (DT > 4). Patient priorities for discussion included cancer directed therapy (70%), symptom management (70%), and prognosis/planning ahead (60%). At 2-month follow-up, 53% reported decreased distress compared to baseline. Satisfaction with cancer care was high at baseline and follow-up. Most patients preferred shared decision making (77%), and 79% reported decision roles concordant with preferences. Overall, 72% of participants found the IGCDG helpful, 93% found the questionnaire easy to complete, and 44% felt it improved communication with their doctor (49% unsure). Conclusions: Administration of the Individualized Goals of Care Discussion Guide is feasible and provides patients with MBC an opportunity to define their goals of care and priorities for discussion in clinic. Clinical trial information: NCT03375827.

Mind–body interventions can improve vulnerabilities that underlie smoking behavior. The characteristics of smokers who use mind–body medicine have not been explored, preventing the development of targeted interventions. Patients ( N = 593) presenting to a mind–body medicine clinic completed self-report measures. Patients were 67 percent never smokers, 27 percent former smokers, and 6 percent current smokers. Current smokers were younger; more likely to be single, unemployed, or on disability; and report greater depression symptoms, greater pain, and lower social support ( ps

6505Background: Despite ASCO recommendations that tobacco use be assessed and managed, most cancer patients who smoke do not receive tobacco treatment. Evidence-based tobacco treatment has not yet ...

62 Background: In efforts to inform clinical screening and development of survivorship care services, we sought to characterize patterns of healthcare needs among cancer survivors by 1) identifying and characterizing subgroups of survivors based on self reported health care needs, and 2) assessing socio-demographic, clinical and psychosocial factors associated with these subgroups. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional self administered survey among patients presenting for routine follow-up care for early stage cancer (breast, gynecologic, neuro, gastro-intestinal, genito-urinary, thoracic, head and neck, melanoma, sarcoma and hematologic) at our academic medical center. Latent class cluster analysis was used to identify clusters of survivors based on survivorship care needs within 7 domains (side-effects, lifestyle/self-care, emotional coping, social support, sexual health, complementary services and practical support). Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to assess factors associated with these clusters. Results: Among 292 respondents, the highest unmet needs were related to information regarding side effects (53%), lifestyle/self-care (51%) and emotional coping (43%) domains. Our analysis identified 4 clusters of survivors: 1) low needs (N = 123, 42%), 2) mainly physical needs (N = 46, 16%), 3) mainly psychological needs (N = 57, 20%) and 4) both physical and psychological needs (N = 66, 23%). Compared to cluster 1, those in clusters 2, 3, and 4 were younger (P < 0.03); those in clusters 3 and 4 had higher levels of fear of recurrence, anxiety, depression and insomnia (P < 0.05); and those in clusters 2 and 4 reported higher levels of fatigue (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Unmet needs among cancer survivors are prevalent and must be addressed, however a substantial group of survivors report low or no healthcare needs. The wide variation in healthcare needs among cancer survivors suggests a need for screening all patients, followed by tailored interventions in clinical care delivery and research to improve outcomes.

200 Background: Despite the recognized need for high quality survivorship care, barriers to identifying and addressing patients’ needs still remain. We sought to evaluate cancer survivor care priorities, awareness of available services, and factors associated with care and informational needs. Methods: A needs assessment survey was distributed to patients presenting for routine follow-up care in adult oncology clinics at the MGH Cancer Center between February and August of 2016. The survey assessed sociodemographic characteristics, and preferences for care and communication. Care priorities were selected from a list of options including open ended response. Discussion of supportive care services was assessed by the item “have any of your providers informed you about the types of supportive care services that are available to cancer patients" with response options of “yes,” “no” or “don’t know.” Results: Among 637 total respondents, 339 patients with early stage cancer completed the survey. The majority of participants were between 50-69 years old (54%), white (89%), female (64%), and college educated (80%). Breast (32%) and hematological malignancies (21%) were the most prevalent diagnoses. Commonly endorsed priorities for care included: emotional concerns related to cancer (40%), strategies to increase self-care (33%), and management of physical cancer symptoms (30%). Demographic and clinical factors associated with endorsing emotional concerns as a care priority included female gender, and moderate or greater levels of fatigue, depression, or anxiety (all p< 0.01). Factors associated with endorsing management of physical cancer symptoms as a care priority included younger age, and moderate or greater levels of fatigue or depression (all p≤0.01). Despite these priorities for care, only 41% of patients reported receiving information from providers about available supportive care services. Conclusions: Cancer survivors’ preferences for emotional support and symptom management are strongly associated with self-reported depression and fatigue. Routine screening for these issues and improvement in communication regarding available services should be prioritized in survivorship care.

For individuals with HIV who are current or former injection drug users, depression is a common, distressing condition that can interfere with a critical self-care behavior—adherence to antiretroviral therapy. The present study describes the feasibility and outcome, in a case series approach, of cognitive behavioral therapy to improve adherence and depression (CBT-AD) among individuals with HIV and depression undergoing methadone maintenance treatment for heroin dependence. CBT-AD integrates cognitive behavioral therapy for depression with our intervention for improving adherence to antiretroviral therapy for HIV (Life-Steps; [Safren, S. A., Otto, M. W., Worth, J., Salomon, E., Johnson, W., Mayer, K., et al. (2001). Two strategies to increase adherence to HIV antiretroviral medication: Life-Steps and medication monitoring. Behavioral Research and Therapy, 39, 1151–1162]). Specifically, in CBT-AD, patients first receive a cognitive behavioral intervention focusing on improving skills related to medication adherence. Each of the subsequent CBT modules (activity scheduling, cognitive restructuring, problem-solving training, and relaxation training/diaphragmatic breathing) is designed to address both self-care/adherence behaviors as well as depression. The process and outcome with 4 cases suggest that the treatment was feasible and acceptable and was generally associated with improvements. This case series provides an example of how cognitive behavioral therapists can integrate the treatment of depression with the enhancement of critical self-care behaviors in the context of highly complex, medical and psychiatric comorbidity.

Context Palliative care clinicians (PCCs) are vulnerable to burnout as a result of chronic stress related to working with seriously ill patients. Burnout can lead to absenteeism, ineffective communication, medical errors, and job turnover. Interventions that promote better coping with stress are needed in this population. Objectives This pilot study tested the feasibility of the Relaxation Response Resiliency Program for Palliative Care Clinicians, a program targeted to decrease stress and increase resiliency, in a multidisciplinary cohort of PCCs (N = 16) at a major academic medical center. Methods A physician delivered the intervention over two months in five sessions (12 hours total). Data were collected the week before the program start and two months after completion. The main outcome was feasibility of the program. Changes in perceived stress, positive and negative affect, perspective taking, optimism, satisfaction with life, and self-efficacy were examined using nonparametric statistical tests. Effect size was quantified using Cohen's d. Results The intervention was feasible; all participants attended at least four of the five sessions, and there was no attrition. After the intervention, participants showed reductions in perceived stress and improvements in perspective taking. Conclusion Our findings suggest that a novel team-based resiliency intervention based on elicitation of the relaxation response was feasible and may help promote resiliency and protect against the negative consequences of stress for PCCs.

10053 Background: Fear of cancer recurrence (FoCR) following definitive cancer therapy is often reported by patients, but little is known about who is most likely to be impacted, how FoCR influences emotional distress, and what interventions may mitigate patients’ FoCR. We sought to determine the prevalence of FoCR among cancer survivors and to evaluate potential predictors of FoCR in this population. Methods: As part of a comprehensive supportive care needs assessment, we evaluated the prevalence of FoCR among patients receiving follow-up cancer care at our institution as well as factors associated with FoCR. Elevated FoCR was measured with a single item: “I worry about my cancer coming back” rated on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = “not at all” to 4 = ”very much”); responses of 3 or 4 were considered positive for FoCR. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize patterns of FoCR. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests compared differences in emotional, clinical, and demographic characteristics between participants with and without FoCR, as well as interest in and knowledge of survivorship services. Results: Of 636 patients who completed the survey, 318/636 (50.0%) patients had curable cancer and had either completed cancer therapy or were completing maintenance treatment. On inquiry, 167/318 (53%) reported FoCR. Those with FoCR were more likely to be female (p < 0.002) and under the age of 70 (p < 0.003). They were also more likely to be sad (25% vs. 14%, p < 0.015), anxious (40% vs. 21% p < 0.0005), feel uncertain about the future (30% vs. 14%, p < 0.0005), have problems managing stress (26% vs. 13%, p < 0.003), and were more likely to worry about dying (55% vs. 8%, p < 0.0001) and to fear another cancer (74% vs. 8% p < 0.0001). Education level, cancer type, knowledge of and interest in support services, and survivorship care plan receipt were not associated with FoCR. Conclusions: Patient FoCR is prevalent among more than half of survivors of cancer and is associated with emotional distress that is insufficiently addressed by survivor care planning and supportive services. Clinicians can and should screen for and address this issue. Future research is needed to develop and test interventions, beyond care plans, to address FoCR in both low risk and high risk patient populations.

e21601 Background: Exercise can improve outcomes and quality of life following cancer diagnosis. The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) recommends 150 minutes of moderate aerobic activity for patients with cancer. We sought to evaluate exercise patterns and barriers to exercise among patients presenting for follow-up care. Methods: Patients were recruited from the outpatient cancer clinic and completed a self-administered survey focused on symptoms, lifestyle and needs. Participants reported height, weight, weekly time performing moderate-to-vigorous aerobic activity, time spent strength training and perceived barriers to exercise. Descriptive statistics characterized the sample and patterns of exercise. An independent-samples t-test examined differences in strength training between patients currently on and off treatment; Chi-square examined differences among those meeting or not meeting ACSM activity guidelines. Results: Of 637 patients surveyed, 590 (93%) completed exercise questions (55% female; median age 60-69). The most common cancer diagnoses were breast (26%), hematologic (18%) and gastrointestinal (12%). Over half (57%; n = 352) were overweight (BMI ≥ 25) and 26% (n = 161) were obese (BMI ≥ 30). Patients engaged in moderate-to-vigorous aerobic exercise an average of 110 min/week and in strength training for 30 min/week. 71% did not meet ACSM aerobic exercise guidelines; 62% reported no strength training and 29% reported no exercise. 76% of respondents reported at least one barrier to exercise. Common barriers included other illness (35%), lack of free time (21%), fatigue (8%) and boredom with exercise (8%). Most participants (60%; n = 351) decreased exercise after cancer diagnosis. Participants currently on therapy were significantly less likely to meet ACSM aerobic activity guidelines (p = 0.04) and reported doing less strength training (p < 0.001) than those not on therapy. Over half of participants (53%) expressed interest in receiving more information about exercise and physical activity services. Conclusions: There is potential to improve activity, fitness and cancer outcomes through increasing exercise among patients with cancer. Accessible, engaging exercise interventions are needed.

175 Background: Patients with incurable cancer often experience marked anxiety that is associated with poor quality of life (QOL), high symptom burden, and complications with medical treatment. The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of a mobile app-based cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) intervention to treat anxiety symptoms in patients with incurable cancer. Methods: From 2/15 to 8/16, 145 patients with incurable cancers (e.g., advanced lung, breast, GI/GU, sarcoma, melanoma) who screened positive for at least mild anxiety symptoms (Hospital Anxiety & Depression Scale-Anxiety subscale, HADS-A > 7) were randomized 1:1 at two cancer centers to receive either the CBT mobile app for anxiety or a mobile health education program (control), delivered via tablet computers. The CBT app consisted of 7 modules teaching skills to relax the body, reduce worry, stay present-focused, improve communication, and plan/pace activities, which patients completed over 12 weeks. To assess anxiety, mood, and QOL, we administered the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI), HADS, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General at baseline and 12 weeks. General linear models were used to assess the effect of the intervention on patient outcomes over time. Results: The sample was predominantly female (73.8%) and white (91.7%), with a mean age of 56.45 ( SD= 11.30) years. Both study groups reported significant improvements in anxiety, depression, and QOL from baseline to post-assessment (all p-values < .002), with no differences in the improved outcomes between groups. Secondary analyses revealed interaction effects on anxiety between the intervention and baseline HAM-A scores. Among patients with higher baseline anxiety, those randomized to the CBT app had greater improvements on the HAM-A ( p= .043), CGI ( p= .048), and HADS-A ( p= .001) compared to the health education control group. Conclusions: Patients with incurable cancer who received either a CBT mobile app intervention or mobile health education program reported improvements in anxiety, depression, and QOL. However, the CBT mobile app had better outcomes than health education for patients with higher baseline anxiety. Clinical trial information: NCT02286466.

10051 Background: Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) are asymptomatic clonal precursors to multiple myeloma, a hematological malignancy. Because observation is currently the standard of care, a diagnosis of MGUS or SMM can be associated with stress and worry about progression. We evaluated the efficacy of the evidence-based mind-body intervention, the Stress Management and Resiliency Training: Relaxation Response Resiliency Program (SMART-3RP) in reducing distress and stress reactivity in patients with MGUS and SMM. Methods: In participants diagnosed with intermediate or high risk MGUS or SMM, this randomized, waitlist controlled trial (Oct 2013 – Sep 2016) assessed distress (10-point scale) as the primary outcome and perceived stress (PSS-10), stress reactivity (MOCS-A), and mindfulness (FFMQ) as secondary outcomes and hypothesized mediators of distress reduction. We collected self-report measures at enrollment (T1), 3 months (T2), and 6 months (T3). The immediate treatment arm received the 8-session, 1.5 hour/week SMART-3RP group intervention from T1 to T2 and continued practicing skills from T2 to T3; the waitlist arm received the intervention from T2 to T3. Results: 93 participants (59% women) diagnosed with MGUS (n = 49) or SMM (n = 44) were randomized to immediate treatment (n = 45) or waitlist (n = 48). In an ITT analysis of immediate SMART-3RP vs. waitlist (T1-T2), we found significantly greater improvement in distress (-1.4 vs. -0.3, p = .04) and stress reactivity (0.39 vs. 0.02, p < .001), but not perceived stress (-3.9 vs. -2.2, p = .12) or mindfulness (2.4 vs. -0.1, p = .17). Improvements in stress reactivity were maintained for the immediate treatment group (T2-T3), but only partially for distress. Conclusions: The SMART-3RP, compared to waitlist, reduced distress in participants with intermediate or high-risk MGUS and SMM, with improvements in stress reactivity as a primary mediator of distress reduction. Participants strongly endorsed the intervention’s ability to enhance coping and reduce distress. Clinical trial information: NCT01955395.

e21603 Background: Insomnia is prevalent among cancer survivors. However, screening and treatment is inconsistent across U.S. cancer centers. We sought to identify factors associated with moderate to severe insomnia (MSI) to inform the development of a screening and treatment program for survivors. Methods: As part of a comprehensive supportive care needs assessment, we evaluated the prevalence and correlates of insomnia among patients receiving follow-up cancer care. Patients reported on a 5 point Likert scale (0 = never to 5 = always) how often they have “problems falling or staying asleep”. MSI was defined as those who endorsed “4 = very often” or “5 = always,” and remaining responses were characterized as “No Insomnia” (NI). Descriptive statistics summarized patterns of insomnia and sleep hygiene. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests compared differences in sleep hygiene, fatigue, anxiety, depression, and other clinical and demographic characteristics between patients with and without insomnia. Results: Among 312 respondents, 83 (27%) endorsed MSI. Women were more likely to endorse MSI compared to men (32% vs. 19%, p = 0.02). Age was not associated with MSI. MSI was most common among patients with hematologic malignancy (36%), breast cancer (32%), gynecologic cancer (31%), and melanoma (29%). Regarding sleep hygiene: Most reported frequent exposure to bright light before sleep (89% MSI vs. 85% NI). Patients with MSI, compared to NI, were more likely to report watching the clock (86% vs. 75%, p = 0.04) and an irregular sleep schedule (47% vs. 32%, p = 0.02). Patients with MSI were also less likely to meet exercise guidelines (31% vs. 45% NI, p = 0.03) and more likely to report fatigue (29% vs. 14%, p = 0.004). Further, those with MSI were more likely to report anxiety (40% vs. 8%), fear of recurrence (74% vs. 46%), and financial concerns (35% vs. 15%) (all p < 0.001). 67% of patients with MSI were interested in supportive care to address insomnia. Conclusions: A simple one-item screener identified survivors susceptible to moderate to severe insomnia. Interventions beyond attention to sleep hygiene are needed to improve insomnia and its impact on fatigue and emotional distress. The relationships between insomnia, fitness, anxiety and distress merit further evaluation.

The rapidly expanding number of Hispanics living in USA has increased the need for their inclusion in research on physical and mental health. Current studies that have explored health outcomes among Hispanics have often noted an 'epidemiological paradox', in which there is a discrepancy between their minority status and positive health outcomes when compared with other racial/ethnic groups. Certain socio-cultural variables, in particular the value placed on family, have been largely implicated in these findings. This review will provide a summary of the literature exploring familism within the structure of the Hispanic family and its potential impact on health. We will focus on research exploring the plausible impact that family and familism values may have on the physical health (particularly within the HIV, diabetes, and breast cancer literature) and also on health behaviours of Hispanics, as well as its effect on mental health (particularly related to acculturative stress and caregiver stress). Throughout the review, we highlight some of the potential mechanisms by which familism may impact on the health status of Hispanics. We conclude the review by noting some of the clinical and ethical implications of this research, and by offering suggestions for future work in this area.

Anxiety disorders are the most prevalent class of mental disorders, often characterized by a chronic course and comorbid psychopathology. Reports of anxiety-cortisol relationships are inconsistent in the literature. Salivary alphaamylase (sAA), a biomarker of autonomic nervous system activation, provides an opportunity to examine the stress response more fully. This study recruited a diagnostically heterogeneous outpatient sample attending a specialized anxiety treatment center to explore relationships between trait anxiety and salivary stress biomarkers and tested the influence of symptom chronicity and psychiatric comorbidity on this relationship. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between psychosocial and physiological variables. Forty-four adults completed study procedures. Univariate associations were detected between chronicity and cortisol (r= -0. 348; p= 0. 028) and between comorbidity and sAA(r=0. 381; p= 0. 026). Although the statistical significance of these associations at α=0. 05 was lost when multiple regression was used to control for covariates, the relationship between comorbidity and sAA retained its strength of association (β=0. 341; p=0. 075). Chronicity moderated the anxiety-stress relationship such that greater chronicity significantly strengthened the relationship between trait anxiety and sAA; this interaction accounted for a significant proportion of the observed variance (ΔR2=0. 469; p = 0. 001). This exploratory study supports the feasibility of sAA in anxiety-stress research using diagnostically heterogeneous samples. This work also suggests that the factors of symptom chronicity and psychiatric comorbidity may contribute variance to the anxiety-stress relationship in typically presenting anxiety disorder samples. Further research is needed to replicate the utility of alpha amylase in ecologically valid samples demonstrated here and understand in greater detail how these highly prevalent characteristics of anxiety may influence autonomic activation.

220 Background: We previously demonstrated the efficacy of a brief, in-person cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) program for alleviating anxiety in patients with advanced cancer. The aim of the current study was to adapt this program to an interactive, patient-centered mobile tablet application (CBT app) for self-delivery, ideally to enhance dissemination and patient access to the CBT intervention. Methods: Development of the CBT app proceeded in two phases. First, we enrolled five patients with advanced cancer and anxiety (HADS-Anxiety subscale score ≥ 8) to review a preliminary CBT app prototype and to provide qualitative feedback regarding intervention acceptability and utility. Using content analysis of the recorded data, we identified key themes in patient feedback and refined the CBT app content and design accordingly. Finally, a multidisciplinary team of clinical researchers (n=7) specializing in healthcare technology, psychiatry, and psychology conducted an extensive iterative review process to vet and finalize the CBT app intervention. Results: Patients reported that the CBT app content was comprehensible, easily navigated, and helpful in addressing a breadth of concerns relevant to patients with anxiety and advanced cancer. Specifically, patients reported that case examples, tailored feedback, accessible interactive features, and content summaries were important for engagement with the program. The multidisciplinary study team used patient feedback to adapt the CBT app prototype to a tablet design consisting of six modules that teach skills for practicing relaxation, staying present-focused, coping with fears related to cancer, and pacing activities. To enhance patient engagement, features also included homework assignments, symptom distress tracking, and tailored algorithms and branching logic based on patient responses. Conclusions: Patient interviews confirmed acceptability of the CBT app content. Expert clinician feedback also supported the tablet design for self-administration of the intervention to reduce patient burden. We are currently conducting a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy of the CBT app for improving anxiety symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT02286466.

Understanding how stigmatized identities contribute to increased rates of depression and anxiety is critical to stigma reduction and mental health treatment. There has been little research testing multiple aspects of stigmatized identities simultaneously. In the current study, we collected data from a diverse, urban, adult community sample of people with a concealed stigmatized identity (CSI). We targeted 5 specific CSIs – mental illness, substance abuse, experience of domestic violence, experience of sexual assault, and experience of childhood abuse – that have been shown to put people at risk for increased psychological distress. We collected measures of the anticipation of being devalued by others if the identity became known (anticipated stigma), the level of defining oneself by the stigmatized identity (centrality), the frequency of thinking about the identity (salience), the extent of agreement with negative stereotypes about the identity (internalized stigma), and extent to which other people currently know about the identity (outness). Results showed that greater anticipated stigma, greater identity salience, and lower levels of outness each uniquely and significantly predicted variance in increased psychological distress (a composite of depression and anxiety). In examining communalities and differences across the five identities, we found that mean levels of the stigma variables differed across the identities, with people with substance abuse and mental illness reporting greater anticipated and internalized stigma. However, the prediction pattern of the variables for psychological distress was similar across the substance abuse, mental illness, domestic violence, and childhood abuse identities (but not sexual assault). Understanding which components of stigmatized identities predict distress can lead to more effective treatment for people experiencing psychological distress.