Search

Abstract Background Young adult (YA) cancer survivors are a growing, yet underserved population who often face significant and long-lasting cancer-related physical (e.g., pain, fatigue) and emotional (e.g., psychological distress) symptoms. Post-treatment symptoms can persist, disrupting YA’s abilities to complete goals consistent with their developmental stage (e.g., completing their education, achieving autonomy and independence, building their careers, establishing peer and romantic relationships, building their families). While symptom management has been identified as a significant issue in YA’s transitions to survivorship, the symptom management needs of this population largely go unmet. Methods We developed an eight-session, group-based behavioral intervention that is delivered using videoconferencing to address the unique symptom management needs of YA cancer survivors. The intervention was developed in conjunction with YA survivors, leading to the novel combination of traditional behavioral symptom coping strategies, home-based physical activity, strategies from contemporary cognitive-behavioral approaches (e.g., those derived from acceptance and commitment therapy, strategies to foster self-compassion), concepts from meaning centered psychotherapy, and behavioral strategies to improve communication and health care engagement. Participants receive printed intervention materials and access to a study-specific mobile application, both of which are used throughout the program. Herein, we report on a pilot study that is in progress. Recruitment has been completed. YA cancer survivors were recruited in cohorts of n = 10 or n = 11 (n = 61) and randomized to the intervention or waitlist control arms. All participants completed a baseline assessment and four additional assessments over 1 year, with each involving a battery of self-report measures. Discussion The primary objective is to evaluate intervention feasibility and acceptability. As a secondary objective, we will examine patterns of change in intervention targets (i.e., pain, fatigue, emotional distress, symptom interference). Changes from baseline among intervention targets will be estimated for each patient and compared between arms using unadjusted statistical testing. Unadjusted and adjusted multilevel modeling will be used to estimate the effect of the intervention on changes in intervention targets. Interaction models will be used to compare the trajectory of change over time between arms. We expect that this pilot trial will inform our future approach to identify, recruit, and retain participants and provide preliminary data to support a larger, fully powered randomized controlled trial evaluating the intervention. Trial registration NCT04035447 at clinicaltrials.gov; registered July 29, 2019.

ObjectiveEmerging literature suggests contextual factors are important components of therapeutic encounters and may substantially influence clinical outcomes of a treatment intervention. At present, a single consensus definition of contextual factors, which is universal across all health-related conditions is lacking. The objective of this study was to create a consensus definition of contextual factors to better refine this concept for clinicians and researchers.DesignThe study used a multi-stage virtual Nominal Group Technique (vNGT) to create and rank contextual factor definitions. Nominal group techniques are a form of consensus-based research, and are beneficial for identifying problems, exploring solutions and establishing priorities.SettingInternational.Main outcome measuresThe initial stages of the vNGT resulted in the creation of 14 independent contextual factor definitions. After a prolonged discussion period, the initial definitions were heavily modified, and 12 final definitions were rank ordered by the vNGT participants from first to last.ParticipantsThe 10 international vNGT participants had a variety of clinical backgrounds and research specializations and were all specialists in contextual factors research.ResultsA sixth round was used to identify a final consensus, which reflected the complexity of contextual factors and included three primary domains: (1) an overall definition; (2) qualifiers that serve as examples of the key areas of the definition; and (3) how contextual factors may influence clinical outcomes.ConclusionOur consensus definition of contextual factors seeks to improve the understanding and communication between clinicians and researchers. These are especially important in recognizing their potential role in moderating and/or mediating clinical outcomes.