Decisional conflict and its determinants among patients with cancer undergoing immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy or targeted therapy: a cross-sectional study.

Decisional conflict might occur during shared decision-making (SDM) because immunotherapy is a rather novel treatment option for patients with cancer. To explore the prevalence and severity of physical and psychological symptoms and the effort invested in SDM in relation to decisional conflict among patients with cancer undergoing immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy or targeted therapy. This was a cross-sectional survey study. The SURE version of the Decisional Conflict Scale was used to screen cancer patients' decisional conflict status. Demographic or clinical characteristics, physical symptoms and psychological distress; efforts invested in the SDM process were also assessed as potential factors related to decisional conflict. One hundred seventeen patients surveyed, the prevalence of fatigue (79.5%), sleep disturbance (78.6%), poor appetite (67.5%), and pain (58.1%) symptoms were high and the severity was at moderate levels. The prevalence of pruritus (40.2%), rash (34.2%), dry skin (41.9%), and diarrhea (17.1%) symptoms were low and the severity was at mild levels. 65.8% of patients reported uncertainty, with mild to moderate levels. Furthermore, 97.4% of the patients made some effort in SDM, and the effort level was moderate (mean: 5.56 ± 2.02). 64.1% of patients were certain that immunotherapy was the best option. Age, uncertainty, and effort in the SDM process were major factors related to decisional conflict. We observed that older patients (age: ≥ 65) and those with higher uncertainty levels and less effort in SDM reported higher levels of decisional conflict. Future studies should explore older patients' decisional related needs of immunotherapy. Interventions should be designed to reduce the uncertainty experienced by patients with cancer and enhance their understanding of immunotherapy to enable them to take more effort in the SDM process.

Effects of exercise interventions on social and cognitive functioning of men with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Exercise is beneficial for prostate cancer patients' physical functioning; however, effects on social and cognitive functioning are inconsistent. This meta-analysis of exercise interventions for prostate cancer patients had two aims: the primary aim was to evaluate the effects of exercise interventions on social functioning; the secondary aim was to consider additional outcomes of cognitive functioning as well as adverse events. METHODS: Electronic databases (Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, and the Chinese database Airti Library) were searched for relevant papers (1987-2019), which included hand searching. After careful inspection, 10 relevant randomized controlled trials were analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software; pooled means determined social and cognitive functioning. RESULTS: Meta-analysis of summary scores (fixed-effects model) showed an overall beneficial effect of exercise on social functioning (Hedges' g = 0.35, 95% CI [0.193, 0.515], p < 0.001) and cognitive functioning (Hedges' g = 0.35, 95% CI [0.123, 0.575], p < 0.01) in men with prostate cancer when compared to controls. Intervention durations of 12-16 and 24-48 weeks that provided supervised aerobic exercise combined with resistance exercise sessions had a small to medium effect on social functioning compared to controls. One exercise group experienced one serious, but non-fatal, adverse event due to a higher exercise intensity (50-75% VO2max). DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis to examine the effects of exercise interventions on cognitive functioning among prostate cancer patients. We suggest further research be conducted to confirm these findings.