Symptoms and survivorship needs differences between "good sleepers" and "bad sleepers" in survivors of breast and gynecologic cancers.

INTRODUCTION: Although 80% of cancer survivors report symptoms of insomnia, only 28-43% meet DSM-5 criteria for this diagnosis. We sought to characterize the association between patient-reported insomnia symptoms, patient outcomes, and supportive care variables, as well as explore clinically meaningful insomnia thresholds in a sample of women diagnosed with breast and gynecologic cancers. METHODS: From July 2018-March 2019, all breast and gynecologic cancer survivors seen at the Stanford Women's Cancer Center were approached and invited to participate in the study (15% declined). Of those who consented, 273 survivors completed an online survey related to their sleep (ISI), quality of life (FACT-G), distress (PHQ-4), supportive care needs (SCNS-SF34), and symptom severity (MDASI). Survivors who scored <8 on ISI were categorized as "good sleepers," survivors with ISI ≥8 were categorized as "bad sleepers." RESULTS: 126 (46.2%) of survivors were "good sleepers," 147 (53.8%) were "bad sleepers." Good sleepers were older than bad sleepers (p < .05) but did not differ in any other demographic or any medical variables. Using hierarchical linear regression models, we found that good sleep (ISI <8) was associated with higher quality of life, lower psychological distress, increased social support, lower symptom severity, and lower supportive care needs, after accounting for demographic, medical, and treatment variables. The findings were largely replicated with an ISI cut off of 15. CONCLUSIONS: Among women treated for breast and gynecologic cancers, survivors who were good sleepers had better psychosocial outcomes, fewer supportive care needs, and lower symptom severity compared to those who reported insomnia symptoms. Results also indicate that degree of sleep impairment, whether mild or severe, has similarly poor associations with most aspects of patient functioning and symptomatic burden. Further research is needed to determine causality of these findings.

Patterns of social media use and associations with psychosocial outcomes among breast and gynecologic cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: We sought to characterize the use of social media (SM) among breast and gynecologic cancer survivors, as well as associations between patterns of SM use and psychosocial outcomes. METHODS: Two hundred seventy-three breast and gynecologic cancer survivors recruited at the Stanford Women's Cancer Center completed the study. Participants completed questionnaires to measure quality of life (FACT-G), functional social support (Duke-UNC FSSQ), distress (PHQ-4), decision regret (DRS), and SM use. RESULTS: In total, 75.8% of the sample reported using SM. There was no difference in quality of life (QOL), functional social support (FSS), distress, or decision regret between SM users and non-users. SM users indicated using SM for social support (34.3%) and loneliness (24.6%) more than for information-seeking (15.9%), coping (18.8%), or self-disclosure (14%). SM use for coping was associated with lower QOL (p < .001), lower FSS (p < .001), and higher decision regret (p = .029). Use for social support was associated with lower FSS (p = .029). Use for information seeking was associated with lower QOL (p = .012). Use of SM when lonely was associated with lower QOL (p < .001), higher distress (p = .007), lower FSS (p < .001), and higher decision regret (p = .020). CONCLUSIONS: Associations between SM use and psychosocial outcomes are nuanced and dependent on motivation for use. Further research is needed to better characterize SM use and associations with psychosocial outcomes among cancer survivors. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: SM is an important potential avenue for understanding and addressing the psychosocial effects associated with cancer survivorship.

Does circadian rhythm influence gastrointestinal toxicity?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The current review outlines the existing research on the impact of circadian rhythm on gastrointestinal toxicity associated with cancer treatment and explores clinical evidence for utilizing circadian-based approaches in addressing gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, mucositis, and hepatotoxicity. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent evidence highlights circadian control of gastrointestinal physiology of appetite, digestion, nutrient absorption, and cellular proliferation in the digestive system. In addition, animal models support the mechanistic rationale of using chronotherapy (a type of anticancer therapy delivered at specific times with the goal of producing less toxicity and greater treatment response) to minimize gastrointestinal-impact of systemic cancer treatments. In addition, earlier research demonstrates that many chemotherapeutic agents are responsive to circadian timing in animals. On the contrary, clinical trials focused on minimizing gastrointestinal toxicity using chronotherapy have been limited in recent years and have not yielded the efficacy initially hoped for. Instead, researchers focused on understanding circadian rhythm's influence on the gastrointestinal system at a mechanistic level as well as measuring circadian rhythm at an individual level. SUMMARY: Although using circadian timing is a promising target for reducing gastrointestinal toxicity, recent evidence suggests that more research is needed to understand circadian rhythm before circadian-based interventions can be developed that will result in lessening of gastrointestinal toxicity.