Interventions for insomnia in cancer patients and survivors-a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Considering the persistent nature and higher prevalence of insomnia in cancer patients and survivors compared with the general population, there is a need for effective management strategies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively evaluate the available evidence for the efficacy of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for insomnia in adult cancer patients and survivors. METHODS: Following the PRISMA guidelines, we analyzed data from 61 randomized controlled trials involving 6528 participants. Interventions included pharmacological, physical, and psychological treatments, with a focus on insomnia severity and secondary sleep and non-sleep outcomes. Frequentist and Bayesian analytical strategies were employed for data synthesis and interpretation. RESULTS: Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) emerged as the most efficacious intervention for reducing insomnia severity in cancer survivors and further demonstrated significant improvements in fatigue, depressive symptoms, and anxiety. CBT-I showed a large postintervention effect (g = 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.57 to 1.15) and a medium effect at follow-up (g = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.18 to 0.92). Other interventions such as bright white light therapy, sleep medication, melatonin, exercise, mind-body therapies, and mindfulness-based therapies showed benefits, but the evidence for their efficacy was less convincing compared with CBT-I. Brief Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia showed promise as a less burdensome alternative for patients in active cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: CBT-I is supported as a first-line treatment for insomnia in cancer survivors, with significant benefits observed across sleep and non-sleep outcomes. The findings also highlight the potential of less intensive alternatives. The research contributes valuable insights for clinical practice and underscores the need for further exploration into the complexities of sleep disturbances in cancer patients and survivors.

Comparing the efficacy of mindfulness-based therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy for depression in head-to-head randomized controlled trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis of equivalence.

BACKGROUND: While Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is recommended as first-line treatment for depression, a significant minority do not show an adequate treatment response. Despite evidence for the efficacy of Mindfulness-Based Therapies (MBT) both in treating current depression and preventing relapse, it remains unknown whether MBT and CBT are equivalent in the treatment of current depression. METHODS: Five databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) directly comparing MBT with CBT and including depression as primary or secondary outcome. RESULTS: When pooling the results of 30 independent RCTs with a total of 2750 participants, MBT and CBT were statistically significantly equivalent at both post-intervention (Hedges's g = -0.009; p < .001) and follow-up (g = -0.033; p = .001). Supplementary Bayesian analyses provided further support for the alternative hypothesis of no difference between MBT and CBT. When exploring possible sources of heterogeneity, the differences at follow-up were smaller between CBT and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) than between CBT and mindfulness-based stress-reduction (MBSR) (Slope = 0.37;p = .022). CONCLUSION: The currently available evidence suggests that that MBT and CBT are equally efficacious in treating current adult depression. It remains unclear whether the similar effects of the two intervention types are due to different mechanisms or common factors.

Mediators of acceptance and mindfulness-based therapies for anxiety and depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Acceptance and mindfulness-based therapies have shown efficacy in the treatment of anxiety and depression. Arguably, acceptance and mindfulness-based therapies target core processes in anxiety and depression by increasing mindful attention, decentering, and acceptance. The present study identified randomized controlled trials of acceptance and mindfulness-based therapies for anxiety and depression. Specifically, we aimed to synthesize the indirect effect of the three putative mediators (i.e., mindful attention, decentering, acceptance) on anxiety and depression. Electronic searches yielded 4989 unique records, which were screened for eligibility by two independent raters, resulting in the identification of 33 eligible studies (30 independent trials). The overall pooled mediating effect of mindful attention, decentering, and acceptance was small to medium (r = 0.145, p < .001). Type of mediation analysis emerged as the only statistically significant moderator. Specifically, studies using correlation-based mediation approaches showed statistically significant mediating effects, while studies using causal time-lag analyses did not yield statistically significant mediating effects. Mediator specificity could not be established. In conclusion, putative mediators of acceptance and mindfulness-based therapies mediated treatment effects on anxiety and depression. Limitations in study number, designs, and statistical approaches employed restrict conclusions regarding specificity and causality.

Internet-delivered Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for anxiety and depression in cancer survivors: Predictors of treatment response.

BACKGROUND: The present study investigates possible predictors of treatment response in an Internet-delivered Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (iMBCT) intervention with therapist support. This iMBCT program, a fully online delivered intervention with asynchronous therapist support, has previously been shown to be efficacious in reducing symptoms of anxiety and depression in women treated for breast cancer and men treated for prostate cancer. METHODS: Eighty-two breast- and prostate cancer survivors experiencing psychological distress received 8 weeks of therapist-guided iMBCT. Primary outcomes were improvement in anxiety and depression scores from baseline to post-treatment and from baseline to six-months follow-up. Clinical predictors included levels of depression and anxiety at the time of screening and at baseline, as well as time since diagnosis. Demographic predictors included age and educational level. Therapy-related predictors included working alliance, self-compassion, and five facets of mindfulness. Mixed Linear Models were employed to test the prediction effects over time. RESULTS: Higher levels of baseline depression were associated with increased treatment response in anxiety at post-treatment, and lower levels of self-compassion were associated with increased treatment response in depression at post-treatment. None of the proposed predictors significantly predicted treatment response at six-months follow-up. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that iMBCT can be provided for cancer survivors regardless of their age, educational level, and time since diagnosis (up to five years) and that therapeutic alliance is not crucial for treatment response. We did not identify characteristics predicting treatment response, although many factors were tested. Still, other characteristics may be predictors, and given the relatively small sample size and a large number of statistical tests, the results should be interpreted with caution.

Internet-delivered mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for anxiety and depression in cancer survivors: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Internet-delivered interventions may alleviate distress in cancer survivors with limited access to psychological face-to-face treatment. In collaboration with a group of cancer survivors, we developed and tested the efficacy of a therapist-assisted internet-delivered mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (iMBCT) program for anxiety and depression in cancer survivors. METHODS: A total of 1282 cancer survivors were screened for anxiety and depression during their routine oncology follow-up; eligible breast (n = 137) and prostate cancer (n = 13) survivors were randomized to iMBCT or care-as-usual (CAU) wait-list. Primary outcomes of anxiety and depression were assessed at baseline, 5 weeks, 10 weeks (post intervention), and 6 months. RESULTS: Significant effects were found for both anxiety (Cohen's d = 0.45; P = .017) and depressive symptoms (d = 0.42; P = .024) post intervention. The effects were maintained at follow-up for anxiety (d = 0.40; P = .029), but not for depressive symptoms (d = 0.28; P = .131). CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary findings suggest iMBCT to be a helpful intervention for cancer survivors suffering from symptoms of anxiety. Further studies on the efficacy for symptoms of depression are needed.

Patient involvement in the development of a psychosocial cancer rehabilitation intervention: evaluation of a shared working group with patients and researchers.

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY: The aim of this paper is to present our experiences from a shared working group (SWG) with patient representatives and researchers. The SWG collaborated on developing a psychosocial cancer rehabilitation intervention for women treated for breast cancer and men treated for prostate cancer and on the planning of an effect study of this intervention.The SWG included five patient representatives (three women treated for breast cancer and two men treated for prostate cancer), four researchers and a research assistant. The SWG met four times during the year where the intervention was developed. Data material for the present evaluation study comprises meeting documents, transcriptions of interviews with two patient representatives and three researchers from the SWG, and the primary investigator's field notes.The collaboration between patient representatives and researchers informed both the intervention and the research planning and was rewarding for the involved participants. The well-structured organization of the collaboration had a positive impact on the outcome. In addition, clear goals and clarification of expectations were important. Challenges were encountered in keeping continuity between meetings and carrying out homework as intended. It was crucial for the collaboration that patient representatives had specific knowledge, interest and motivation for the project.Involving patient representatives in the research process heightened the relevancy of the research and the quality of its contents. The SWG gave patient representatives and researchers a better mutual understanding. Overall, the conclusion is that the benefits obtained by involving patient representatives exceeds the additional costs this involves. ABSTRACT: Background The aim of the paper is to present experiences of researchers collaborating with patients in a shared working group comprising patient representatives and researchers. Experiences are deduced from the evaluation of the work in the working group, which collaborated on developing a psychosocial cancer rehabilitation intervention for women treated for breast cancer and men treated for prostate cancer and the planning of a randomized controlled trial that investigates the effect of this intervention. Methods Five patient representatives (three women treated for breast cancer and two men treated for prostate cancer), four researchers and a research assistant participated in the shared working group. The shared working group met four times during the year the intervention was developed. Data material for the present evaluation study was collected from meeting documents, transcriptions of interviews with two patient representatives and three researchers from the shared working group, and the primary investigator's field notes. The data analysis was guided by Sandelowski's qualitative description strategy. Results The collaboration between patient representatives and researchers informed the intervention and the research planning and was rewarding for the involved participants. The well-structured organization of the collaboration had a positive impact on the outcome. Also, clear goals and clarification of expectations were important. Challenges were encountered in ensuring continuity between meetings and carrying out homework as intended. It was considered crucial for the collaboration to recruit patient representatives with specific knowledge, interest and motivation for the project. The direct costs related to the shared working group, including meals, transportation and salary for the research assistant, were small. However, the indirect costs in terms of time spent on planning patient-involving elements of, organizing meetings and evaluation were substantial and demanded a significant amount of extra work for the primary investigator. Conclusion Involving patients in the research process heightened the relevancy of the research and the quality of the research contents. The shared working group influenced both patient representatives and researchers and gave them a better mutual understanding. Overall, the conclusion is that the benefits obtained by involving patients exceed the additional costs related to patient involvement.