Cancer Survivors, Chemotherapy-induced Peripheral Neuropathy
Conditions
Keywords
CIPN, cancer survivors, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, eHealth, online, PROFILES registry
Brief summary
Rationale: An average of 30% of adult cancer survivors suffers from chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) ≥ 6 months after completion of chemotherapy, and their quality of life (QoL) is strongly affected due to these symptoms. Treatment options are limited. Objective: The goal of this study is to examine the effectiveness of an online psychological intervention based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) in a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) and compared to a treatment-as-usual control condition (TAU). We aim to improve pain interference in cancer survivors with chronic painful CIPN (present for at least 3 months) in the curative disease phase who were treated with chemotherapy treatment at least 6 months ago (irrespective of disease site). Study design: It concerns a test of effectiveness of the ACT intervention in an RCT on quality of life. In total, 146 participants will be randomly allocated to one of two groups: the online ACT intervention with therapist email guidance or a control condition that receives treatment-as-usual. Patients in the control condition can follow the online ACT intervention directly after the 3 month-follow up measurement. Self-reported questionnaires will be conducted at baseline, after the intervention, and at 3- and 6-month follow-up. Additionally, interviews will be executed with a subgroup of interested patients afterwards, to explore intervention effects more in-depth. Participants will be sampled via various patient organizations, oncologists, and advertisements distributed via the PROFILES-registry that contains ongoing research projects on CIPN. Data will be collected online via the PROFILES-registry. Study population: The population consists of adult cancer survivors in the curative disease phase suffering from painful CIPN for at least 3 months and who received chemotherapy treatment 6 or more months ago. Intervention: An online ACT intervention was developed in the first phase of the QLIPP-CIPN study. In this study phase insights into daily limitations and quality of life of the patient population were gained, which served as the basis of the patient-centered development of the online ACT intervention following the CeHRes roadmap for participatory eHealth design. The intervention includes an 8-week self-management course containing 6 modules regarding psycho-education and ACT- processes. By means of text and exercises people learn to carry out value-oriented goals in daily life with pain. To do this, they learn new ways of coping with pain, including reducing pain avoidance and increasing pain acceptance. Additionally, participants will receive email guidance. Main study parameters/endpoint: Pain interference in daily life using subscale Interference of the Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI). This scale focuses on a psychosocial aspect of chronic pain, specifically the interference with functioning in, for example, work, homework chores, recreational and social activities due to pain. Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: Participation is not expected to have any risks. Participants can quit the study at any moment and will not be excluded based on medication use or other current treatment for CIPN. If participants regress during the intervention and need new chemotherapy treatment, they can choose if they will continue or not. Participants do need to invest time to follow the intervention, which takes around 2 hours per week. Furthermore, it might be confronting to work on pain acceptance for participants. Benefits of participation are foremost a possible improvement in pain interference and reductions in pain and CIPN symptoms.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALOnline intervention
The first module includes psychoeducation on neuropathic pain and CIPN (Table 1). Participants acquaintance themselves with intervention goals and mindfulness exercises central to ACT. In subsequent modules, participants learn about the aversive effects of pain avoidance, gain insight into their personal values, and work on pain acceptance. Participants exercise to recognize unhelpful thoughts about their pain and learn the difference between the subjective (judging) and objective self, and think about concrete actions to prevent relapse. The intervention primarily consists of text and experiential exercises, complemented with illustrations, metaphors and audio (mp3) files. Additional functionalities may be an outline of experiences by other CIPN patients and/or the ability to keep a diary. Participants in the experimental condition will receive therapist guidance.
Sponsors
Dutch Cancer Society
Comprehensive Cancer Centre The Netherlands
Daniëlle van de Graaf
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
1. age of 18 years or older, 2. identified by a clinician or self as having painful sensations (i.e., aching, burning, ''pins-and-needles'', shock-like, painful tingling, numbness, cramps) bilaterally in the feet/legs and/or hands/arms for at least 3 months. Furthermore, 3. score a 3 or higher on an 11-point pain intensity scale (Numeric Rating Scale), 4. the pain was not present prior to receiving chemotherapy, 5. chemotherapy ended at least 6 months ago.
Exclusion criteria
1. enrollment in psychological treatment related to cancer, pain, or psychiatry upon entry, 2. new chemotherapy scheduled during study participation, 3. no access to the Internet/no email address, 4. not enough time to follow the intervention (2 hours per week), 5. problems with the Dutch language.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Pain interference | T0b (0 months) | Multidimensional Pain Inventory - Dutch Language Version (MPI-DLV). Subscale Interference. Minimum = 0, maximum = 60. Higher score means worse outcome. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Cancer related quality of life | T0b (0 months) | European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires Core-30 item (EORTC QLQ-C30). Minimum = 30, maximum = 126. Higher score means better outcome. |
| CIPN symptom severity | T0a (0 months) | European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-CIPN20 (EORTC QLQ-CIPN20). Minimum = 0, maximum = 60. Higher score means worse outcome. |
| Pain intensity | T0a (0 months) | Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11). Minimum = 0, maximum = 20. Higher score means worse outcome. |
| Pain catastrophizing | T0b (0 months) | Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). Minimum = 0, maximum = 65. Higher score means worse outcome. |
| Psychological distress | T0b (0 months) | Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Minimum = 0, maximum = 56. Higher score means worse outcome. |
| Mindfulness | T0b (0 months) | Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). Minimum = 0, maximum = 56. Higher score means better outcome. |
| Values-based living | T0b (0 months) | Engaged Living Scale (ELS). Minimum = 0, maximum = 80. Higher score means better outcome. |
| Intervention evaluation (Based on: Trompetter et al. (2015)). | T3 (2 months) (ACT) | Questions: * During the past few weeks, how many hours did you spend on average per week working on the online course? * On average, how many days per week did you do mindfulness exercises during the past few weeks? * On the days you practiced mindfulness: On average, how many minutes did you spend practicing? * How do you rate the quality of the online training you received? * Did you receive the kind of help you were hoping to receive? * To what extent did the online training meet your needs? * Suppose one of your acquaintances needed the same help, would you recommend the online training? * How satisfied are you with the amount of help you received? * Did the online training help you cope better with your problems? * Overall, how satisfied are you with the online training you received? * Would you do the online training again if you needed to? * What grade would you give the online training? |
| Adherence | T5 | Adherence will be based on technical data obtained from Karify's online environment. The following information will be used for this purpose. * Sent messages: the moment when a message is sent to the supervisor. * Given feedback: the moment when feedback is given on a specific assignment. * Significant moment: first\_viewed: the moment when an assignment is viewed for the first time. * Significant moment: finished: the moment when an assignment is handed in for the first time. This will possibly be combined with the number of hours spent on intervention (self-reported), as described under 'intervention evaluation'. |
| Psychological flexibility | T0a (0 months) | Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale (PIPS). Minimum = 0, maximum = 84. Higher score means worse outcome (higher score means more inflexibility). |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Interviews | T3 (2 months) | Qualitative data on intervention effects and satisfaction will be collected by means of interviews with some participants after completion of the intervention |
Countries
Netherlands
Outcome results
None listed