Search

Background: With rising interest in complementary approaches to symptom management, awareness of real-world practice patterns in the incorporation of integrative oncology (IO) into cancer care is limited. Therefore, we examined the reasons for referral, symptom burdens, and clinical outcomes for cancer patients who underwent initial IO consultations. Methods: The records of adult patients with cancer who underwent initial outpatient IO consultations at our cancer center for a representative 10-day period at the start of each month for 12 months starting January 1, 2017, were reviewed retrospectively. Patient demographic and medical characteristics and outpatient IO consultation details, including patient-reported outcome measures of symptom burden, were extracted. Descriptive summary statistics and logistic regression were used to analyze the data. Results: Among the 473 study patients, 71% were women, breast cancer (42%) was the most common cancer type, and 31% had metastatic cancer. Referring clinicians listed an integrative approach (57%) as the most common reason for referral, followed by diet (26%), pain (19%), discussion of herbs and supplements (18%), and stress (18%). In comparison, patients listed their primary concerns as diet (16%), pain (15%), and an integrative approach to overall health (11%). After the IO consultations, the highest likelihood of subsequent recommendations were acupuncture for hot flashes (odds ratio [OR], P = .002) or peripheral neuropathy (OR = 6.59, P

Background: We explored the use of a novel smart phone-based application (APP) for delivery and monitoring of meditation to treat mood symptoms experienced by cancer patients Methods: We assessed the feasibility of using a meditation delivery and tracking APP over 2-weeks and its impact on cancer patients’ self-reported anxiety and depression. Outpatients reporting depression and/or anxiety were recruited and randomized to the APP or waitlist control group. Assessments included an expectancy scale, exit survey, mood rating before and after each meditation, and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS-FS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) at baseline and after 2-weeks. The primary aim was to assess feasibility; secondary aims included satisfaction with the APP, association between meditation frequency and length with self-reported symptoms, and change in symptom measures (symptoms, anxiety, depression, and sleep). Results: Our study included 35 participants (17 meditation group; 18 controls) who were primarily female (94%) with breast cancer (60%). The 61% enrollment rate and 71% adherence rate met pre-specified feasibility criteria. Most meditation group participants described the APP as “Useful” to “Very Useful” and would “Probably” or “Definitely” recommend its use. Mixed model analysis revealed a statistically significant association between meditation length (5, 10, or 15 minutes) and change in anxiety, with 15-minute sessions associated with greater reductions in anxiety. In the exit survey, more meditation group vs. control group participants reported improved focus, mood, and sleep. Study groups differed significantly by ESAS fatigue score change; the meditation group decreased a median of 1.5 pts (IQR 2.5) and the control group increased a median of 0.5 points (IQR 2). The meditation group, but not the control group, experienced statistically significant improvement in ESAS fatigue, depression, anxiety, appetite, and physical, psychological, and global distress. Change in PSQI and HADS anxiety and depression scores did not reveal any statistically significant between-group differences. Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of a meditation APP for cancer patients. Meditation APP users reported improvement in several measures of symptom distress. Future studies should explore ways to enhance the APP’s usability and clinical benefit.

Background: There is increasing interest in complementary approaches such as Tai Chi (TC) and Qi Gong (QG) in oncology settings. We explored the effects of TC/QG delivered in group classes at a comprehensive cancer center. Methods: Patients and caregivers who participated in TC or QG completed assessments before and after an in-person group class. Assessments included questions about expectancy/satisfaction and common cancer symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale [ESAS]). ESAS distress subscales analyzed included global (GDS), physical (PHS), and psychosocial (PSS). Results: Three hundred four participants (184 patients, 120 caregivers) were included in the analysis. At baseline, caregivers had a greater expectancy for change in energy level as a result of class participation compared with patients (22.9% vs 9.9%). No significant difference was observed between baseline patient and caregiver PSS. Clinically significant improvement in well-being was observed among patients in TC classes (1.0) and caregivers in QG classes (1.2). For fatigue, patients (1.4) and caregivers (1.0) participating in QG experienced clinically significant improvement. Both TC and QG classes were associated with clinically significant improvements (ESAS GDS decrease ≥3) in global distress for patients (TC = 4.52, SD= 7.6; QG = 6.05, SD = 7.9) and caregivers (TC = 3.73, SD = 6.3; QG = 4.02, SD = 7.8). Eighty-nine percent of participants responded that their expectations were met. Conclusions: Patients and caregivers participating in TC or QG group classes were satisfied overall and experienced significant improvement in global distress. Additional research is warranted to explore the integration of TC and QG in the delivery of supportive cancer care.

Background: Acupuncture intervention in actual practice is rarely reported and may be different from that applied in acupuncture research. Objectives: To review acupuncture practice in an integrative medicine clinic and characterize the association between targeted symptoms, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) diagnosis, and acupoint selection. Methods: We reviewed outpatient acupuncture records from March 2016 to April 2018. Statistical analyses were applied to characterize referral symptoms and associated TCM diagnosis as well as acupoint selection. Results: The final analysis included 5393 acupuncture records (1264 patients). Twelve TCM diagnosis components were identified in the referral symptoms of pain, neuropathy, xerostomia, and hot flashes. Pain was associated with 78 different TCM diagnoses (combinations of TCM diagnosis components). Total of 217 different acupoints were used in the acupuncture treatments (1739) for neuropathy. The acupoint yintang was used in 73.8% of the visits for neuropathy, yet only in 26.5% ( P < .001) of the treatments when patients had a TCM diagnosis of qi deficiency, qi stagnation, and blood stagnation. Similarly, both consistencies and variations were seen in acupoint selection with each targeted symptom and its associated TCM diagnoses. Conclusions: TCM diagnosis was not homogeneous among acupuncture treatments for a single referral symptom. In contrast to most of the research on acupuncture for symptom control, there were considerable variations in acupoint selection among treatments for the same symptom in a clinical setting. Future research is needed to examine the clinical relevance of a fixed intervention structure in acupuncture research and the value of individualized acupuncture treatment.

Introduction: There is limited research regarding the benefits of mind-body practices such as meditation in hospitalized patients with an active diagnosis of any cancer type. Methods: We conducted a prospective, randomized, clinical trial (NCT03445572) comparing 2 meditative practices—Isha Kriya (IK) and meditative slow breathing (MSB)—versus wait-list controls in hospitalized cancer patients. Our aim was to determine the feasibility of meditation practice in cancer inpatients. Feasibility was defined as recruitment of more than 50% of the eligible patients approached and at least 60% of the patients having meditated at least 4 days by day 7. Acceptability was assessed on day 7 as a positive response on at least 2 questions on the modified Global Symptom Evaluation (GSE) scale. Results: Forty patients (39% of the eligible patients approached) consented to participate in the study and were randomly assigned to the MSB (n = 13), IK (n = 14), or wait-list (n = 13) groups. Of the 27 patients assigned to receive MSB and IK meditations, day 7 data were available for 18 patients. Fifteen of the 18 patients meditated at least once in the first 7 days, and most (12/15) responded positively on the GSE. Conclusion: Both IK and MSB meditations were acceptable among the hospitalized cancer patients. Feasibility for enrollment and practice was likely not achieved due to limited uninterrupted time for daily meditation, high levels of morbidity in some participants, and limited research staff support. Shorter term outcomes should be explored in future meditation studies involving hospitalized cancer patients.

Background: Acupuncture is a recognized integrative modality for managing hot flashes. However, data regarding predictors for response to acupuncture in cancer patients experiencing hot flashes are limited. We explored associations between patient characteristics, including traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) diagnosis, and treatment response among cancer patients who received acupuncture for management of hot flashes. Methods: We reviewed acupuncture records of cancer outpatients with the primary reason for referral listed as hot flashes who were treated from March 2016 to April 2018. Treatment response was assessed using the hot flashes score within a modified Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (0-10 scale) administered immediately before and after each acupuncture treatment. Correlations between TCM diagnosis, individual patient characteristics, and treatment response were analyzed. Results: The final analysis included 558 acupuncture records (151 patients). The majority of patients were female (90%), and 66% had breast cancer. The median treatment response was a 25% reduction in the hot flashes score. The most frequent TCM diagnosis was qi stagnation (80%) followed by blood stagnation (57%). Older age ( P = .018), patient self-reported anxiety level ( P = .056), and presence of damp accumulation in TCM diagnosis ( P = .047) were correlated with greater hot flashes score reduction. Conclusions: TCM diagnosis and other patient characteristics were predictors of treatment response to acupuncture for hot flashes in cancer patients. Future research is needed to further explore predictors that could help tailor acupuncture treatments for these patients.

Background . Exercise - contributes to improved treatment-related outcomes. We reviewed characteristics of cancer patients referred for physical therapist–led exercise counseling at a comprehensive cancer center and its effects on self-reported symptoms and quality of life. Methods. Patients presenting for outpatient exercise counseling from February 2016 to May 2017 completed the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS; 0-10 scale, 10 most severe) pre-encounter/post-encounter and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS10) global health assessment pre-encounter. Counseling included assessment and education. ESAS individual items and subscales of physical distress (PHS), psychological distress, and global distress (GDS) were analyzed. We used paired t -tests to compare (1) ESAS symptoms pre-encounter/post-encounter and (2) ESAS and PROMIS10 scores at baseline (pre-encounter) and first follow-up. Results. Of 350 participants, most were female (77.7%), Caucasian (66.3%), and had breast cancer (43%). Baseline (pre-encounter) symptom scores (frequency; mean) included poor sleep (68.2%; 3.5), poor well-being (67.4%; 3.2), and fatigue (64.7%; 3.1). Comparing pre-encounter/postencounter ESAS outcomes, we observed statistically and clinically significant reduction in GDS (−3.32; SD = 6.52; P < .001). On follow-up, statistically and clinically significant improvements were observed for fatigue (−1.22; P = .01), GDS (−4.81; P = .01), PHS (−3.1; P = .03) and PROMIS10 global health, mental health, and physical health scores (all P