Search

Simple Summary: Cancer patients frequently encounter significant emotional and psychological challenges that can adversely affect their overall well-being and treatment outcomes. To address these challenges, we developed the Cancer Patient Empowerment Program (CancerPEP), a comprehensive, home-based intervention that incorporates physical exercise, nutritional guidance, and social support. CancerPEP builds on the success of the Prostate Cancer Patient Empowerment Program (PC-PEP), which has demonstrated positive effects on psychological well-being in prostate cancer patients. In this study, we also evaluated whether adding a Heart Rate Variability (HRV) biofeedback device could enhance the effectiveness of CancerPEP. Our findings indicate that while CancerPEP significantly reduced psychological distress and improved emotional well-being across cancer patients—including a breast cancer subgroup—at the end of the intervention (the 6-month point), the addition or lack of an HRV device did not significantly contribute to these improvements for the full sample. These results suggest that CancerPEP, similar to PC-PEP, is a valuable addition to standard cancer care, providing a holistic approach to support patients both mentally and emotionally. However, the inclusion of the HRV device may not be necessary to achieve these benefits. Background/Objectives: Psychological distress is a significant concern among cancer patients, negatively affecting their quality of life and adherence to treatment. The Cancer Patient Empowerment Program (CancerPEP) was developed as a comprehensive, home-based intervention aimed at reducing psychological distress by incorporating physical activity, dietary guidance, and social support. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, accrual and attrition rates, safety, and effectiveness of the CancerPEP intervention, with and without the biofeedback device, on psychological distress from baseline to 6 months, specifically focusing on the effects of group randomization and the difference between pre- and post-intervention results. Methods: This single-site, crossover randomized clinical trial included 104 cancer patients who were randomized to receive the CancerPEP intervention, with or without a Heart Rate Variability (HRV) biofeedback monitor. At 6 months, participants who did not receive the device were allowed to use one until the end of the year, while those who did receive the device were followed up to 12 months. Randomization was stratified by the presence or absence of clinically significant psychological distress and metastatic status. Psychological distress was assessed using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. The primary endpoint was the presence of nonspecific psychological distress, as measured by the K10 scale at 6 months from the trial start, based on group randomization. A secondary exploratory analysis assessed psychological distress at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months for both groups, while controlling for group randomization and prognostic covariates. Prognostic covariates included age; comorbidities; time between diagnosis and randomization; treatment modality; relationship status; and use of prescribed medications for anxiety, depression, or both. An exploratory sub-analysis was conducted for the breast cancer subgroup, based on the sample size available after recruitment. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05508412). Results: The provision of the HRV biofeedback monitor in conjunction with the CancerPEP intervention did not significantly affect the primary outcome in either the full sample or the breast cancer subgroup, indicating that the HRV biofeedback provision was not beneficial in this trial. No self-reported or otherwise discovered adverse events at the 6-month mark were observed. About 10% of participants were lost to follow-up in both the early and late HRV monitor provision groups. Participation in the CancerPEP program led to a significant reduction in psychological distress over time. The odds of psychological distress were significantly higher at the start of the trial than at the end of the intervention (aOR = 2.64, 95% CI: 1.53–4.56) or 6 months after the intervention (aOR = 2.94, 95% CI: 1.62–5.30). Similarly, in the breast cancer subgroup, distress was higher at the trial's start than at 6 months, i.e., after the intervention (aOR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.24–4.08), or at the end of the trial at 12 months (aOR = 2.73, 95% CI: 1.35–5.52). Conclusions: CancerPEP significantly reduces psychological distress in cancer patients, with consistent improvements noted across various cancer types and stages, including benefits specifically for breast cancer patients. These findings build upon the success of the Prostate Cancer Patient Empowerment Program (PC-PEP), indicating that a similar comprehensive intervention can be advantageous for all cancer patients and may be further tailored to address specific needs. With its holistic approach—encompassing physical, dietary, and psychosocial support—CancerPEP shows promise as a vital component of survivorship care. Ongoing 24-month evaluations will yield critical data on its long-term benefits. Additionally, a randomized trial with a control group (usual care without intervention) for breast cancer patients is currently under way and could potentially guide the integration of CancerPEP into standard oncology care to enhance patient outcomes and quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The capacity loss and coulombic efficiency of commercial LiCoO2/graphite Li-ion cells have been examined using high precision coulometry and long-term cycling tests. The experiments show that time, not cycle count, was the dominant contributor to the degradation of LiCoO2/graphite Li-ion cells cycled at low rates and elevated temperatures. The differential voltage versus capacity, dV/dQ vs Q, of the cells was measured for all cycles during the extended cycling and fit using predicted dV/dQ vs Q plots calculated from Li/graphite and Li/LiCoO2 cells made from the same electrodes that were used in the commercial cells. From this analysis it was possible to determine fraction of positive and negative electrode masses that remained active as a function of cycle number and also the portion of capacity loss due to the relative slippage of the positive and negative electrode potential-capacity curves. A rapid impedance rise was observed near the end of the cycling testing. These results provide a model procedure for understanding of the failure of lithium-ion cells subjected to sustained high temperature cycling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fe-C-N oxygen-reduction catalysts were prepared by mechanochemical reaction of FexN (x = 2-4) and graphite under Ar using high-energy ballmilling. The activity of the catalyst toward the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) depends on the ballmilling time and on the FexN precursor content. Heat-treatment up to 600°C does not significantly affect the activity, but the activity strongly decreases as the samples are heat-treated above 800°C in argon. The onset potential of a typical sample ballmilled for 12 h is 0.72 V versus reversible hydrogen electrode. About 20% of the product of oxygen reduction is H2O2 and the other 80% is water. The X-ray diffraction pattern of the ballmilled material shows the formation of Fe7C3 and disordered carbon, which presumably contains nitrogen, because the ball mills are sealed and the nitrogen cannot escape. This work demonstrates that mechanochemical synthesis is a useful technique for the preparation of Fe-C-N ORR catalysts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]