Background Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is among the top unmet concerns reported by breast cancer survivors. Despite the sizable literature on FCR, few theoretical models have been empirically tested. One of the most cited is the FCR model. Aim This study seeks to understand the nature of women's cognitive and emotional issues from FCR using specific guidance from the model by Lee‐Jones and to provide suggestions for modifications to the model based on empirical results from the reported experiences of women living with breast cancer. Methods and results A qualitative descriptive study using semi‐structured interviews was conducted at an urban hospital. Recruited by convenience sampling, 12 breast cancer survivors concerned with FCR and who had recently completed active treatment participated in the study. Seven thematic categories emerged from the women's descriptions of their cognitive and emotional experiences with FCR: (a) FCR is always there; (b) beliefs about risk of recurrence; (c) beliefs about eradication of cancer; (d) preferences not to seek information about recurrence; (e) derailment of normal life; (f) worries related to recurrence; and (g) need for support. Adjustments to the model by Lee‐Jones et al1 specifically to women living with breast cancer include the addition of new variables—the fear is always present, a preference not to seek information, and the need for support beyond treatment—and the merging of two variables, anxiety and worry, as participants viewed these concepts as interchangeable and experienced in similar ways. Lastly, participants did not report any remorse related to not opting for more aggressive treatments. Conclusion The refinement of a more comprehensive FCR theoretical model, such as through the modifications derived from this study, provides a deeper understanding of breast cancer survivors' experiences with FCR and can more effectively guide health care professionals to develop appropriately tailored interventions aimed at decreasing FCR levels.
Objective: Fear of Cancer Recurrence (FCR), Health Anxiety (HA), worry, and uncertainty in illness are psychological concerns commonly faced by cancer patients. In survivorship research, these similar, yet different constructs are frequently used interchangeably and multiple instruments are used in to measure them. The lack of clear and consistent conceptualization and measurement can lead to diverse or contradictory interpretations. The purpose of this scoping review was to review, compare, and analyze the current conceptualization and measurements used for FCR, HA, worry, and uncertainty in the breast cancer survivorship literature to improve research and practice.Inclusion Criteria: We considered quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies of breast cancer survivors that examined FCR, HA, worry, or uncertainty in illness as a main topic and included a definition or assessment of the constructs.Methods and Analysis: The six-staged framework was used to guide the scoping review process. Searches of PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases were conducted. The principle-based qualitative analysis and simultaneous content analysis procedures were employed to synthesize and map the findings.Findings: After duplicate removal, the search revealed 3,299 articles, of which 82 studies met the inclusion criteria. Several critical attributes overlapped the four constructs, for example, all were triggered by internal somatic and external cues. However, several unique attributes were found (e.g., a sense of loss of security in the body is observed only among survivors experiencing FCR). Overall, findings showed that FCR and uncertainty in illness are more likely to be triggered by cancer-specific factors, while worry and HA have more trait-like in terms of characteristics, theoretical features, and correlates. We found that the measures used to assess each construct were on par with their intended constructs. Eighteen approaches were used to measure FCR, 15 for HA, 8 for worry, and 4 for uncertainty.Conclusion: While consensus on the conceptualization and measurement of the four constructs has not yet been reached, this scoping review identifies key similarities and differences to aid in their selection and measurement. Considering the observed overlap between the four studied constructs, further research delineating the unique attributes for each construct is warranted.
Objective: Most fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) interventions have small effects, and few target FCR. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) with breast and gynecological cancer survivors evaluated the efficacy of a cognitive-existential fear of recurrence therapy (FORT) compared to an attention placebo control group (living well with cancer [LWWC]) on FCR. Method: One hundred and sixty-four women with clinical levels of FCR and cancer distress were randomly assigned to 6-weekly, 120 min FORT (n = 80) or LWWC (n = 84) group sessions. They completed questionnaires at baseline (T1), posttreatment (T2; primary endpoint), 3 (T3), and 6 months (T4) posttreatment. Generalized linear models were used to compare group differences in the fear of cancer recurrence inventory (FCRI) total score and secondary outcomes. Results: FORT participants experienced greater reductions from T1 to T2 on FCRI total with a between-group difference of −9.48 points (p = .0393), resulting in a medium effect of −0.530, with a maintained effect at T3 (p = .0330) but not at T4. For the secondary outcomes, improvements were in favor of FORT, including FCRI triggers (p = .0208), FCRI coping (p = .0351), cognitive avoidance (p = .0155), need for reassurance from physicians (p = .0117), and quality of life (mental health; p = .0147). Conclusions: This RCT demonstrated that FORT, compared to an attention placebo control group, resulted in a greater reduction in FCR posttreatment and at 3 months posttreatment in women with breast and gynecological cancer, indicating its potential as a new treatment strategy. We recommend a booster session to sustain gains.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.