ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02088710.

Patients, especially older ones, can benefit from enhanced treatment information given additionally to routine care. Enhanced information about mode of action and potential side effects of endocrine therapy when included into clinical routine might foster patient autonomy and prevent early disruptions in adherence.

BackgroundAdjuvant endocrine therapy can improve disease-free survival and time before recurrence in breast cancer patients. However, it is associated with considerable side effects that negatively affect patients’ quality of life and cause non-adherence. The recently demonstrated effect of individual expectations on side-effect development (nocebo effect) suggests that psychological factors play a role in the prevention of side effects. The aim of this study is to evaluate cognitive-behavioral side-effect prevention training (SEPT) for breast cancer patients. This article describes the study protocol and applied research methods.Methods/DesignIn a randomized controlled trial, 184 female breast cancer patients are assigned to receive either SEPT, standard medical care or a manualized supportive therapy at the start of adjuvant endocrine treatment. SEPT consists of three sessions of cognitive-behavioral training including psychoeducation to provide a realistic view of endocrine therapy, imagination-training to integrate positive aspects of medication into daily life, and side-effect management to enhance expectations about coping ability. Side effects three months after the start of endocrine therapy serve as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, coping ability and patients’ medication adherence. Patients’ expectations (i.e., expectations about side effects, coping ability, treatment and illness) are analyzed as mediators.DiscussionThe optimization of expectations might be a potential pathway in health care to improve patients’ quality of life during long-term medication intake. The results will provide implications for a possible integration of evidence-based prevention training into clinical practice.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, (NCT01741883).

Results suggest that downgrading unattainable goals and making more progress in accomplishing attainable goals may be possible mechanisms of response shift as an adaption to illness. Thus, integrating life goal adjustment into rehabilitation services for cancer patients seems to be worthwhile to enhance an adaptive self-regulation and QOL.

Purpose Patients with advanced cancer often receive suboptimal end-of-life (EOL) care. Particularly males with advanced cancer are more likely to receive EOL care that is more aggressive, even if death is imminent. Critical factors determining EOL care are EOL conversations or advance care planning. However, information about gender-related factors influencing EOL conversations is lacking. Therefore, the current study investigates gender differences concerning the content, the desired time point, and the mode of initiation of EOL conversations in cancer patients. Methods In a cross-sectional study, 186 female and male cancer patients were asked about their preferences for EOL discussions using a semi-structured interview, focusing on (a) the importance of six different topics (medical and nursing care, organizational, emotional, social, and spiritual/religious aspects), (b) the desired time point, and (c) the mode of discussion initiation. Results The importance of EOL topics differs significantly regarding issue (p = 0.002, η 2 = 0.02) and gender (p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.11). Males wish to avoid the engagement in discussions about death and dying particularly if they are anxious about their endof-life period. They wish to be addressed regarding the "hard facts" nursing and medical care only. In contrast, females prefer to speak more about "soft facts" and to be addressed about each EOL topic. Independent of gender, the majority of patients prefer to talk rather late: when the disease is getting worse (58%), at the end of their therapy, or when loosing self-sufficiency (27.5%). Conclusion The tendency of patients to talk late about EOL issues increases the risk of delayed or missed EOL conversations, which may be due to a knowledge gap regarding the possibility of disease-associated incapability. Furthermore, there are significant gender differences influencing the access to EOL conversations. Therefore, for daily clinical routine, we suggest an early two-step, gender-sensitive approach to end-of-life conversations.