The Role of Patients’ Response Expectancies in Side Effect Development and Control

Jean‐Pierre, Pascal; Shelke, Abhay R.; Kaufman, Maralyn E.; Bole, Christopher W.; Morrow, Gary R.

doi:10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2005.12.001

Cited by 20 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 208 publications

(220 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, the nocebo hypothesis, discussed by Hahn (1997) and Barsky et al (2002), proposes that expectations of developing side effects can cause symptoms to appear. It is also likely that studies that have linked anxiety to the development of nausea are, to some extent, capturing the construct of negative expectancies (Roscoe, Jean-Pierre, Shelke, et al, 2006). …”

Section: Psychological Models Of Anvmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pessimism, by contrast, is associated with depression and lowered disease resistance in breast cancer patients, poor health in middle and late adulthood, and more rapidly deteriorating health and increased morbidity in AIDS patients. Interestingly, a general tendency to be optimistic does not appear to predict degree of nausea from chemotherapy, even though specific nausea expectancies are strong predictors of this side effect (Roscoe et al, 2006). Treatment approaches that could tap into the construct of optimism to address negative expectancies, however, could prove efficacious in controlling ANV by enabling patients to view their chemotherapy side effects with optimism.…”

Section: Complementary and Alternative Treatment Of Anvmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Anticipatory nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy

Kamen

Tejani

Chandwani

et al. 2014

European Journal of Pharmacology

Self Cite

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a specific variation of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, anticipatory nausea and vomiting (ANV) appears particularly linked to psychological processes. The three predominant factors related to ANV are classical conditioning; demographic and treatment-related factors; and anxiety or negative expectancies. Laboratory models have provided some support for these underlying mechanisms for ANV. ANV may be treated with medical or pharmacological interventions, including benzodiazepines and other psychotropic medications. However, behavioral treatments, including systematic desensitization, remain first line options for addressing ANV. Some complementary treatment approaches have shown promise in reducing ANV symptoms. Additional research into these approaches is needed. This review will address the underlying models of ANV and provide a discussion of these various treatment options.

show abstract

Section: Psychological Models Of Anvmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Complementary and Alternative Treatment Of Anvmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anticipatory nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy

Kamen

Tejani

Chandwani

et al. 2014

European Journal of Pharmacology

Self Cite

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Response expectancies are thought to reflect automatic (i.e., typically not under voluntary control) processes, and they are hypothesized to directly cause expected outcomes without further psychological mediators (6). Researchers in a range of clinical and experimental contexts have sought to determine if response expectancies predict subsequent nonvoltional experiences, and research has typically reported a significant association between these two constructs (8,9). The relationship between individuals’ response expectancies and experiences is especially pertinent to cancer patients because of the aversive side effects (e.g., pain, fatigue, nausea, and vomiting) commonly associated with cancer treatment regimens (e.g., surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Response Expectancies and Cancer Treatment-Related Side Effects

Sohl

Schnur

Montgomery

2009

Journal of Pain and Symptom Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response expectancies, defined as expectations for nonvolitional responses, have been proposed to contribute to the experience of side effects of cancer and its treatment. To statistically evaluate this association, a systematic search of the published literature was conducted, resulting in fourteen studies appropriate for meta-analysis. Results revealed a significant (Z = 6.58, P < 0.001) mediumsized (r = 0.36) association between patients' response expectancies for cancer treatment-related side effects and the experience of these side effects. Assessment of response expectancies with reference to the time the treatment-related side effect would occur resulted in larger effect sizes than when such temporal specificity in assessment was not included, Q(1) = 10.27, P < 0.01. AU: SHOULD THIS BE 0.01? In your original, it was just 01. Effect sizes were also moderated by patients' prior experience with cancer treatment, Q(1) = 18.91, P = 0.001, such that prior experience led to stronger associations between response expectancies and side effects than no prior experience. Relationships between response expectancies and pain, fatigue, nausea and vomiting were explored. Effect sizes did not differ between side effects, with the exception that the relationship was significantly stronger for pain than for vomiting (P < 0.05). Overall, these results support the contribution of response expectancies to cancer treatment-related side effects. Additionally, the results support the conduct of research on interventions to alter response expectancies, with the goal of reducing side effects and improving patient quality of life.

show abstract

“…39,40 Patients' expectations about developing CINV were postulated to account for some of this variance, and numerous studies have shown a positive relationship between patients' expectations for the development of CINV. [41][42][43] For example, Roscoe and colleagues 44 studied 194 breast cancer patients about to begin their first cancer treatment regimen containing doxorubicin (See Figure 2). The results showed that patients' expectancy of nausea assessed prior to receiving their first chemotherapy cycle was a strong predictor of subsequent nausea and was a more robust predictor of severe nausea than previously reported factors, such as age, nausea during pregnancy, and susceptibility to motion sickness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting

Mustian

Darling

Janelsins

et al. 2008

Oncology &Amp; Hematology Review (US)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite treatment advances, nausea and vomiting, especially anticipatory nausea and vomiting, delayed nausea and vomiting and nausea alone, are still the most common, expected and feared side effects among patients receiving chemotherapy. Of the 70 to 80% of cancer patients who experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting many will delay or refuse future chemotherapy treatments and contemplate stopping all treatments because of fear of further nausea and vomiting. The purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of the pathopsychophysiology of CINV, the recommended guidelines for standard treatment, and highlight newer targeted treatment approaches.

show abstract

The Role of Patients’ Response Expectancies in Side Effect Development and Control

Cited by 20 publications

References 208 publications

Anticipatory nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy

Anticipatory nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy

A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Response Expectancies and Cancer Treatment-Related Side Effects

Chemotherapy-induced Nausea and Vomiting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About