A Multimodal Lifestyle Psychosocial Survivorship Program in Young Cancer Survivors
Julia von Grundherr, Simon Elmers, Barbara Koch, Lesley‐Ann Hail, Julia Mann, Gabriele Escherich, Corinna Bergelt, Luisa Samland, Wiebke Jensen, Eik Vettorazzi, Maria Stark, Luzia Valentini, Freerk T. Baumann, Susanne Singer, Rüdiger Reer, Ronja Beller, Gabriele Calaminus, Jörg Faber, Carl Friedrich Classen, Judith Gebauer, Inken Hilgendorf, Michael Koehler, Alexander Puzik, Nicole Salzmann, Annette Sander, Lisa Schiffmann, Magdalena Sokalska-Duhme, Sonja Schuster, Ann-Kristin Kock-Schoppenhauer, Carsten Bokemeyer, Marianne Sinn, Alexander Stein, Sarah Dwinger, Jannike Salchow
Abstract
Importance: There is a lack of trials examining the effect of counseling interventions for child, adolescent, and younger adult (CAYA) cancer survivors. Objective: To assess lifestyle habits and the psychosocial situation of CAYAs to determine the efficacy of needs-based interventions in the CARE for CAYA program (CFC-P). Design, Setting, and Participants: The CFC-P was conducted as a multicenter program in 14 German outpatient clinics, mainly university cancer centers. Recruitment began January 1, 2018; a randomized clinical trial was conducted until July 15, 2019; and intervention was continued as a longitudinal cohort study until March 31, 2021. Data preparation was conducted from April 1, 2021, and analysis was conducted from August 14, 2021, to May 31, 2022. Herein, predefined confirmatory analyses pertain to the RCT and descriptive results relate to the overall longitudinal study. Data analysis was based on the full analysis set, which is as close as possible to the intention-to-treat principle. Intervention: A comprehensive assessment determined needs in physical activity, nutrition and psychooncology. Those with high needs participated in 1 to 3 modules. In the RCT, the IG received 5 counseling sessions plus newsletters, while the control group CG received 1 counseling session. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the change in the rate of CAYAs with high needs at 52 weeks. Secondary outcomes were feasibility, modular-specific end points, satisfaction, quality of life, and fatigue. Results: Of 1502 approached CAYAs aged 15 to 39 years, 692 declined participation. Another 22 CAYAs were excluded, resulting in 788 participants. In the randomized clinical trial, 359 CAYAs were randomized (intervention group [IG], n = 183; control group [CG], n = 176), and 274 were followed up. In the RCT, the median age was 25.0 (IQR, 19.9-32.2) years; 226 were female (63.0%) and 133 male (37.0%). After 52 weeks, 120 CAYAs (87.0%) in the IG and 115 (86.5%) in the CG still had a high need in at least 1 module (odds ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.51-2.11; P = .91). Both groups reported reduced needs, improved quality of life, reduced fatigue, and high satisfaction with the CFC-P. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the implementation of a lifestyle program in this cohort was deemed necessary, despite not meeting the primary outcome. The interventions did not alter the rate of high needs. The results may provide guidance for the development of multimodal interventions in the follow-up care of CAYAs. Trial Registration: German Clinical Trial Register: DRKS00012504.