A Hope-Based Intervention to Address Disrupted Goal Pursuits and Quality of Life Among Young Adult Cancer Survivors
Over 70,000 US young adults are diagnosed with cancer annually, disrupting important life transitions and goal pursuits. Hope is a positive psychology construct associated with better quality of life (QOL) that focuses on goal-oriented thinking. We developed and tested Achieving Wellness After Kancer in Early life (AWAKE), a scalable 8-week app-based program consisting of educational videos, mood/activity tracking, and telephone-based coaching to promote hope and QOL in young adult cancer survivors (YACS, 18–40 years old). A two-arm RCT was used to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of AWAKE (n = 38) versus attention control (AC; n = 18) among YACS within 2 years of completing treatment and recruited from two NCI-designated cancer centers. Outcomes including hope (Trait Hope Scale), QOL (36-Item Short Form Health Survey; Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General), depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), and substance use were assessed at baseline, 8 weeks, and 6 months. Participants were an average of 32.55 (SD = 5.45) years old; 75.0% were female, and 80.4% White. The most common cancers were breast cancer (28.6%), melanoma (16.1%), and leukemia/lymphoma (12.5%). High retention, engagement, and satisfaction rates were documented in both conditions; AWAKE versus AC participants rated video content as more relevant (p = 0.007) and reported greater likelihood of talking positively about the program (p = 0.005). Many efficacy change scores showed positive trends in AWAKE versus AC. Reorienting to one’s goal pursuits after cancer diagnosis and treatment is critical and may be supported through hope-based interventions. Findings suggest that the AWAKE warrants subsequent research testing its efficacy, effectiveness, and scalability.
KeywordsAdolescent and young adult cancer survivors Survivorship Psychological factors
This research was supported by Emory University’s Winship Cancer Institute (P30 CA138292; Winship Invests Pilot Program; PI: Berg). This project was supported by services from the University of Kentucky Markey Cancer Center Behavioral and Community-Based Research and Cancer Research Informatics Shared Resource Facilities (P30 CA177558).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Review Boards at Emory University (IRB00086979) and the University of Kentucky (16-0751-P2H) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.American Cancer Society (2018) Cancer facts & figures 2018. Atlanta, American Cancer Society https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/annual-cancer-facts-and-figures/2018/cancer-facts-and-figures-2018.pdf. Accessed April 16, 2019Google Scholar
- 3.NCI Surveillance, E., and End Results Program (SEER) (2018) NCI Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) 2018. https://seer.cancer.gov/. Accessed April 16, 2019
- 4.Ketterl TG, Syrjala KL, Casillas J, Jacobs LA, Palmer SC, McCabe MS, Ganz PA, Overholser L, Partridge A, Rajotte EJ, Rosenberg AR, Risendal B, Rosenstein DL, Baker KS (2019) Lasting effects of cancer and its treatment on employment and finances in adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. Cancer 125(11):1908–1917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.LIVESTRONG Young Adult Alliance (2014) Closing the gap: a strategic plan: addressing the recommendations of the Adolescent and young adult Oncology progress Review Group. Austin, Lance Armstrong Foundation, p 2007Google Scholar
- 20.Snyder CR, Lopez SJ (2009) Oxford handbook of positive psychology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 25.Snyder CR (1996) To hope, to lose, and hope again. J Pers Interpers Loss 1:3–16Google Scholar
- 36.Cheavens J, Gum A, Snyder CR (2000) The Trait Hope Scale. In: Maltby CAL, Hill A (eds) Handbook of psychological tests. Mellen Press, Lampeter, pp 248–258Google Scholar
- 37.Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel R (1995) User’s manual for the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) core measures of health-related quality of life. RAND Corporation, Santa MonicaGoogle Scholar
- 38.Cella, David F., David S. Tulsky, George Gray, Bernie Sarafian, Elizabeth Linn, Amy Bonomi, Margaret Silberman, Suzanne B. Yellen, Patsy Winicour, Judy Brannon, Karen Eckberg, Stephen Lloyd, Sandy Purl, Carol Blendowski, Michelle Goodman, Madeline Barnicle, Irene Stewart, Marnie McHale, Philip Bonomi, Edward Kaplan, Samuel Taylor IV, Charles R. Thomas, Jr, and Jules Harriset. 1993. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol 11(3): 570–579Google Scholar
- 40.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Behavioral risk factor surveillance system, 2011 (2012) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/brfss/data_documentation/index.htm. Accessed April 15, 2019