Telephone Peer-Support Program Reduces Breast Cancer Distress for Women Carrying BRCA Mutation
In an Australian study reported in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, White et al found that a telephone-based peer-support intervention reduced breast cancer distress among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation.
Study Details
In the study, 207 mutation carriers reporting interest in talking to other mutation carriers were randomly assigned to the peer-support intervention (n = 105) or usual care (n = 102). The intervention involved trained peer volunteers’ contacting study participants six times over 4 months to provide informational, emotional, and practical support. Outcomes included breast cancer distress (measured by Impact of Event Scale), anxiousness, unmet information needs, and stress and confidence (measured by Cognitive Appraisals About Genetic Testing scale). Outcomes were assessed at the end of intervention (4 months after randomization) and 2 months later.
Benefits of Intervention
The intervention group had significantly greater reductions vs the usual care group overall in breast cancer distress (P = .01), anxiousness (P = .03), unmet information needs (P = .001), and stress (P = .02). The reductions in breast cancer distress (P = .002), anxiousness (P = .01), unmet information needs (P < .001), and stress (P = .004) were significantly greater at the end of intervention, but only the reduction in breast cancer distress (P = .04) was significantly greater at 2-month follow-up. There were no differences between the two groups in confidence overall or at either assessment.
The investigators concluded: “The intervention is effective in reducing distress and unmet information needs for this group of women. Identifying strategies for prolonging intervention effects is warranted.”
Victoria M. White, PhD, of Cancer Council Victoria, is the corresponding author for the Journal of Clinical Oncology article.
The study was supported by the National Breast Cancer Foundation, National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, and Cancer Institute of New South Wales. The study authors reported no potential conflicts of interest.
The content in this post has not been reviewed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. (ASCO®) and does not necessarily reflect the ideas and opinions of ASCO®.
