Cardiovascular disease is a competing cause of death in patients with cancer with early-stage disease. This elevated cardiovascular disease risk is thought to derive from both the direct effects of cancer therapies and the accumulation of risk factors such as hypertension, weight gain, cigarette smoking, and loss of cardiorespiratory fitness. Effective and viable strategies are needed to mitigate cardiovascular disease risk in this population; a multimodal model such as cardiac rehabilitation may be a potential solution. This statement from the American Heart Association provides an overview of the existing knowledge and rationale for the use of cardiac rehabilitation to provide structured exercise and ancillary services to cancer patients and survivors. This document introduces the concept of cardio-oncology rehabilitation, which includes identification of patients with cancer at high risk for cardiac dysfunction and a description of the cardiac rehabilitation infrastructure needed to address the unique exposures and complications related to cancer care. In this statement, we also discuss the need for future research to fully implement a multimodal model of cardiac rehabilitation for patients with cancer and to determine whether reimbursement of these services is clinically warranted.

The increase in cancer incidence and mortality is challenging current cancer care delivery globally, disproportionally affecting low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs) when it comes to receiving evidence‐based cancer prevention, treatment, and palliative and survivorship care. Patients in LMICs often rely on traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine (TCIM) that is more familiar, less costly, and widely available. However, spheres of influence and tensions between conventional medicine and TCIM can further disrupt efforts in evidence‐based cancer care. Integrative oncology provides a framework to research and integrate safe, effective TCIM alongside conventional cancer treatment and can help bridge health care gaps in delivering evidence‐informed, patient‐centered care. This growing field uses lifestyle modifications, mind and body therapies (eg, acupuncture, massage, meditation, and yoga), and natural products to improve symptom management and quality of life among patients with cancer. On the basis of this review of the global challenges of cancer control and the current status of integrative oncology, the authors recommend: 1) educating and integrating TCIM providers into the cancer control workforce to promote risk reduction and culturally salient healthy life styles; 2) developing and testing TCIM interventions to address cancer symptoms or treatment‐related adverse effects (eg, pain, insomnia, fatigue); and 3) disseminating and implementing evidence‐based TCIM interventions as part of comprehensive palliative and survivorship care so patients from all cultures can live with or beyond cancer with respect, dignity, and vitality. With conventional medicine and TCIM united under a cohesive framework, integrative oncology may provide citizens of the world with access to safe, effective, evidence‐informed, and culturally sensitive cancer care.

This randomized clinical trial examines the efficacy of true or sham acupuncture vs standard care in the treatment of radiation-induced xerostomia among patients in the United States and China.

A B S T R A C T PurposePatients with cancer commonly use complementary and alternative medicine, including herbs and supplements (HS), during cancer treatment. This national survey explored oncologists' knowledge, attitudes, and practice patterns regarding HS use by their patients. MethodsA survey was sent by mail and e-mail to a random sample of 1,000 members of the American Society for Clinical Oncology. The questions covered several topics: communication patterns, attitudes about HS, education about HS, response to HS use among hypothetical patients with cancer, knowledge of HS adverse effects, and demographic information. ResultsAmong eligible oncologists, 392 (42%) responded to the questionnaire. Most were white (75%) men (71%), with a mean age of 48 years (standard deviation, 9.8 years). On average, oncologists discussed use of HS with 41% of their patients; only 26% of discussions were initiated by the oncologist. Two of three oncologists indicated they did not have enough knowledge to answer questions from patients regarding HS, and 59% had not received any education about the topic. Physician factors associated with having initiated discussions with patients about the use of HS included female sex, higher self-reported knowledge, prior education about HS, increased knowledge about HS adverse effects and interactions, and estimating that Ͼ 40% of one's patients with cancer use HS. ConclusionFewer than one half of oncologists are initiating discussions with patients about HS use, and many indicate that lack of knowledge and education is a barrier to such discussions. Improving physician education about HS may facilitate more physician-patient communication about this important topic.

BACKGROUND Although yoga practice may improve quality of life (QOL) in cancer patients, feasibility in patients with lung cancer is largely unknown. Moreover, previous research has excluded patients’ family caregivers. Because caregivers are vulnerable to caregiver burden, a dyadic approach targeting QOL in both patient and caregiver may be particularly beneficial. Thus, the purpose of this study was to establish the feasibility of a couple-based Vivekananda Yoga (VKC) intervention in lung cancer patients and caregivers. Vivekananda Yoga may be suitable for a dyadic approach and address the multifaceted needs (e.g., emotional, physical, spiritual, and social) common among families coping with lung cancer. METHOD In this single-arm feasibility trial, patients with lung cancer undergoing radiotherapy and their caregivers participated in a 15-session VKC program focused on the interconnectedness of the dyad. The program consisted of four main components: 1) joint loosening with breath synchronization; 2) postures (asanas) and a deep relaxation technique; 3) breath energization (pranayama) with sound resonance; and 4) meditation. We assessed pre/post-intervention levels of fatigue (BFI), sleep disturbances (PSQI), psychological distress (BSI), overall mental and physical QOL (SF-36), spirituality (FACT-Sp) and relational closeness. We also tracked feasibility data, and participants completed program evaluations. RESULTS We approached 28 eligible dyads of which 15 (53%) consented and 9 (60%) completed the intervention. No adverse events were reported. Patients (mean age: 73 years, 63% female, all stage III) and caregivers (mean age: 62 years, 38% female, 63% spouses) completed a mean of 10 sessions (range: 4–14) and 95.5% of them rated the program as very useful. Paired t-tests revealed a significant increase in patients’ mental health (d=.84, P=.04) and a significant decrease in caregivers’ sleep disturbances (d=1.44, P=.02). Although not statistically significant, for patients, effect sizes for change scores were medium for benefit finding and small for distress (d=.65 and .37, respectively). For caregivers, medium effects were found for improvement in physical functioning (d=.50). CONCLUSION This novel supportive care program appears to be safe, feasible, acceptable, and subjectively useful for lung cancer patients and their caregivers and lends support for further study in a larger randomized controlled trial.