This study has contributed to disentangling how dyadic coping behaviors influence couples' adjustment. Interventions may focus on reducing negative dyadic coping and strengthening common dyadic coping, and be attentive to the different effects of dyadic coping on patients and partners.

We confirmed the hypothesis that patient-perceived unmet needs of rehabilitation during the cancer trajectory are associated with decreased quality of life. This study supports the use of unmet needs questions to identify patients in need of clinical attention. Interventions reducing cancer patients' perceived needs of rehabilitation may enhance quality of life.

Self-efficacy was a significant predictor of an active adjustment style and emotional well-being in breast cancer patients. Hence, it could be a valuable target of rehabilitation programs.

Objective. Little is known about the development of psychological wellbeing over time among women who have been treated for breast cancer. The aim of this study was to identify distinct patterns of distress, anxiety, and depression in such women. Methods. We invited 426 consecutive women with newly diagnosed primary breast cancer to participate in this study, and 323 (76%) provided information on distress ('distress thermometer') and on symptoms of anxiety and depression ('hospital anxiety and depression scale'). Semiparametric group-based mixture modeling was used to identify distinct trajectories of distress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms assessed the week before surgery and four and eight months later. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the characteristics of women in the distinct groups. results. Although no subgroup of women with chronic severe anxiety or depressive symptoms was found, we did identify a subgroup of 8% of the women who experienced continuously severe distress. Young age, having a partner, shorter education, and receiving chemotherapy but not radiotherapy might characterize women whose psychological symptoms remain strong eight months after diagnosis. conclusion. By looking beyond the mean, we found that 8% of the women experienced chronic severe distress; no subgroups with chronic severe anxiety or depression were identified. Several socio-demographic and treatment factors characterized the women whose distress level remained severe eight months after diagnosis. The results suggest that support could be focused on relatively small groups of patients most in need.

The distress thermometer performed satisfactorily relative to the HADS in detecting distress in our study. A screening procedure in which application of the distress thermometer is a first step could be useful for identifying persons in need of support.

We examined the incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among 32 757 cancer survivors and age‐, gender‐, and geographically matched cancer‐free controls during a follow‐up period of 1‐13 years, and explored whetherCVD incidence differed by received cancer treatment, traditional cardiovascular risk factors, age, or gender. Adult 1‐year cancer survivors without a history ofCVD diagnosed with breast (n = 6762), prostate (n = 4504), non‐Hodgkin (n = 1553), Hodgkin (n = 173), lung and trachea (n = 2661), basal cell carcinoma (BCC; n = 12 476), and colorectal (n = 4628) cancer during 1999‐2011 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and matched to cancer‐free controls without a history ofCVD. Drug dispenses and hospitalizations from thePHARMO Database Network were used as proxy forCVD. Data were analyzed using Cox regression analyses. Prostate (HR: 1.17; 95%CI: 1.01‐1.35) and lung and trachea (HR: 1.48; 95%CI: 1.10‐1.97) cancer survivors had an increased risk for developingCVD compared to cancer‐free controls. This increased risk among lung and trachea cancer survivors remained statistically significant after including traditional cardiovascular risk factors and cancer treatment information (HR: 1.41; 95%CI: 1.06‐1.89). Among prostate cancer survivors, the increased risk of incidentCVD was limited to those who received hormones and those without traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Breast, non‐Hodgkin,BCC, and colorectal cancer survivors showed no increasedCVD risk compared to cancer‐free controls. There was an increased risk of incidentCVD among prostate, and lung and trachea cancer survivors compared to age‐, gender‐ and geographically matched cancer‐free controls. Studies including longer follow‐up periods are warranted to examine whether cancer survivors are at increased risk of long‐term incidentCVD.

Objective: Specialized palliative care (SPC) interventions increasingly include patient-caregiver dyads, but their effects on dyadic coping are unknown. We investigated whether an SPC and dyadic psychological intervention increased aspects of dyadic coping in patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers, whether dyad characteristics moderated effects and whether aspects of dyadic coping mediated significant intervention effects on caregivers' anxiety and depression. Methods:We randomized 258 patients with incurable cancer and their caregivers to care as usual or accelerated transition from oncological treatment to home-based SPC and dyadic psychological support. In secondary outcome analyses, using mixedeffects models, we estimated intervention effects and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for communication of stress and common coping, and moderation by dyad type and demographics. In path analyses, we investigated whether stress communication and common coping mediated intervention effects on caregivers' symptoms of anxiety and depression. (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01885637). Results:The intervention significantly increased common coping in patients and caregivers in couples (estimated difference, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.11 to 1.24) and stress communication by partner caregivers (0.97; 0.24 to 1.24). We found some support for different intervention effects for spouses and other dyads, but no evidence of mediation.Conclusions: Specialized palliative care and dyadic psychological intervention may affect aspects of dyadic coping. Common coping and stress communication did not mediate the previously found significant intervention effects on caregiver anxiety and depression, indicating that other mechanisms may have been central in the intervention.The stressful life with advanced cancer requires patients and caregivers to cope individually and together. 1,2 Multidisciplinary specialized palliative care (SPC) aims to relieve suffering in patients with life-threatening illness and their families 3 and can significantly improve quality of life of patients with advanced cancer. 4 According to the systemic transactional model of coping (STM), couples may cope with stressors such as cancer in individual and interactional ways. 2,5 Dyadic coping is a reciprocal process in which each partner's communication of stress serves to elicit support from the other partner, like helping with or taking over tasks (supportive/delegated coping), and common coping, ie, managing a problem together. 5 In patients with cancer, stress communication has been related to better dyadic adjustment 6 and quality of life. 7 Greater common coping efforts, such as joint problem-solving or relaxation, have been found to predict increased relationship quality and lower depressive symptoms in dyads coping with cancer 8 but have also been associated with lower distress in caregivers and increased distress in patients. 6 Psychological interventions targeting dyads of patients with advanced cancer and their partners or caregivers may significantly improve, eg, psy...

ObjectivePatients and partners both cope individually and as a dyad with challenges related to a breast cancer diagnosis. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of a psychological attachment‐oriented couple intervention for breast cancer patients and partners in the early treatment phase.MethodsA randomised controlled trial including 198 recently diagnosed breast cancer patients and their partners. Couples were randomised to the Hand in Hand (HiH) intervention in addition to usual care or to usual care only. Self‐report assessments were conducted for both patients and partners at baseline, postintervention (5 months), and follow‐up (10 months), assessing cancer‐related distress, symptoms of anxiety and depression, and dyadic adjustment. Patients' cancer‐related distress was the primary outcome.ResultsCancer‐related distress decreased over time in both patients and partners, but the intervention did not significantly affect this decrease at postintervention (P = .08) or follow‐up (P = .71). A significant positive effect was found on dyadic adjustment at follow‐up for both patients (P = .04) and partners (P = .02).ConclusionsThere was no significant effect of the HiH intervention cancer‐related distress. The results suggest that most couples can cope with cancer‐related distress in the context of usual care. However, the positive effect on dyadic adjustment implies that the HiH intervention benefitted both patients and partners. Future studies should investigate how to integrate a couple focus in usual cancer care to improve dyadic coping in the early treatment phase.