What is the state of the evidence on the mind–cancer survival question, and where do we go from here? A point of view

Stephen, Joanne; Rahn, Michelle; Verhoef, Marja J.; Leis, Anne

doi:10.1007/s00520-007-0281-4

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Most of the survival studies were carried out on patients with breast cancer, therefore the results might not necessarily be representative for other types of cancer. A recent review concluded: "Some researchers view the mindcancer survival question as resolved and negative, whereas others identify conceptual and methodological challenges and view the possible impact of psychosocial factors on survival as simply unproven" [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coping styles as predictors of survival time in bladder cancer

Hardt¹,

Gillitzer²,

Schneider³

et al. 2010

Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of coping in the survival of cancer is a controversial topic. To specifiy the influence of coping on survival time, we conducted a longitudinal, prospective and observational study. In a preoperative interview, 105 patients with primary bladder cancer were asked about their active and depressive coping strategies. Ten years later, the survival rate was recorded; in cases of death, it was noted whether or not it was in consequence of the bladder cancer. Kaplan-Meier analyses of the collected data revealed a mean survival rate of about 60% after 10 years. Cox regression demonstrated no significant effect for active or depressive coping when tumour stage was controlled for. Patients who presented with high values for either of the coping strategies lived only slightly longer than those with low values. Therefore, it can be concluded that preoperative coping does not seem to demonstrate an important role for survival in bladder cancer

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coping styles as predictors of survival time in bladder cancer

Hardt¹,

Gillitzer²,

Schneider³

et al. 2010

Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As early as the mid-1920s, psychologists were speculating about the association of psychogenic factors with cancer (Evans, 1926). Personality has long been hypothesized to play a causal role in the development and progression of cancer (Augustine, Larsen, Walker, & Fisher, 2008;Cardenal, Ortiz-Tallo, Martín, & Martínez, 2008;Heffner, Loving, Robles, & Kiecolt-Glaser, 2003;Nakaya et al, 2009;Shigehisa & Honda, 2006;Stephen, Rahn, Verhoef, & Leis, 2007;Vissoci, Vargas, & Morimoto, 2004), although recently, some authors have reported the opposite findings (Bleiker, Hendriks, Otten, Verbeek, & van der Ploeg, 2008;Dahl, 2010;Hansen, Floderus, Frederiksen, & Johansen, 2005;Nakaya et al, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality, Emotions and Coping Styles: Predictive Value for the Evolution of Cancer Patients

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study had a twofold goal: to define differences in psychological aspects between cancer patients and a control group and to explore the predictive value of such aspects for the evolution of the disease two years later. Firstly, personality, anxiety, anger and depression were assessed in both groups. Results of t-analyses revealed significant group differences. In personality, cancer patients had higher levels of neuroticism and lower levels of extraversion, agreeableness and conscientiousness than the control group. In emotional variables, cancer patients had higher levels of anxiety and some aspects of anger, but there were no group differences in depression levels. Secondly, applying a quasi-prospective design, the predictive value of personality, emotions and coping styles for the evolution of cancer (favourable or unfavourable) was explored using generalized linear models and logistic regression. A four-predictor logistic model was fitted: Anger Expression-In, Resignation, Self-blame and Conscientiousness, indicating that the higher Anger Expression-in, Resignation, and Self-blame scores together with a lower Conscientiousness score, the more likely it is for patients' cancer to evolve unfavourably. These results indicate the crucial role of psychological aspects for the evolution of the disease and the need to include such aspects in the design of clinical interventions.Este estudio tiene un doble objetivo: describir las diferencias en los aspectos psicológicos entre los pacientes con cáncer y un grupo control, y explorar el posible valor predictivo de estos aspectos en la evolución de la enfermedad dos años más tarde. En primer lugar, se evaluaron en ambos grupos variables de personalidad, ansiedad, ira y depresión. Los resultados de los análisis t mostraron diferencias significativas entre los dos grupos. En personalidad, los pacientes con cáncer mostraron niveles más altos de neuroticismo y niveles más bajos de extraversión, afabilidad y concienciación que el grupo control. En variables emocionales, los pacientes con cáncer presentaron puntuaciones más elevadas en ansiedad y en algunos aspectos de la ira, pero no hubo diferencias entre los grupos en los niveles de depresión. En segundo lugar, aplicando un diseño cuasi-prospectivo, se analizó el valor predictivo de la personalidad, las emociones y los estilos de afrontamiento en la evolución del cáncer (favorable o desfavorable), mediante modelos lineales generalizados y de regresión logística. Se ajustó un modelo logístico de cuatro predictores: Ira interna, Resignación, Autoculpación y Concienciación, indicando que altas puntuaciones en Ira interna, Resignación, Autoculpación, junto con puntuaciones bajas en Concienciación, presentaban mayor probabilidad de relacionarse con una evolución desfavorable del cáncer. Estos resultados apoyan el papel crucial de los aspectos psicológicos en la evolución de la enfermedad y la necesidad de incluirlos en el diseño de las intervenciones clínicas. Palabras clave: personalidad, emociones, estilos de afrontamient...

show abstract

“…In the mid-1980s, Cassileth et al stated that "the inherent biology of the disease alone determines the prognosis, overriding the potentially mitigating influence of psychosocial factors," 16(p1555) whereas Berland argued 10 years later that there is "growing consensus" that "biological (that is, immunological) functions cannot be separated from psychological factors." 18(p17) Although debate is still ongoing about the relationship between biological and psychological mechanisms in the cancer context, 19 the role of psychological mechanisms continues to be minimized in biomedical studies on spontaneous regression or exceptional cancer survival. For example, in reviewing mechanisms underlying cancer regression both Papac 10 and Abdelrazeq 11 conclude that psychological interventions cannot induce cancer regression.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Is an Exceptional Cancer Trajectory?: Multiple Stakeholder Perspectives on Cancer Trajectories in Relation to Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use

Hök

Forss

Falkenberg³

et al. 2009

Integr Cancer Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Although links between exceptional cancer trajectories (ECTs) and complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) have been suggested, most research on ECT uses predefined criteria for ECTs without necessarily including CAM use. Little knowledge can be found about subjective perspectives of ECTs in relation to CAM. Objectives: This Swedish study explores how patients, significant others, and CAM and biomedical health care (BHC) providers reason about ECT, including the role of CAM. Methods: Using a case study approach, open interviews were conducted with multiple stakeholders about cancer trajectories reported as exceptional. Results: In-depth analysis of 5 cases indicated that although all stakeholders agreed that the reported cases were positive, in no case was the same trajectory considered exceptional by all stakeholders. Different stakeholders shared neither conceptualizations of what constituted an ECT nor attributions for positive trajectories. Patients, significant others, and CAM providers emphasized unexpectedly long survival and well-being in ECTs, whereas BHC providers only referred to survival. CAM and BHC providers normalized reported trajectories, although the forms for this differed between provider groups. Concluding discussion: Stakeholders' accounts are discussed relative to different health care domains, legitimization processes, and legal constraints, which have led to the lack of a public sphere for CAM use in cancer.

show abstract

What is the state of the evidence on the mind–cancer survival question, and where do we go from here? A point of view

Cited by 11 publications

References 69 publications

Coping styles as predictors of survival time in bladder cancer

Coping styles as predictors of survival time in bladder cancer

Personality, Emotions and Coping Styles: Predictive Value for the Evolution of Cancer Patients

What Is an Exceptional Cancer Trajectory?: Multiple Stakeholder Perspectives on Cancer Trajectories in Relation to Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About