Panacea Index Logo

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Randomized-controlled trial of mindfulness-based cancer recovery versus supportive expressive group therapy among distressed breast cancer survivors (MINDSET): long-term follow-up results.

Psycho-oncology
July 1, 2016
Linda E Carlson et al. (6 authors)
Journal ArticleRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tHuman StudyClinical
Study Details

Study Goal

The researchers aimed to compare the effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Cancer Recovery (MBCR) and Supportive Expressive Group Therapy (SET) in improving psychological well-being in distressed breast cancer survivors over a 1-year follow-up period.

Results Summary

MBCR showed greater immediate reductions in mood disturbance and stress symptoms compared to SET, with benefits maintained over 12 months. MBCR also improved quality of life, social support, spirituality, and post-traumatic growth more than SET, though SET also showed some improvements.

Population

Distressed Stage I-III breast cancer survivors (n=252).

Effective Dosage

Not specified

Duration

Intervention duration not specified, but follow-up lasted 12 months.

Interactions

None mentioned

Extracted Claims (21)
InterventionDirectionEndpointPopulationDosageImpactClaim #
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
decrease
mood disturbance
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
greater reduction
#1
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
decrease
fatigue
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
greater reduction
#2
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
decrease
anxiety
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
greater reduction
#3
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
decrease
confusion
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
greater reduction
#4
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
decrease
stress symptoms
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
greater reduction
#5
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
decrease
tension
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
greater reduction
#6
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
decrease
sympathetic arousal
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
greater reduction
#7
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
decrease
cognitive symptoms
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
greater reduction
#8
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
emotional quality of life
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#9
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
functional quality of life
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#10
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
emotional social support
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#11
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
affective social support
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#12
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
positive social support
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#13
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
spirituality
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#14
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
feelings of peace
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#15
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
meaning in life
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#16
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
post-traumatic growth
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#17
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
appreciation for life
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#18
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
ability to see new possibilities
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
increased
#19
Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR)
increase
psychological well-being
distressed breast cancer survivors
over 12 months
benefits were maintained
#20
Supportive expressive group therapy (SET)
increase
many outcomes
distressed breast cancer survivors
-
improved to a lesser degree
#21
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness-based cancer recovery (MBCR) and supportive expressive group therapy (SET) are two well-validated psychosocial interventions, but they have not been directly compared, and little is known about long-term outcomes. This comparative effectiveness study measured the effects of these two interventions immediately following the groups and for 1 year thereafter in distressed breast cancer survivors. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-two distressed Stage I-III breast cancer survivors were randomized into either MBCR or SET. Women completed questionnaires addressing mood, stress symptoms, quality of life, social support, spirituality and post-traumatic growth before and after the interventions, and 6 and 12 months later. RESULTS: Immediately following the intervention, women in MBCR reported greater reduction in mood disturbance (primarily fatigue, anxiety and confusion) and stress symptoms including tension, sympathetic arousal and cognitive symptoms than those in SET. They also reported increased emotional and functional quality of life, emotional, affective and positive social support, spirituality (feelings of peace and meaning in life) and post-traumatic growth (appreciation for life and ability to see new possibilities) relative to those in SET, who also improved to a lesser degree on many outcomes. Effect sizes of the time × group interactions were small to medium, and most benefits were maintained over 12 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first and largest to demonstrate sustained benefits of MBCR in distressed breast cancer survivors relative to an active control. MBCR was superior to SET for improving psychological well-being with lasting benefits over 1 year, suggesting these women gained long-lasting and efficacious tools to cope with cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on clinicaltrials.gov number NCT00390169, October 2006. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
Adaptation, PsychologicalAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMeditationMiddle AgedMindfulnessPsychotherapy, GroupQuality of LifeStress, PsychologicalSurvivors
Study Links
Quality Scores
SafetyNot Assessed
Efficacy85/10
Quality90/10
Citation Metrics
Total Citations79
Citations/Year8.8
Relative Citation Ratio3.75
NIH Percentile89.1%
Research Impact Scores
APT Score0.95
Weight Score2.21
Normalized Score0.72
Related Supplements