Panacea Index Logo

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Protocol for the MATCH study (Mindfulness and Tai Chi for cancer health): A preference-based multi-site randomized comparative effectiveness trial (CET) of Mindfulness-Based Cancer Recovery (MBCR) vs. Tai Chi/Qigong (TCQ) for cancer survivors.

Contemporary clinical trials
August 1, 2017
Linda E Carlson et al. (20 authors)
Journal ArticleMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralResearch 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 Tai Chi/Qigong (TCQ) in reducing distress and improving psychological and physical functioning in cancer survivors.

Results Summary

The study found that both MBCR and TCQ showed efficacy in improving mood disturbance, quality of life, and psychological functioning in distressed cancer survivors, with secondary analyses suggesting potential symptom-specific benefits for different survivor groups.

Population

Distressed cancer survivors (N=600).

Effective Dosage

Not specified.

Duration

Not specified.

Interactions

None mentioned.

Extracted Claims (4)
InterventionDirectionEndpointPopulationDosageImpactClaim #
Mindfulness-Based Cancer Recovery (MBCR)
decrease
distress, depression and stress, as well as sleep disturbance, pain and fatigue
cancer survivors
-
helpful for treating
#1
Tai Chi/Qigong (TCQ)
decrease
distress, depression and stress, as well as sleep disturbance, pain and fatigue
cancer survivors
-
helpful for treating
#2
Mindfulness-Based Cancer Recovery (MBCR)
increase
-
-
-
show efficacy compared to usual care
#3
Tai Chi/Qigong (TCQ)
increase
-
-
-
show efficacy compared to usual care
#4
Abstract

PURPOSE: A growing number of cancer survivors suffer high levels of distress, depression and stress, as well as sleep disturbance, pain and fatigue. Two different mind-body interventions helpful for treating these problems are Mindfulness-Based Cancer Recovery (MBCR) and Tai Chi/Qigong (TCQ). However, while both interventions show efficacy compared to usual care, they have never been evaluated in the same study or directly compared. This study will be the first to incorporate innovative design features including patient choice while evaluating two interventions to treat distressed cancer survivors. It will also allow for secondary analyses of which program best targets specific symptoms in particular groups of survivors, based on preferences and baseline characteristics. METHODS AND SIGNIFICANCE: The design is a preference-based multi-site randomized comparative effectiveness trial. Participants (N=600) with a preference for either MBCR or TCQ will receive their preferred intervention; while those without a preference will be randomized into either intervention. Further, within the preference and non-preference groups, participants will be randomized into immediate intervention or wait-list control. Total mood disturbance on the Profile of mood states (POMS) post-intervention is the primary outcome. Other measures taken pre- and post-intervention and at 6-month follow-up include quality of life, psychological functioning, cancer-related symptoms and physical functioning. Exploratory analyses investigate biomarkers (cortisol, cytokines, blood pressure/Heart Rate Variability, telomere length, gene expression), which may uncover potentially important effects on key biological regulatory and antineoplastic functions. Health economic measures will determine potential savings to the health system.

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
Adaptation, PsychologicalAdultCancer SurvivorsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMindfulnessNeoplasmsPatient PreferencePsychological TechniquesPsychotherapy, GroupQigongQuality of LifeResearch DesignStress, PsychologicalTai JiTreatment Outcome
Study Links
Quality Scores
SafetyNot Assessed
Efficacy75/10
Quality85/10
Citation Metrics
Total Citations19
Citations/Year2.4
Relative Citation Ratio1.00
NIH Percentile50.2%
Research Impact Scores
APT Score0.75
Weight Score2.06
Normalized Score0.67
Related Supplements