Combined Model of Online Remote Interventions for Cancer-Related Cognitive Impairment (CRCI)

March 12, 2023 updated by: Hadassah Medical Organization

Cancer survival rates have increased dramatically in recent years. However, many survivors report cognitive decline following treatment, which significantly impairs their quality of life. Online cognitive training programs have shown promise in improving cognitive functions in cancer survivors, but most studies report limited impact of training on everyday function. A complementary treatment approach is functional treatment delivered by occupational therapists, which directly targets daily function. Combining the two approaches has the potential to overcome the limitations of both approaches, enabling improved cognitive functions and transfer to daily function. Remotely-administrated interventions further make treatment accessible and cost-effective. The current study is aimed at testing the efficacy of a novel, combined, remotely-delivered treatment approach: Cognitive Retraining and Functional Treatment(CRAFT), using a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) design. 90 cancer survivors will be randomly assigned to receive 15 weeks of either the combined treatment, computerized training only, or treatment-as-usual. Outcomes will be assessed at completion, and following 3 months of no contact, to test immediate and enduring effects of treatment. Baseline predictors for treatment response will be further assessed.

Positive results in the proposed study could potentially change the therapeutic landscape for rehabilitation of cancer-related cognitive decline, which currently impair the lives of millions worldwide.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

90

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

  • Israel
      • Jerusalem, Israel
        • Hadassah Medical Organization

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. age ≥ 18;
  2. Subjective concern about declines in cognitive functioning related to a diagnosis of cancer and/or cancer related treatment. This will be obtained by asking participants the question "do you have concerns about your memory or other thinking abilities following cancer treatment?". Participants are required to answer yes to this question.
  3. interested in treatment and state they have 2 weekly hours available for the intervention.
  4. Completion of active treatment for non-Central Nervous System (CNS) cancer (e.g., chemotherapy,radiation therapy and surgery) 6 months or more in the past.
  5. Cognitive decline with no dementia: 21<Mini-Mental State Examination <27 (Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh, 1975) and/or 19< Montreal Cognitive Assessment <26 (Nasreddine et al., 2005);
  6. Daily access to a computer and Internet facilities;
  7. Able to sign an informed consent;
  8. Stable psychiatric condition (according to participants self- report and medical file).

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. no prior experience using computers;
  2. pregnancy;
  3. History of a central nervous system tumor.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: CRAFT (Cognitive Training and Functional Treatment)
Over 12 weeks this group will be instructed to complete 3 weekly sessions of Computerized Cognitive Training, in addition to a weekly 1 hour remote CO- OP (Meta cognitive strategy training) session. Each participant will set three occupational goals that will be the focus of the CO -OP treatment
Behavioral: Cognitive orientation to daily occupational performance (CO-OP)
The CO-OP is a client-centered, goal directed approach aimed at enabling individuals to identify strategies that will improve daily function. A Weekly (1hr) session is delivered remotely via video conferencing.
Behavioral: Computerized Cognitive Training (BrainHQ, posit science)
The BrainHQ training targets multiple cognitive domains. The training will be delivered remotely, using a web-based program. Training progresses in an adaptive, individualized manner, based on individual progression of each participant . Participants are required to practice a minimum of half hour, three times a week (total of 1.5hr)
Active Comparator: Computerized Cognitive Training
This group will be instructed to complete 3 weekly sessions of Computerized Cognitive Training
Behavioral: Computerized Cognitive Training (BrainHQ, posit science)
The BrainHQ training targets multiple cognitive domains. The training will be delivered remotely, using a web-based program. Training progresses in an adaptive, individualized manner, based on individual progression of each participant . Participants are required to practice a minimum of half hour, three times a week (total of 1.5hr)
No Intervention: Treatment As Usual
This group will receive no intervention

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) (Law et al., 1998)
Time Frame: Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
A semi-structured interview used to assess the self-perception of clients' performance and satisfaction with their level of participation in daily functioning regarding the five most important problems they identified. The patient rates each problem on a 10-point scale indicating his level of performance (1= not able to do it at all, 10= able to do it extremely well) and level of satisfaction (1= not satisfied at all, 10 = extremely satisfied). Change is assessed by administering the interview at different time points.
Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
Change in Computerized Cognitive Assessments (Posit Science)
Time Frame: Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
Computerized Assessment will be used to assess neuro-cognitive function using five different tasks from posit science. Domains that will be assessed are sustained attention, visual working memory, speed of processing (visual and auditory) and flexibility
Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
Change in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Cognition (FACT COG) (Jacobs, Jacobsen, Booth-Jones, Wagner, & Anasetti, 2007)
Time Frame: Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
A self-report questionnaire for cancer patients with cognitive function issues. The tool includes 37-items assessing memory, concentration, language and thinking abilities. The items are grouped into 4 subscales: perceived cognitive impairment (PCI), perceived cognitive abilities (PCA), comments from others (OTH), and impact on quality of life (QOL). The items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale (0=never, 4 =several times a day) regarding the past 7 days, higher scores indicating greater QOL.
Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General practice (FACT-GP) (Cella et al., 1993)
Time Frame: Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
A patient reported quality of life questionnaire commonly used in cancer survivors. The tool consists of 21-statements on which the respondent is asked to think of the last week and determine his level of agreement to each statement on a 5-point scale (0=not at all, 4= very strongly agree), higher scores indicate greater QOL.
Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
Change in the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9)(Kroenke, Spitzer, & Williams, 2001)
Time Frame: Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
A self-report measure for the screening and severity of depressive symptomatology. The nine items in the questionnaire regard the frequency of symptoms within the last 2 weeks and are rated on a four-point Likert scale (0= not at all, 3=almost every day). The maximum score is 27, with higher scores reflecting more depressive symptoms.
Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
Change in the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD -7) (Spitzer, Kroenke, Williams, & Löwe, 2006)
Time Frame: Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
A self-report measure used for the screening and severity of GAD, It includes 7 items describing the severity of the patient's anxiety over the past 2 weeks on a four- point Likert scale (0= not at all sure, 3= nearly every day). The sum score ranges from 0 to 21, with values of 5, 10, 15 indicated mild, moderate or severe anxiety symptoms
Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
Change in the Ruminative Response Scale (RRS) (Treynor, Gonzalez, & Nolen-Hoeksema, 2003)
Time Frame: Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
A self-report questionnaire used to assess rumination among adults. The RRS includes 22 items describing responses to depressed mood. Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale (1= almost never, 4= almost always). A total score can be calculated, summing all 22 items scores (22-88), higher scores indicating more rumination.
Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
Change in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Fatigue (FACT -F) (Yellen, Cella, Webster, Blendowski, & Kaplan, 1997)
Time Frame: Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
A fatigue measure used to assess cancer patients at the active or survivor stage. The 13-item questionnaire utilizing a five-point Likert scale (0 = not at all, 4=very much so). The total score varies from 0 - 52, higher score indicating more fatigue
Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
Change in the New General Self-Efficacy Scale (NGSE) (Chen, Gully, & Eden, 2001)
Time Frame: Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
A self administered questionnaire used to evaluate self-efficacy. The questionnaire includes eight items that are rated on a five- point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree). The total score ranges from 9 to 40, with higher scores reflecting better self-efficacy.
Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
Change in Performance Quality Rating Scale (PQRS) (Martini, Rios, Polatajko, Wolf, & McEwen, 2015)
Time Frame: Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
An observational measure, used to assess actual performance of client-selected activities. Score ranges between 1 (0% task completion) to 10 (100% of task completion) and is established by therapist thoroughly questioning client about performance using explicit questions.
Time 0: Baseline, before group allocation and intervention; Time 1: at completion of intervention, an average of 15 weeks after T0; Time 2: 3 months after Time 1 (an average of 6 months after enrollment)
Social Presence (Hauber, Regenbrecht, Billinghurst, & Cockburn, 2006)
Time Frame: 3 Time points during intervention (Week 1, Week 5, Week 10), CRAFT only
A questionnaire used to measure co-presence and social presence of adults participating in technology based social interactions
3 Time points during intervention (Week 1, Week 5, Week 10), CRAFT only
Satisfaction questionnaire and interview
Time Frame: Time 1: At completion of intervention (an average of 15 weeks after baseline) (CRAFT only)
A satisfaction questionnaire and interview were developed for the use of this study
Time 1: At completion of intervention (an average of 15 weeks after baseline) (CRAFT only)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Hadassah Medical Organization

Collaborators

Israel Cancer Association
Israel cancer research fund

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Yafit Gilboa, PhD, Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

February 26, 2018

Primary Completion (Actual)

September 30, 2021

Study Completion (Actual)

August 30, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 1, 2019

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 22, 2019

First Posted (Actual)

December 26, 2019

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 14, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 12, 2023

Last Verified

March 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • CRCI-HMO-CTIL

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Cancer

Clinical Trials on Cognitive orientation to daily occupational performance (CO-OP)

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Japan

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

3
Subscribe