FatigueNCT04525924
Feasibility of Adjunctive BLT for Amelioration of Fatigue in Chinese Cancer Patients Admitted to a Palliative Care Unit
A study testing bright light therapy in people with Fatigue and Cancer, run by Hospital Authority, Hong Kong at 1 site in Hong Kong.
Trial summary
Fatigue is the most common symptom in palliative care patients who have advanced cancer. Fatigue is also one of the most underreported hence under-treated symptoms. Patients may perceive it as a condition to be endured, whereas healthcare workers find it very challenging to assess and treat due to its subjective… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- What is being tested?
- bright light therapy
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 42 participants
- Where
- 1 siteHong Kong
- Study dates
- 1 Aug 2020to Nov 2020
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adult patient aged 18 years old or above
- Chinese ethnic group
- Diagnosis of incurable cancer
- A score of >=3 in Brief Fatigue Inventory after a period of standard care
Who cannot join
- Patients who are imminently dying
- Patients who are undergoing chemotherapy or radiotherapy
- Patients who have history of epilepsy, brain tumour, brain metastasis
- Patients who are blind or have retinal disease
- Patents who have photosensitive skin condition
- Patients who have history of bipolar disorder as BLT has been suggested to increase the risk of manic swing in patients with bipolar disorder
Show all 10Show fewer
- Patients who have their dosage of antidepressants adjusted within 6 weeks
- Patients who have difficulties to communicate effectively
- Patients with impaired mental status precluding the completion of the questionnaire (AMT <5)
- Patients who are unable to give valid consent
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Hong Kong1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Shatin Hospital
Hong Kong
Heng Joshua Tang, 57967529, th372@ha.org.hk
About this study
Official title: Feasibility Study of Adjunctive Bright Light Therapy (BLT) for Amelioration of Fatigue in Chinese Cancer Patients Admitted to a Palliative Care Unit
Fatigue is the most common symptom in palliative care patients who have advanced cancer. Fatigue is also one of the most underreported hence under-treated symptoms. Patients may perceive it as a condition to be endured, whereas healthcare workers find it very challenging to assess and treat due to its subjective nature and multi-dimensional causes.
However, evidence-based practice to tackle this distressing problem is still inadequate, and that a one-size fit all approach is unrealistic. Various pharmacological options have been examined, but due to limited evidence, no specific drug could be recommended.
Read more
Latest development in management of fatigue includes non-pharmacological approach. Bright Light Treatment (BLT) has also evolved as a favourable treatment for cancer-related fatigue. BLT is the prescription of artificial bright light over a designated period of time. Recent clinical evidence showed that BLT reduced symptom of fatigue in patients undergoing active chemotherapy and cancer survivours.
There is however no data on bright light therapy used in in-patient palliative care settings.
A single group, prospective interventional study will be conducted in in-patient palliative care unit of Shatin Hospital (N = 42). The aim is to assess the feasibility and impact of BLT as an in-patient intervention in a cohort of local Chinese palliative care in-patients diagnosed with incurable cancer with documented symptom of fatigue, and to ascertain the changes of fatigue, mood, sleep and quality of life after 1-week exposure of BLT.
Read the detailed description
Fatigue is the most common symptom in palliative care patients who have advanced cancer, ranging from 59% to 77% depends on the assessment method (1). There is limited local data on the prevalence of fatigue in cancer patients. A cross-sectional study by Dr KY Lam in 2009 (unpublished data) found 53% of 55 patients receiving palliative care suffered from severe fatigue. A cross-sectional symptom screening of all the patients in the palliative care ward in Shatin Hospital showed 22 out of 55 (40%) patients reported fatigue (unpublished data).
The fatigue experienced by cancer patients is multi-dimensional. The feeling may be a physical sensation (weakness, tiredness, exhaustion, unable to perform tasks), an affective sensation (low mood, lack of motivation), or a cognitive sensation (lack of concentration, difficulty thinking clearly). This phenomenon is also subject to cultural interpretation therefore there is a need to understand each subject's perception and experience of fatigue within his or her own cultural context (2, 3).
Fatigue is also one of the most under-reported hence under-treated symptoms. Patients may perceive it as a condition to be endured, whereas healthcare workers find it very challenging to assess and treat due to its subjective nature and multidimensional causes. The impairment in self-care capabilities and daily functioning lead to negative effects on desire to continue treatment thus affecting the functional recovery even in patients with a more stable disease status (3-5). The quality of life (QOL) of patients, which is our focus in palliative care service, is heavily reduced (6).
However, evidence-based practice to tackle this distressing problem is still inadequate, and that a one-size fit all approach is unrealistic (7). Various pharmacological options have been examined, but due to limited evidence, no specific drug could be recommended for the treatment of fatigue in palliative care patients in the latest Cochrane review in 2015 (8).
Latest development in management of fatigue includes non-pharmacological approach. Effect size in reducing fatigue in various treatments were summarised in a report by Bower (9). Exercise was more effective than control in reducing fatigue with a mean effect size of -0.27. Psychosocial intervention trials that included fatigue as a primary or secondary outcome have shown reductions in fatigue relative to control, with effective sizes ranging from -0.10 to -0.31. Psychostimulant trials, most of which were conducted among patients with advanced disease and used methylphenidate, suggested that psychostimulants were more effective than placebo in improving fatigue with an effect size of -0.28. Of note, two studies with larger sample size showed no benefit for methylphenidate vs. placebo for improving fatigue (10, 11). The application of non-pharmacological approach in our local patients was even more limited. A pilot study of 26 patients receiving palliative care in Shatin Hospital showed a mean change score of 0.5 (1.862) of improvement in Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) Q3 after two weeks of in-patient multidisciplinary care (unpublished data). The estimated effect size of the pilot study was 0.268 (mean change/SD = 0.5/1.863). Overall, these data suggest that non-pharmacological treatments (e.g. exercise, psychoeducation, support program, cognitive-behavioural therapy) have a mild to moderate effect on improving symptom of fatigue.
Over these few decades, Bright Light Treatment (BLT) has also evolved as a favourable treatment for cancer-related fatigue. BLT is the prescription of artificial bright light over a designated period of time. It was initially developed for the treatment of seasonal affective disorder, and found to be as effective as antidepressants for treatment of depressive symptoms during winter (12). The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines on cancer-related fatigue (13) and a recent review on all treatment options of cancer-related fatigue (14) suggested that BLT is a safe and accessible option.
There are several mechanisms on how light therapy works. Firstly, it works through improving alertness. Healthy subjects who had increasing bright light exposure as compared to dim light would have a rapid effect of decrease in sleepiness and improvement in their performance (15). Secondly, BLT works through improving mood. Efficacy of BLT have been demonstrated in seasonal affective disorder (12), non-seasonal depression (16) and bipolar depression (17). Thirdly, BLT works through regulation of circadian rhythm. Circadian disruptions were demonstrated in 55 community-dwelling cancer patients receiving palliative care (18). Although the cause and effect between exacerbated fatigue and decreased light exposure could not be confirmed, increased fatigue was significantly correlated with decreased light exposure among patients with breast cancer (19). Exposure to bright light in the morning leads to an advance of endogenous circadian rhythms that results in a realignment of these rhythms with the individual's sleep-wake cycle. Therefore, possibly by providing a corrective phase advance with morning BLT, rhythm dysregulation could be corrected resulting in a reduction of fatigue symptom.
Two trials investigated the impact of light therapy on fatigue and QOL in the same group of 39 women with breast cancer undergoing active chemotherapy (20, 21). Results suggest that morning bright light treatment helped prevent the typical worsening of fatigue and quality of life during chemotherapy treatment. Although the light treatment did not improve overall fatigue in this sample, the lack of deterioration in total fatigue during a period where symptoms typically worsen was encouraging. Another study sought to determine the effect of bright light treatment on cancer-related fatigue among 36 post-treatment survivors (22). At the end of the treatment period, patients who had received bright white light therapy were no longer clinically fatigued, whereas 55% of the patients in the active control condition continued to report clinical fatigue. The effects of the bright white light treatment were maintained 3-weeks post-intervention.
A more recent study again focused on cancer survivors (23, 24). The total fatigue score using the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form showed an effect size of 1.20 in the bright-white-light intervention group and an effect size of 0.93 in the supposing placebo arm dim-red-light group. These were large within group effect size. This study employed BLT as an adjunctive therapy and the participants were not excluded for using their usual medications (including psychotropic medications). A randomised controlled trial in 2007 reported that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) do not appear to have beneficial effects on cancer-related fatigue, supporting the distinction between fatigue and depression in cancer patients and suggesting that fatigue is not solely a symptom of depression (25).
Bruera and team tried to introduce BLT to patients with advanced cancer and insomnia in out-patient settings (26). One shortcoming of their study was partly due to a high attrition rate especially in the control arm where dim red light was used as placebo. They suggested future studies to incorporate alternative trial designs to improve the adherence.
There is however no data on bright light therapy used in in-patient palliative care settings. Conducting research on patients receiving palliative care has been particularly challenging (27, 28). Barriers include the difficulty in participation due to limitations of serious illness, complex symptoms and clinical instability, resulting in high attrition and missing data. The MOREcare Statement (29) suggested researchers to use measures which are as short and simple as possible.
Despite these limitations, the present evidence suggests that BLT, a safe and easily delivered treatment, may be a clinically feasible and effective intervention to reduce symptom of fatigue in cancer palliative care patients during hospital stay. This study aims to test the feasibility of administering bright light therapy in cancer palliative care patients for the treatment of fatigue.
- Being tested
- bright light therapy
- Keywords
- fatigue, cancer, palliative care, BLT, bright light therapy, feasibility
- Medical subject headings
- Fatigue, Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
bright light therapyDevice
please see arm description
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Bright light therapy | Experimental | Bright light therapy (BLT) will be given via a lightbox device in the morning for 30 minutes after waking up. Duration of therapy will be 7 consecutive days. Receives: Device: bright light therapy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Rate of declined particilation in the study
Rate of approached potential subjects who declined participation in the study
Measured: At screening stage
Attrition rate
Rate of subject drop out (all cause)
Measured: 1 week of the intervention
Change in brief fatigue inventory
Change of scoreing of the brief fatigue inventory (BFI) from baseline to end of treatment. BFI is a 9-item questionnaire measured in 11-point Likert scale. It evaluates the level of present, overall and worst fatigue together with its interference to patients' general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relationships with other people and enjoyment of life during the past 24 hours. A higher score means a worse outcome.
Measured: Pre- and post- the 1-week intervention
Secondary outcomes (3)
Change in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
Change in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) from baseline to end of treatment. PSQI is a 19-item self-report measure to assess sleep quality. It consists of 7 components measuring duration of sleep, sleep disturbance, sleep latency, day dysfunction due to sleepiness, sleep efficiency, overall sleep quality, and whether a person needs medications in order to sleep. A global score > 5 indicates that a patient reports severe difficulties in at least 2 domains or moderate difficulties in more than 3 areas.
Measured: Pre- and post- the 1-week intervention
Change in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Change in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) from baseline to end of treatment. HADS is comprised of 14 questions which assess level of depression and anxiety. Each item is scored from 0-3, thus the patient can score between 0-21 for either anxiety or depression. A literature review identified a cut-off point of 8/21 for anxiety or depression.
Measured: Pre- and post- the 1-week intervention
Change in McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire - Hong Kong
Change in McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire - Hong Kong (MQOL-HK) from baseline to end of treatment. It assesses a patient's QOL in 5 domains (physical, psychological, existential, support and sexual functioning). The physical symptoms subscale allows patients to describe their 3 most disturbing symptoms and rate them. Patients can also rate their perceived QOL as a single item score. Responses are measured in 11-point Likert scale.
Measured: Pre- and post- the 1-week intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted25 Aug 2020
- Study start1 Aug 2020
- Primary completionNov 2020 (estimated)
- Study completionNov 2020 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (29)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for FatigueStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Authority, Hong Kong
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Tang Heng Joshua, Hospital Authority, Hong Kong
- Investigators
- Heng Joshua Tang, Principal investigator, Hospital Authority
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04525924
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- FatigueBLT
- Status last verified
- Sep 2020
- First submitted
- 28 Jul 2020
- Last updated
- 29 Sep 2020
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Teunissen SC, Wesker W, Kruitwagen C, de Haes HC, Voest EE, de Graeff A. Symptom prevalence in patients with incurable cancer: a systematic review. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2007 Jul;34(1):94-104. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.10.015. Epub 2007 May 23.
PubMed 17509812Stone P, Richards M, Hardy J. Fatigue in patients with cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1998 Oct;34(11):1670-6. doi: 10.1016/s0959-8049(98)00167-1.
PubMed 9893650Chan CW, Molassiotis A. The impact of fatigue on Chinese cancer patients in Hong Kong. Support Care Cancer. 2001 Jan;9(1):18-24. doi: 10.1007/s005200000192.
PubMed 11147138Lou Y, Yates P, McCarthy A, Wang H. Fatigue self-management: a survey of Chinese cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. J Clin Nurs. 2013 Apr;22(7-8):1053-65. doi: 10.1111/jocn.12174.
PubMed 23480501Curt GA, Breitbart W, Cella D, Groopman JE, Horning SJ, Itri LM, Johnson DH, Miaskowski C, Scherr SL, Portenoy RK, Vogelzang NJ. Impact of cancer-related fatigue on the lives of patients: new findings from the Fatigue Coalition. Oncologist. 2000;5(5):353-60. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.5-5-353.
PubMed 11040270Gupta D, Lis CG, Grutsch JF. The relationship between cancer-related fatigue and patient satisfaction with quality of life in cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2007 Jul;34(1):40-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.10.012. Epub 2007 May 25.
PubMed 17532179Dean A. The holistic management of fatigue within palliative care. Int J Palliat Nurs. 2019 Aug 2;25(8):368-376. doi: 10.12968/ijpn.2019.25.8.368.
PubMed 31437105Mucke M; Mochamat; Cuhls H, Peuckmann-Post V, Minton O, Stone P, Radbruch L. Pharmacological treatments for fatigue associated with palliative care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 May 30;2015(5):CD006788. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006788.pub3.
PubMed 26026155Bower JE. Cancer-related fatigue--mechanisms, risk factors, and treatments. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014 Oct;11(10):597-609. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.127. Epub 2014 Aug 12.
PubMed 25113839Lower EE, Fleishman S, Cooper A, Zeldis J, Faleck H, Yu Z, Manning D. Efficacy of dexmethylphenidate for the treatment of fatigue after cancer chemotherapy: a randomized clinical trial. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2009 Nov;38(5):650-62. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2009.03.011.
PubMed 19896571Bruera E, Yennurajalingam S, Palmer JL, Perez-Cruz PE, Frisbee-Hume S, Allo JA, Williams JL, Cohen MZ. Methylphenidate and/or a nursing telephone intervention for fatigue in patients with advanced cancer: a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Jul 1;31(19):2421-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.45.3696. Epub 2013 May 20.
PubMed 23690414Golden RN, Gaynes BN, Ekstrom RD, Hamer RM, Jacobsen FM, Suppes T, Wisner KL, Nemeroff CB. The efficacy of light therapy in the treatment of mood disorders: a review and meta-analysis of the evidence. Am J Psychiatry. 2005 Apr;162(4):656-62. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.4.656.
PubMed 15800134NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2018 Cancer-Related Fatigue, page 26/64. 2018.
Thong MSY, van Noorden CJF, Steindorf K, Arndt V. Cancer-Related Fatigue: Causes and Current Treatment Options. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2020 Feb 5;21(2):17. doi: 10.1007/s11864-020-0707-5.
PubMed 32025928Phipps-Nelson J, Redman JR, Dijk DJ, Rajaratnam SM. Daytime exposure to bright light, as compared to dim light, decreases sleepiness and improves psychomotor vigilance performance. Sleep. 2003 Sep;26(6):695-700. doi: 10.1093/sleep/26.6.695.
PubMed 14572122
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 Sep 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Feasibility Study of Adjunctive Bright Light Therapy (BLT) for Amelioration of Fatigue in Chinese Cancer Patients Admitted to a Palliative Care Unit
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04525924
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- FatigueBLT
- Keywords
- fatigue, cancer, palliative care, BLT, bright light therapy, feasibility
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Hospital Authority, Hong KongOther government
- Study start
- 1 Aug 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Nov 2020 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Nov 2020 (estimated)
- First posted
- 25 Aug 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Fatigue is the most common symptom in palliative care patients who have advanced cancer. Fatigue is also one of the most underreported hence under-treated symptoms. Patients may perceive it as a condition to be endured, whereas healthcare workers find it very challenging to assess and treat due to its subjective nature and multi-dimensional causes.
However, evidence-based practice to tackle this distressing problem is still inadequate, and that a one-size fit all approach is unrealistic. Various pharmacological options have been examined, but due to limited evidence, no specific drug could be recommended.
Latest development in management of fatigue includes non-pharmacological approach. Bright Light Treatment (BLT) has also evolved as a favourable treatment for cancer-related fatigue. BLT is the prescription of artificial bright light over a designated period of time. Recent clinical evidence showed that BLT reduced symptom of fatigue in patients undergoing active chemotherapy and cancer survivours.
There is however no data on bright light therapy used in in-patient palliative care settings.
A single group, prospective interventional study will be conducted in in-patient palliative care unit of Shatin Hospital (N = 42). The aim is to assess the feasibility and impact of BLT as an in-patient intervention in a cohort of local Chinese palliative care in-patients diagnosed with incurable cancer with documented symptom of fatigue, and to ascertain the changes of fatigue, mood, sleep and quality of life after 1-week exposure of BLT.
Detailed description
Fatigue is the most common symptom in palliative care patients who have advanced cancer, ranging from 59% to 77% depends on the assessment method (1). There is limited local data on the prevalence of fatigue in cancer patients. A cross-sectional study by Dr KY Lam in 2009 (unpublished data) found 53% of 55 patients receiving palliative care suffered from severe fatigue. A cross-sectional symptom screening of all the patients in the palliative care ward in Shatin Hospital showed 22 out of 55 (40%) patients reported fatigue (unpublished data).
The fatigue experienced by cancer patients is multi-dimensional. The feeling may be a physical sensation (weakness, tiredness, exhaustion, unable to perform tasks), an affective sensation (low mood, lack of motivation), or a cognitive sensation (lack of concentration, difficulty thinking clearly). This phenomenon is also subject to cultural interpretation therefore there is a need to understand each subject's perception and experience of fatigue within his or her own cultural context (2, 3).
Fatigue is also one of the most under-reported hence under-treated symptoms. Patients may perceive it as a condition to be endured, whereas healthcare workers find it very challenging to assess and treat due to its subjective nature and multidimensional causes. The impairment in self-care capabilities and daily functioning lead to negative effects on desire to continue treatment thus affecting the functional recovery even in patients with a more stable disease status (3-5). The quality of life (QOL) of patients, which is our focus in palliative care service, is heavily reduced (6).
However, evidence-based practice to tackle this distressing problem is still inadequate, and that a one-size fit all approach is unrealistic (7). Various pharmacological options have been examined, but due to limited evidence, no specific drug could be recommended for the treatment of fatigue in palliative care patients in the latest Cochrane review in 2015 (8).
Latest development in management of fatigue includes non-pharmacological approach. Effect size in reducing fatigue in various treatments were summarised in a report by Bower (9). Exercise was more effective than control in reducing fatigue with a mean effect size of -0.27. Psychosocial intervention trials that included fatigue as a primary or secondary outcome have shown reductions in fatigue relative to control, with effective sizes ranging from -0.10 to -0.31. Psychostimulant trials, most of which were conducted among patients with advanced disease and used methylphenidate, suggested that psychostimulants were more effective than placebo in improving fatigue with an effect size of -0.28. Of note, two studies with larger sample size showed no benefit for methylphenidate vs. placebo for improving fatigue (10, 11). The application of non-pharmacological approach in our local patients was even more limited. A pilot study of 26 patients receiving palliative care in Shatin Hospital showed a mean change score of 0.5 (1.862) of improvement in Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) Q3 after two weeks of in-patient multidisciplinary care (unpublished data). The estimated effect size of the pilot study was 0.268 (mean change/SD = 0.5/1.863). Overall, these data suggest that non-pharmacological treatments (e.g. exercise, psychoeducation, support program, cognitive-behavioural therapy) have a mild to moderate effect on improving symptom of fatigue.
Over these few decades, Bright Light Treatment (BLT) has also evolved as a favourable treatment for cancer-related fatigue. BLT is the prescription of artificial bright light over a designated period of time. It was initially developed for the treatment of seasonal affective disorder, and found to be as effective as antidepressants for treatment of depressive symptoms during winter (12). The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines on cancer-related fatigue (13) and a recent review on all treatment options of cancer-related fatigue (14) suggested that BLT is a safe and accessible option.
There are several mechanisms on how light therapy works. Firstly, it works through improving alertness. Healthy subjects who had increasing bright light exposure as compared to dim light would have a rapid effect of decrease in sleepiness and improvement in their performance (15). Secondly, BLT works through improving mood. Efficacy of BLT have been demonstrated in seasonal affective disorder (12), non-seasonal depression (16) and bipolar depression (17). Thirdly, BLT works through regulation of circadian rhythm. Circadian disruptions were demonstrated in 55 community-dwelling cancer patients receiving palliative care (18). Although the cause and effect between exacerbated fatigue and decreased light exposure could not be confirmed, increased fatigue was significantly correlated with decreased light exposure among patients with breast cancer (19). Exposure to bright light in the morning leads to an advance of endogenous circadian rhythms that results in a realignment of these rhythms with the individual's sleep-wake cycle. Therefore, possibly by providing a corrective phase advance with morning BLT, rhythm dysregulation could be corrected resulting in a reduction of fatigue symptom.
Two trials investigated the impact of light therapy on fatigue and QOL in the same group of 39 women with breast cancer undergoing active chemotherapy (20, 21). Results suggest that morning bright light treatment helped prevent the typical worsening of fatigue and quality of life during chemotherapy treatment. Although the light treatment did not improve overall fatigue in this sample, the lack of deterioration in total fatigue during a period where symptoms typically worsen was encouraging. Another study sought to determine the effect of bright light treatment on cancer-related fatigue among 36 post-treatment survivors (22). At the end of the treatment period, patients who had received bright white light therapy were no longer clinically fatigued, whereas 55% of the patients in the active control condition continued to report clinical fatigue. The effects of the bright white light treatment were maintained 3-weeks post-intervention.
A more recent study again focused on cancer survivors (23, 24). The total fatigue score using the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form showed an effect size of 1.20 in the bright-white-light intervention group and an effect size of 0.93 in the supposing placebo arm dim-red-light group. These were large within group effect size. This study employed BLT as an adjunctive therapy and the participants were not excluded for using their usual medications (including psychotropic medications). A randomised controlled trial in 2007 reported that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) do not appear to have beneficial effects on cancer-related fatigue, supporting the distinction between fatigue and depression in cancer patients and suggesting that fatigue is not solely a symptom of depression (25).
Bruera and team tried to introduce BLT to patients with advanced cancer and insomnia in out-patient settings (26). One shortcoming of their study was partly due to a high attrition rate especially in the control arm where dim red light was used as placebo. They suggested future studies to incorporate alternative trial designs to improve the adherence.
There is however no data on bright light therapy used in in-patient palliative care settings. Conducting research on patients receiving palliative care has been particularly challenging (27, 28). Barriers include the difficulty in participation due to limitations of serious illness, complex symptoms and clinical instability, resulting in high attrition and missing data. The MOREcare Statement (29) suggested researchers to use measures which are as short and simple as possible.
Despite these limitations, the present evidence suggests that BLT, a safe and easily delivered treatment, may be a clinically feasible and effective intervention to reduce symptom of fatigue in cancer palliative care patients during hospital stay. This study aims to test the feasibility of administering bright light therapy in cancer palliative care patients for the treatment of fatigue.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Bright light therapy | Experimental | Device: bright light therapyBright light therapy (BLT) will be given via a lightbox device in the morning for 30 minutes after waking up. Duration of therapy will be 7 consecutive days. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Adult patient aged 18 years old or above
- Chinese ethnic group
- Diagnosis of incurable cancer
- A score of >=3 in Brief Fatigue Inventory after a period of standard care
Key exclusion criteria (10 listed)
- Patients who are imminently dying
- Patients who are undergoing chemotherapy or radiotherapy
- Patients who have history of epilepsy, brain tumour, brain metastasis
- Patients who are blind or have retinal disease
- Patents who have photosensitive skin condition
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| bright light therapyplease see arm description | Device | Bright light therapy |
Primary outcome
Rate of declined particilation in the study
Time frame: At screening stage
Rate of approached potential subjects who declined participation in the study
Attrition rate
Time frame: 1 week of the intervention
Rate of subject drop out (all cause)
Change in brief fatigue inventory
Time frame: Pre- and post- the 1-week intervention
Change of scoreing of the brief fatigue inventory (BFI) from baseline to end of treatment. BFI is a 9-item questionnaire measured in 11-point Likert scale. It evaluates the level of present, overall and worst fatigue together with its interference to patients' general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relationships with other people and enjoyment of life during the past 24 hours. A higher score means a worse outcome.
3 secondary outcomes
Change in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
Time frame: Pre- and post- the 1-week intervention
Change in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Time frame: Pre- and post- the 1-week intervention
Change in McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire - Hong Kong
Time frame: Pre- and post- the 1-week intervention
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 29 Sep 2020.
- Background: PubMed 17509812Teunissen SC, Wesker W, Kruitwagen C, de Haes HC, Voest EE, de Graeff A. Symptom prevalence in patients with incurable cancer: a systematic review. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2007 Jul;34(1):94-104. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.10.015. Epub 2007 May 23.
- Background: PubMed 9893650Stone P, Richards M, Hardy J. Fatigue in patients with cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1998 Oct;34(11):1670-6. doi: 10.1016/s0959-8049(98)00167-1.
- Background: PubMed 11147138Chan CW, Molassiotis A. The impact of fatigue on Chinese cancer patients in Hong Kong. Support Care Cancer. 2001 Jan;9(1):18-24. doi: 10.1007/s005200000192.
- Background: PubMed 23480501Lou Y, Yates P, McCarthy A, Wang H. Fatigue self-management: a survey of Chinese cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. J Clin Nurs. 2013 Apr;22(7-8):1053-65. doi: 10.1111/jocn.12174.
- Background: PubMed 11040270Curt GA, Breitbart W, Cella D, Groopman JE, Horning SJ, Itri LM, Johnson DH, Miaskowski C, Scherr SL, Portenoy RK, Vogelzang NJ. Impact of cancer-related fatigue on the lives of patients: new findings from the Fatigue Coalition. Oncologist. 2000;5(5):353-60. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.5-5-353.
- Background: PubMed 17532179Gupta D, Lis CG, Grutsch JF. The relationship between cancer-related fatigue and patient satisfaction with quality of life in cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2007 Jul;34(1):40-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.10.012. Epub 2007 May 25.
- Background: PubMed 31437105Dean A. The holistic management of fatigue within palliative care. Int J Palliat Nurs. 2019 Aug 2;25(8):368-376. doi: 10.12968/ijpn.2019.25.8.368.
- Background: PubMed 26026155Mucke M; Mochamat; Cuhls H, Peuckmann-Post V, Minton O, Stone P, Radbruch L. Pharmacological treatments for fatigue associated with palliative care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 May 30;2015(5):CD006788. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006788.pub3.
- Background: PubMed 25113839Bower JE. Cancer-related fatigue--mechanisms, risk factors, and treatments. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014 Oct;11(10):597-609. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.127. Epub 2014 Aug 12.
- Background: PubMed 19896571Lower EE, Fleishman S, Cooper A, Zeldis J, Faleck H, Yu Z, Manning D. Efficacy of dexmethylphenidate for the treatment of fatigue after cancer chemotherapy: a randomized clinical trial. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2009 Nov;38(5):650-62. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2009.03.011.
- Background: PubMed 23690414Bruera E, Yennurajalingam S, Palmer JL, Perez-Cruz PE, Frisbee-Hume S, Allo JA, Williams JL, Cohen MZ. Methylphenidate and/or a nursing telephone intervention for fatigue in patients with advanced cancer: a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Jul 1;31(19):2421-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.45.3696. Epub 2013 May 20.
- Background: PubMed 15800134Golden RN, Gaynes BN, Ekstrom RD, Hamer RM, Jacobsen FM, Suppes T, Wisner KL, Nemeroff CB. The efficacy of light therapy in the treatment of mood disorders: a review and meta-analysis of the evidence. Am J Psychiatry. 2005 Apr;162(4):656-62. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.4.656.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Fatigue
Enrolling by invitation
Dance-Based Exercise for Cancer-Related Fatigue in Breast Cancer Patients
Breast Neoplasms
Not yet recruiting
Mind Body Reprogramming Therapy for Adolescents With Chronic Fatigue
Chronic Fatigue
Not yet recruiting
Comparison of Functional Inspiratory Muscle Training and Combined Exercise Training in Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Recruiting
Acute Effects of Post-Exercise Hyperoxia on Recovery in Cycling
Athletic Performance, Hyperbaric Oxygenation
Recruiting
Recovery After Fatigue in Young Athletes: Comparison Between TECAR Therapy and Cycle Ergometer"
Muscle Fatigue, Healthy Adult
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Heng Joshua Tang principal investigator
Hospital Authority
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing bright light therapy in people with Fatigue and Cancer, run by Hospital Authority, Hong Kong at 1 site in Hong Kong.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 10 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Sep 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Hong Kong. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Heng Joshua Tang ((852) 57967529, th372@ha.org.hk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Rate of declined particilation in the study (time frame: At screening stage). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04525924, which also lists 29 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Sep 2020.