TY - JOUR
T1 - Light Therapy for Cancer-Related Fatigue in (Non-)Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors
T2 - Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial
AU - Starreveld, Daniëlle E J
AU - Daniels, Laurien A
AU - Kieffer, Jacobien M
AU - Valdimarsdottir, Heiddis B
AU - de Geus, Jessie
AU - Lanfermeijer, Mirthe
AU - van Someren, Eus J W
AU - Habers, G Esther A
AU - Bosch, Jos A
AU - Janus, Cécile P M
AU - van Spronsen, Dick Johan
AU - de Weijer, Roel J
AU - Marijt, Erik W A
AU - de Jongh, Eva
AU - Zijlstra, Josée M
AU - Böhmer, Lara H
AU - Houmes, Margreet
AU - Kersten, Marie José
AU - Korse, Catharina M
AU - van Rossum, Huub H
AU - Redd, William H
AU - Lutgendorf, Susan K
AU - Ancoli-Israel, Sonia
AU - van Leeuwen, Flora E
AU - Bleiker, Eveline M A
N1 - Funding: This work was supported by the Dutch Cancer Society (Grant No. NKI 2015-7909).
The funder had no influence on study design, data collection, project management, data analysis,
interpretation, or manuscript preparation, review, or approval.
PY - 2021/9/30
Y1 - 2021/9/30
N2 - PURPOSE: To evaluate the short- and long-term effects of light therapy on fatigue (primary outcome) and sleep quality, depression, anxiety, quality of life, and circadian rhythms (secondary outcomes) in survivors of (non-)Hodgkin lymphoma presenting with chronic cancer-related fatigue.METHODS: We randomly assigned 166 survivors (mean survival 13 years) to a bright white light intervention (BWL) or dim white light comparison (DWL) group. Measurements were completed at baseline (T0), post-intervention (T1), at three (T2), and nine (T3) months follow-up. A mixed-effect modeling approach was used to compare linear and non-linear effects of time between groups.RESULTS: There were no significant differences between BWL and DWL in the reduction in fatigue over time. Both BWL and DWL significantly (p < 0.001) improved fatigue levels during the intervention followed by a slight reduction in this effect during follow-up (EST0-T1 = -0.71; EST1-T3 = 0.15). Similar results were found for depression, sleep quality, and some aspects of quality of life. Light therapy had no effect on circadian rhythms.CONCLUSIONS: BWL was not superior in reducing fatigue compared to DWL in HL and DLBCL survivors. Remarkably, the total sample showed clinically relevant and persistent improvements on fatigue not commonly seen in longitudinal observational studies in these survivors.
AB - PURPOSE: To evaluate the short- and long-term effects of light therapy on fatigue (primary outcome) and sleep quality, depression, anxiety, quality of life, and circadian rhythms (secondary outcomes) in survivors of (non-)Hodgkin lymphoma presenting with chronic cancer-related fatigue.METHODS: We randomly assigned 166 survivors (mean survival 13 years) to a bright white light intervention (BWL) or dim white light comparison (DWL) group. Measurements were completed at baseline (T0), post-intervention (T1), at three (T2), and nine (T3) months follow-up. A mixed-effect modeling approach was used to compare linear and non-linear effects of time between groups.RESULTS: There were no significant differences between BWL and DWL in the reduction in fatigue over time. Both BWL and DWL significantly (p < 0.001) improved fatigue levels during the intervention followed by a slight reduction in this effect during follow-up (EST0-T1 = -0.71; EST1-T3 = 0.15). Similar results were found for depression, sleep quality, and some aspects of quality of life. Light therapy had no effect on circadian rhythms.CONCLUSIONS: BWL was not superior in reducing fatigue compared to DWL in HL and DLBCL survivors. Remarkably, the total sample showed clinically relevant and persistent improvements on fatigue not commonly seen in longitudinal observational studies in these survivors.
U2 - 10.3390/cancers13194948
DO - 10.3390/cancers13194948
M3 - Article
C2 - 34638428
SN - 2072-6694
VL - 13
JO - Cancers
JF - Cancers
IS - 19
M1 - 4948
ER -