Cited by 215Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeCancer survivorship and careResilience and Mental Health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 37 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Promoting resilience in adolescents and young adults with cancer: Results from the PRISM randomized controlled trial

Open access

Abstract

Background: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer are at risk for poor psychosocial outcomes. This study aimed to determine whether a novel intervention targeting resilience resources would improve patient‐reported resilience, quality of life, and psychological distress. Methods: In this parallel, phase 2 randomized controlled trial, English‐speaking AYAs (12‐25 years old) with cancer were randomized to the Promoting Resilience in Stress Management (PRISM) intervention or usual care (UC). PRISM is a brief, skills‐based intervention targeting stress management, goal setting, cognitive reframing, and meaning making. Participants completed surveys at enrollment and 6 months. Mixed effects regression models evaluated associations between PRISM and the primary outcome (10‐item Connor‐Davidson Resilience Scale scores) and secondary outcomes (generic and cancer‐related quality of life [Pediatric Quality of Life modules], psychological distress [Kessler‐6], and anxiety/depression [Hospital Anxiety and Depression]) at 6 months. Results: Ninety‐two AYAs were enrolled, were randomized, and completed baseline surveys (48 in the PRISM group and 44 in the UC group); 73% were 12 to 17 years old, and 62% had leukemia or lymphoma. Attrition was primarily due to medical complications and/or death; 36 PRISM participants and 38 UC participants completed 6‐month surveys. PRISM was associated with improved resilience (+3.0 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5‐5.4; P = .02) and cancer‐specific quality of life (+9.6; 95% CI, 2.6‐16.7; P = .01) and reduced psychological distress (–2.1; 95% CI, –4.1 to –0.2; P = .03) but not generic quality of life (+7.2; 95% CI, –0.8 to 15.2; P = .08). Although anxiety was similar between the groups, 2 PRISM participants (6%) and 8 UC participants (21%) met the criteria for depression at 6 months (odds ratio, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01‐1.09; P = .06). Conclusions: PRISM was associated with improved psychosocial outcomes in comparison with UC, suggesting that brief, skills‐based interventions for AYAs may provide a benefit.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In the PRISM randomized controlled trial, a brief skills-based intervention for adolescents and young adults with cancer was associated with improved patient-reported resilience, cancer-specific quality of life, and psychological distress compared with usual care at 6 months. Depression rates were lower among PRISM participants but the difference was not statistically significant.

Key findings

Among 92 enrolled AYAs (48 PRISM, 44 usual care), PRISM was associated with improved resilience (+3.0 points; 95% CI, 0.5-5.4; P = .02), improved cancer-specific quality of life (+9.6; 95% CI, 2.6-16.7; P = .01), and reduced psychological distress (−2.1; 95% CI, −4.1 to −0.2; P = .03).

  • Generic quality of life did not significantly improve (+7.2; 95% CI, −0.8 to 15.2; P = .08).
  • Anxiety was similar between groups: 6 PRISM participants (17%) and 10 usual care participants (26%) met criteria (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.07-1.96), whereas depression was 2 PRISM participants (6%) and 8 usual care participants (21%) (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-1.09; P = .06).
  • At enrollment, 73% were 12 to 17 years old and 62% had leukemia or lymphoma; 43 of 48 PRISM participants (90%) received all 4 main sessions, and attrition was primarily due to medical complications and/or death.

Methods

Phase 2, parallel, 1:1 randomized controlled trial at Seattle Children's Hospital between January 2015 and October 2016; eligible participants were English-speaking AYAs aged 12 to 25 years with new cancer diagnosed 1 to 10 weeks before enrollment and receiving systemic chemotherapy, or with progressive/recurrent/refractory cancer at any time before enrollment; patients with preexisting or cancer-associated cognitive disabilities were excluded.

  • One hundred AYAs were randomized (50 usual care, 50 PRISM); 92 completed baseline surveys (44 usual care, 48 PRISM), and 6-month surveys were completed by 38 usual care and 36 PRISM participants.
  • Primary outcome was patient-reported resilience at 6 months (CDRISC-10); secondary outcomes included generic and cancer-specific quality of life (PedsQL), psychological distress (Kessler-6), and anxiety/depression (HADS).
  • Primary intention-to-treat analysis used unadjusted linear mixed effects regression with patient-level random intercepts and slopes for continuous outcomes and mixed effects logistic regression for binary anxiety/depression outcomes; sensitivity analyses adjusted for sex, race/ethnicity, first language, and history of advanced cancer were unchanged; testing was 2-sided at α = .05 without correction for multiple comparisons.

Limitations

Stated: the trial was conducted at a single large academic pediatric-based AYA oncology center with a multidisciplinary psychosocial usual care team, so results may not generalize to smaller, community-based, or adult oncology centers; staff may have been aware of PRISM content; more usual care participants declined continued participation before baseline; only English-speaking patients were included; chance imbalance occurred in sex and first language; the CDRISC-10 may not exclusively reflect ability to harness resilience resources; the study could not delineate PRISM's active ingredients or dose effect, track real-life skill uptake, or assess durability; and the lack of an active control means social contact may have contributed to effects.

  • Stated: the sample size may have been too small to detect subtle biases, and cultural differences in perceptions of resilience warrant further investigation.
  • Evident from the text: the 6-month binary outcome analyses were based on only 74 participants, and no correction for multiple comparisons was applied, so the anxiety and depression findings are non-significant trends that should be interpreted cautiously.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.31666

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 37 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 43 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 26
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 25
43 of 43
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Traditional cognitive behavioral therapy is designed for patients with maladaptive coping.

    “Finally, CBT is designed for patients with maladaptive coping; AYAs may avoid the development of maladaptive behaviors through preventive learning.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Adolescents and young adults may avoid developing maladaptive behaviors through preventive learning.

    “Finally, CBT is designed for patients with maladaptive coping; AYAs may avoid the development of maladaptive behaviors through preventive learning.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    AYAs, especially those with serious illness, may have underdeveloped resources.

    “we postulate that AYAs, especially those with serious illness, may have underdeveloped resources.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    PRISM's mechanism of action is to bolster these resources and, in turn, enable AYA well-being.

    “PRISM's proposed mechanism of action is to bolster these resources and, in turn, enable AYA well-being.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    PRISM has been validated only in English.

    “because PRISM has been validated only in English.”
5 of 5

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

  • Cancer-specific quality-of-life MCID does not match the stated calculation

    Minor

    Table 2 gives a cancer-specific quality-of-life baseline SD of 16.3. Half of that is 8.15, not the MCID of 9.3 reported in Table 3.

    Reported 9.3 · recomputed 8.15

  • Overall nonwhite percentage is understated

    Minor

    The table lists 34 nonwhite participants among 92 overall, or approximately 37%, rather than 36%.

    Reported 36 · recomputed 36.956522

  • PRISM-group CNS percentage is overstated

    Minor

    Three of 48 PRISM participants is 6.25%, which rounds to 6% at the table's whole-percentage precision, not 7%.

    Reported 7 · recomputed 6.25

  • Generic quality-of-life MCID does not match the stated calculation

    Minor

    The paper defines MCID as half the pooled baseline standard deviation. Table 2 gives a generic quality-of-life baseline SD of 18.6, making the MCID 9.3 rather than the reported 7.2.

    Reported 7.2 · recomputed 9.3

4 of 4

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 45 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Davidson J, 2010, Connor‐Davidson Resilience Scale Manual

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–215 of 215

Metadata

Authors
Rosenberg, A. R., Bradford, M. C., McCauley, E., Curtis, J. R., Wolfe, J., Baker, K. S., & Yi‐Frazier, J. P.
Affiliations
  • Seattle Children's Hospital (US)
  • Seattle Children's Research Institute (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Rosenberg, Abby R.
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-09-19
Volume
124
Issue
19
Pages
3909-3917
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
OpenAlex
W2889985123
Cited by
215
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 2
FWCI
19.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • CureSearch for Children's Cancer (KL2TR000421)
  • National Institutes of Health (KL2TR000421)
  • National Cancer Institute (L40 CA170049)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
Keywords
adolescent and young adult cancer, resilience, psychosocial interventions, stress management, quality of life, psychological distress, anxiety, depression, cognitive reframing, meaning-making, goal setting, leukemia, lymphoma, psychosocial outcomes, Kessler-6, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Counseling, Female, Humans, Male, Neoplasms, Patient Education as Topic, Psychotherapy, Stress, Psychological, Treatment Outcome, Age of Onset, Resilience, Psychological, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review