INNV-21. FEASIBILITY OF A VIRTUAL REALITY (VR) INTERVENTION TARGETING DISTRESS AND ANXIETY IN PRIMARY BRAIN TUMOR (PBT) PATIENTS AT THE TIME OF NEUROIMAGING: INTERIM ANALYSIS OF A PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL

• Published in: Neuro-oncology (Charlottesville, Va.) Vol. 24; no. Supplement_7; pp. vii145 - vii146
• Main Authors: King, Amanda, Roche, Kayla, Leeper, Heather, Vera, Elizabeth, Mendoza, Tito, Mentges, Kelly, Acquaye, Alvina, Adegbesan, Kendra, Boris, Lisa, Burton, Eric, Chambers, Claudia, Choi, Anna, Christ, Alexa, Evans, Karen, Grajkowska, Ewa, Levine, Jason, Lindsley, Matthew, Lollo, Nicole, Komlodi-Pasztor, Edina, Miller, Hope, Panzer, Marissa, Penas-Prado, Marta, Pillai, Valentina, Polskin, Lily, Reyes, Jennifer, Rogers, James, Sahebjam, Solmaz, Sass, Dilorom (Delia), Shuboni-Mulligan, Dorela, Stockdill, Macy, Theeler, Brett, Wall, Kathleen, Wollet, Alex, Wu, Jing, Gilbert, Mark, Armstrong, Terri
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 14.11.2022
• ISSN: 1522-8517; 1523-5866
• DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noac209.561

Abstract BACKGROUND PBT patients experience high levels of distress and anxiety symptoms at the time of neuroimaging, yet few non-pharmacological interventions are available. This phase 2 clinical trial interim analysis explored feasibility of a VR relaxation intervention for a PBT population. METHODS PBT patients seen at NIH were recruited to participate in this single arm trial conducted via telehealth. English-speaking, adult patients with upcoming neuroimaging who can self-report symptoms and have reported distress on previous MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor assessments were eligible. Exclusion criteria include recent surgery or seizures, anxiety disorders, nausea, or visual deficits. The primary intervention consisted of a brief VR session done within 2 weeks prior to neuroimaging with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collected before and immediately post-intervention, as well as 1 week and 4 weeks later, with self-directed VR use over 1 month. A qualitative phone interview was also completed to assess patient satisfaction. RESULTS Fifty-five patients were screened and approached with 40 (73%) responding to initial reach-out and 20 ultimately enrolling (9 declines, 11 screen fails). Decline reasons included: no distress/anxiety (30%), treatment-related toxicities (11%), and unknown (59%). Seven (64%) failed screening due to exclusionary anxiety disorders (36% GAD, 18% PTSD, 9% claustrophobia). Of those enrolled, 65% were ≤ 50 years, 50% were male, 90% were White/non-Hispanic, 85% had good KPS ( > 80), 65% had high-grade tumors, and most were on active treatment. All enrolled patients completed the VR intervention and participation period, PROs questionnaires, weekly check-ins, and qualitative interview. Most patients (90%) reported frequent VR use with 7 mild adverse effects reported (headache, dizziness, nausea, neck pain). CONCLUSION These findings suggest that this intervention is feasible for this population with high enrollment and study completion, though incidence of anxiety disorders was higher than anticipated and a comprehensive evaluation of this cohort is planned.