Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of cancer pain 101: A randomized pilot trial evaluating a single-session telehealth pain-CBT intervention for cancer-related pain.

314 Background: Cancer-related pain significantly impacts quality of life. While pain-CBT is effective, many patients are unable to access care because of therapist shortages and busy treatment schedules that cannot accommodate multi-session treatment. This randomized pilot study explored the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of Cancer Pain 101, a single-session, telehealth pain-CBT intervention for patients with cancer-related pain. Methods: Patients experiencing pain (≥4/10 in the past week) during cancer treatment were eligible. Patients were randomized 1:1 to a 90-min telehealth intervention (pain education, coping skills, opioid management) or digital pain education using validated online resources (control). Feasibility was evaluated through intervention attendance and retention. Participants rated acceptability (satisfaction, relevance) post-intervention. Pain outcomes (worst, average, current), psychosocial measures (catastrophizing, self-efficacy), and knowledge were assessed at baseline, 2, and 4 weeks, analyzed using linear mixed-effects models. Results: From 103 eligible patients, 70 enrolled (67% enrollment rate, age 53.3; 72.9% female), randomized equally (n = 35/group). Groups had no demographic or cancer disease differences. The intervention group demonstrated moderate feasibility, with 60% (21/35) of participants attending the class and 51% (18/35) completing all follow-up assessments. Participants’ intervention acceptability ratings were high: 90% found the class understandable and relevant, 85% enjoyed it and would recommend it, and 80% reported high satisfaction, in contrast to control group participants who reported lower acceptability (enjoyment:53.3%; acceptable: 61%). Intervention participants reported significant reductions in worst pain (Mean Decrease = 1.39, adjusted p = 0.0475) at 2-week follow-up. Participants who were randomized but did not attend the intervention had significantly higher levels of worst pain (MD = 2.48, p = 0.001), current pain (MD = 2.23, p = 0.011), and pain catastrophizing (MD = 12.05, p = 0.014) at baseline compared to those who attended. Conclusions: This pilot RCT demonstrated promising feasibility and high acceptability of Cancer Pain 101 as a brief, scalable telehealth intervention during cancer treatment. Non-attenders reported greater symptom burden, suggesting barriers to engagement. Ongoing efforts must improve access to effective pain strategies within the cancer treatment trajectory. Preliminary findings support further evaluation of Cancer Pain 101 in larger trials.