Randomized controlled trial evaluates eHealth intervention's impact on quality of life in long-term breast cancer survivors, revealing no significant improvements.
Background Digital health interventions have shown promise for improving quality of life, especially in the short term after treatment. However, evidence regarding long-term breast cancer survivors (LT-BCSs; disease free >5 years) remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an eHealth intervention targeting health promotion and late sequelae management to improve LT-BCSs’ quality of life. Methods In a randomized controlled clinical trial, 201 LT-BCSs (mean 11 years posttreatment) were randomly assigned to an interventio group (n = 102) using the CUMACA-M mobile application with specific health advice and recommendations for LT-BCSs, or a control group (n = 99) receiving usual care. Quality of life was measured with the Quality of Life–Cancer Survivors scale (QOL-CS) at baseline and after 3 months. Analyses followed an intention-to-treat approach using t-tests, nonparametric tests, and effect sizes. Results At three months, no statistically or clinically significant differences between the groups in the overall quality of life score (QOL-CS) were found (difference of differences = 0.11; 95% CI -0.10 to 0.32; p = .303). In the intervention group, a small intragroup decrease in spiritual well-being was observed -0.25 (-0.49 to -0.02), of uncertain clinical significance; no significant differences between groups were detected. Conclusions This eHealth intervention did not improve the quality of life of LT-BCSs, suggesting that more personalized, interactive, or professionally supported strategies may be needed. Future research should evaluate the long-term outcomes and effectiveness of hybrid or personalized digital strategies in this population. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05322460; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05322460.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Parra et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: