$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Ovarian cancer is among the most aggressive gynecological malignancies, frequently diagnosed at advanced stages because of subtle early symptoms and the absence of effective screening strategies1. Standard treatment typically combines surgery with platinum-based chemotherapy2, yet despite significant clinical advances, ovarian cancer remains the leading cause of death among gynecological cancers and ranks as the fifth most common cause of cancer-related mortality in women, with an increasing incidence observed in younger populations3. These epidemiological trends underscore the urgent need to improve not only survival outcomes but also the quality of life for affected patients.
Beyond its physical burden, ovarian cancer imposes profound psychological challenges. Treatment-related fatigue, weight loss, and physical deterioration often exacerbate anxiety, depressive symptoms, and emotional dysregulation4. Furthermore, repeated diagnostic procedures and continuous oncology follow-up can intensify psychological distress5. Consequently, psycho-oncology has become an essential dimension of comprehensive cancer care, focusing on structured support for the cognitive and emotional needs of patients.
Recent evidence also links psychosocial stress to both cancer onset and progression6. Dysregulation of neuroendocrine pathways and immune suppression are considered key mediators of this relationship7. In patients undergoing chemotherapy, these psychosocial stressors interact with physiological treatment stress, such as cytotoxic injury to rapidly dividing healthy cells in the nervous, gastrointestinal, and integumentary systems8, further compromising treatment adherence and potentially worsening clinical outcomes.
Despite growing recognition of these challenges, standardized psychological interventions remain scarce and inconsistently implemented in oncology practice. Existing approaches are often fragmented, lack reproducibility, and fail to systematically enhance coping capacity or emotional regulation. While alternative psychological frameworks, such as acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT), have shown benefits in other oncology contexts, they remain underexplored in ovarian cancer care and lack standardized delivery formats.
To address these gaps, the present study develops and evaluates a standardized psychological intervention protocol grounded in the Lazarus stress coping model. The protocol integrates cognitive-behavioral strategies, emotional regulation training, and structured counseling modules into chemotherapy care, aiming to reduce anxiety and depression while improving coping capacity and emotional well-being. By combining validated psychometric tools with a multidisciplinary delivery framework, this study provides a reproducible, theory-driven intervention designed to meet the urgent need for integrated psychological support in oncology practice.
Objective of the research
This study aims to develop and evaluate a standardized psychological intervention protocol for ovarian cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, grounded in the Lazarus stress coping model. The protocol integrates cognitive-behavioral strategies, emotional regulation training, and structured counseling modules into standard oncology care, with three primary objectives: enhancing coping skills, reducing anxiety and depression, and improving overall psychological well-being during chemotherapy. By combining validated psychometric tools with a multidisciplinary delivery framework, this study seeks to establish a theory-driven, reproducible model that embeds standardized psychological care into routine oncology practice.
Relevant articles
Research on the psychological needs and supportive care of ovarian cancer patients has expanded rapidly in recent years, yet several critical gaps remain. Bibliometric analyses indicate increasing interdisciplinarity but limited institutional and international collaboration, restricting integrated clinical strategies9,10.
Qualitative studies report that up to 90% of ovarian cancer patients experience significant emotional stress based on interviews with patients, caregivers, and clinicians, yet small sample sizes and lack of quantitative validation limit generalizability. Similarly, a multicenter cross-sectional study found positive associations between psychological capital, coping competence, and emotional well-being among 223 ovarian cancer patients11, but the absence of longitudinal data prevents causal inference.
Various supportive strategies have been explored, but most remain underdeveloped. Patient navigation (PN) programs benefit women at genetic risk12, yet their long-term impact is rarely assessed. Studies on death-related anxiety demonstrate its predictive role in fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) and fear of progression (FOP)13, but they often rely on unidimensional measurement tools. Likewise, investigations into stress management, self-efficacy, and health control domains highlight the need for integrated care approaches14, yet face sample recruitment limitations.
Furthermore, integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into ovarian cancer trials has been widely recommended15, but inconsistent implementation hampers systematic evaluation of psychological effects. Multimodal prehabilitation programs before cytoreductive surgery show promise in reducing postoperative complications16 and have demonstrated feasibility in small-scale pilot studies17; however, these interventions focus mainly on perioperative readiness and do not adequately address psychological well-being.
Collectively, these findings reveal a fragmented research landscape: while important insights exist, there remains a lack of standardized, reproducible psychological intervention protocols tailored specifically to ovarian cancer patients. This study addresses this critical gap by proposing a theory-driven, evidence-based framework that integrates validated coping strategies into oncology care.