Group Retreat Psilocybin Therapy for People with Metastatic Cancer with Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression: Safety and Efficacy Outcomes of a Phase 1/2 Study
This Phase I/II study (n=52) tested a group retreat model of psilocybin therapy for people with metastatic cancer and anxiety or depression, using 25 mg psilocybin in a 3-day retreat format. No unattended distress episodes occurred, and anxiety and depression scores fell over 28 days.
Authors
- Back, A. L.
- McGregor, B. A.
- Thorn, L. L.
Published
Abstract
Background:
Psilocybin is a promising therapy for cancer-related distress, but existing individual treatment models are resource intensive. In this study, we designed and tested a group model of psilocybin therapy for people with metastatic cancer and cancer-related anxiety and depression.
Method:
Eligibility criteria included metastatic cancer, moderate-to-severe symptoms of anxiety or depression without a pre-cancer mental health diagnosis, performance status adequate to attend a 3-day retreat that required self-care, and tapering of antidepressants. Exclusion criteria included enrollment in hospice. The design of the intervention included: two virtual preparatory sessions; a 3-day in-person retreat in a rustic setting that included the third prep session, the psilocybin session, and the first integration session; and two additional virtual integration sessions. Psilocybin was administered in oral capsules at 25 mg. A retreat team of four core facilitators and two backup facilitators conducted a series of eight retreats. The first retreat had five participants. For subsequent retreats, we used the primary safety outcome from each cohort, other safety outcomes, and qualitative feedback to make decisions to increase, decrease, or hold steady the participant number. The primary safety outcome was “unattended episodes of participant distress” during the psilocybin session requiring a backup facilitator. The primary exploratory efficacy outcome was reduction in anxiety and depression symptoms measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).
Results:
We enrolled 55 participants, of whom 3 withdrew prior to the retreat, leaving a total of 52. Their mean age was 53, and mean duration of living with cancer was 36 months, mean (range 5, 176); anticancer therapy was ongoing for 46 (88%); antidepressants were tapered for 18 (35%). The first retreat cohort had five participants, and the final retreat cohort had eight. For the primary safety outcome, there was not a single episode of unattended participant distress requiring a backup facilitator. The mean baseline at Day −14 (D −14) HADS total score was 17.5 (range 6–28); at D +28, the mean HADS total score was 10.2 (1–30), so the mean decrease in HADS from D −14 to D +28 was 7.3. (p < 0.0001).
Conclusion:
The Group Retreat Psilocybin Therapy was safe and well tolerated, and exploratory measures show efficacy that is promising. A group configuration of eight participants with four core facilitators can be safe for future studies with participants with serious medical illness.
Research Summary of 'Group Retreat Psilocybin Therapy for People with Metastatic Cancer with Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression: Safety and Efficacy Outcomes of a Phase 1/2 Study'
Blossom's Take
This paper reports on the first FDA-approved trial using a rite-of-passage facilitation model (group model in retreat setting). The authors report on no "episode[s] of unattended participant distress requiring a backup facilitator" and lower anxiety and depression scores (from 17.5 to 10.2) four weeks after the trial. Though not a 'standard' clinical trial, this study provides a first glimpse at a more naturalistic type of psychedelic retreat (with one facilitator per two patients). It may provide a template of how a group model may be implemented.
Introduction
Psilocybin has been investigated as a treatment for cancer-related anxiety, depression, and existential distress, and prior randomised studies of individual psilocybin therapy have shown benefit. However, the individual model is labour-intensive, typically requiring substantial therapist time per patient, which limits scalability. The authors note that group-based approaches might reduce resource demands while also adding potential therapeutic elements such as peer support, shared identity, group cohesion, trust, and a ceremonial sense of community. They also point out that very little prior cancer-specific research had tested psilocybin in a true group session format, particularly with all participants taking psilocybin together in the same room. L. and colleagues therefore designed Group Retreat Psilocybin Therapy to test whether a group retreat model could be delivered safely to people with metastatic cancer who had clinically significant anxiety and/or depression. The study aimed primarily to assess safety, especially the facilitator-to-participant ratio needed to support the session, and secondarily to collect exploratory efficacy outcomes on mood, distress, and aspects of the group experience. The paper presents this as a Phase 1/2 feasibility and safety study intended to inform future work. The authors also frame the intervention as a deliberate blend of retreat setting, ritual, and group process, developed to suit medically complex participants who were largely psychedelic-naïve and to see whether a group format could still support a meaningful psilocybin experience.
Expert Research Summaries
Go Pro to access AI-powered section-by-section summaries, editorial takes, and the full research toolkit.
Full Text PDF
Full Paper PDF
Create a free account to open full-text PDFs.
Study Details
- Study Typeindividual
- Journal
- Compound
- Topics
- APA Citation
Back, A. L., McGregor, B. A., Thorn, L. L., Baker, K., Gooley, T., Kaelen, M., Harvey, K., Guy, J. M., Myers, S., Perez, J., Thompson, P., Billingsley, L., & Sesnon, C. (2026). Group Retreat Psilocybin Therapy for People with Metastatic Cancer with Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression: Safety and Efficacy Outcomes of a Phase 1/2 Study. Psychedelic Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1177/28314425251413856
Related Papers
References (14)
Papers cited by this study that are also in Blossom
Ross, S., Bossis, A. P., Guss, J. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2016)
Griffiths, R. R., Johnson, M. W. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2016)
Grob, C. S., Danforth, A. L., Chopra, G. S. et al. · JAMA Psychiatry (2011)
Anderson, B. T., Danforth, A. L., Daroff, R. et al. · EClinicalMedicine (2020)
Kettner, H., Rosas, F. E., Timmermann, C. et al. · Frontiers in Pharmacology (2021)
Agrawal, M., Richards, B. D., Richards, W. A. et al. · Cancer (2023)
Lewis, B. R., Garland, E. L., Byrne, K. et al. · Journal of Pain and Symptom Management (2023)
Shnayder, S., Ameli, R., Sinaii, N. et al. · Journal of Affective Disorders (2023)
Trope, A., Anderson, B. T., Hooker, A. R. et al. · Journal of Psychoactive Drugs (2019)
Belser, A. B., Agin-Liebes, G. I., Swift, T. C. et al. · Journal of Humanistic Psychology (2017)
Show all 14 referencesShow fewer
Back, A., Myers, S., Guy, J. et al. · Psychedelic Medicine (2024)
Barrett, F. S., Johnson, M. W., Griffiths, R. R. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2015)
Barrett, F. S., Bradstreet, M. P., Leoutsakos, J. M. S. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2016)
Roseman, L., Haijen, E. C. H. M., Idialu-Ikato, K. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2019)
Your Personal Research Library
Go Pro to save papers, add notes, rate studies, and organize your research into custom shelves.