This open-label study (n=12) investigates the potential of psilocybin-assisted group therapy (PAT) in cancer patients suffering from depression. Participants underwent preparatory sessions, a high-dose (25mg) psilocybin group session, and integration sessions over three weeks, with clinical outcomes measured at baseline, two weeks, and 26 weeks post-intervention. Results show significant decreases in depression symptoms and no serious adverse events, suggesting safety, feasibility, and possible efficacy of the therapy.
Papers cited by this study that are also in Blossom
Griffiths, R. R., Johnson, M. W. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2016)
Background
Psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy shows promise in treating depression and existential distress in people with serious medical illness. However, its individual-based methodology poses challenges for scaling and resource availability. The HOPE trial (A Pilot Study of Psilocybin Enhanced Group Psychotherapy in Patients with Cancer) is an IRB-approved open-label feasibility and safety pilot study examining psilocybin-assisted group therapy in cancer patients with a DSM-5 depressive disorder (including major depressive disorder as well as adjustment disorder with depressed mood). We report here the safety and clinical outcome measures including 6-month follow up data.
Methods
Outcome measures were collected at baseline, 2-week and 26-weeks post intervention. The study involved three group preparatory sessions, one high-dose (25mg) group psilocybin session, and three group integration sessions with cohorts of four participants over a three week intervention.Results 12 participants completed the trial. No serious adverse events attributed to psilocybin occurred. The primary clinical outcome measures of change in symptoms of depression on the clinician administered 17-item-HAM-D showed clinically substantial decrease in HAM-D scores from baseline to the 2-week timepoint (21.5 to 10.09, p<0.001) and the 26-week timepoint (21.5 to 14.83, p=0.006). Six out of twelve participants met criteria for remission at 2 weeks, as defined by HAM-D < 7, three out twelve demonstrated a clinically significant change (4-6 points), and eight out of twelve demonstrated a clinically substantial change (7-12 points).
Conclusion
This pilot study demonstrated the safety, feasibility, and possible efficacy of psilocybin-assisted group therapy for cancer patients dealing with depressive symptoms. Based on demonstrated efficacy and significant reductions in therapist time, future investigations with the group therapy model are warranted.
Depressive and anxiety symptoms that accompany a cancer diagnosis have been the subject of multiple psilocybin-assisted therapy studies, which have typically used an individual-format model and reported rapid, often durable improvements in mood and existential distress. However, the individual-centred protocol used in most trials is resource intensive—often requiring many clinician hours per participant—and therefore poses barriers to scalability and wider clinical implementation. No published modern study had tested whether a full group-format intervention, including a group psilocybin dosing session, is safe, feasible, and retains therapeutic efficacy. Lewis and colleagues set out to pilot a full-group psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy model in patients with cancer and a DSM-5 depressive disorder. The study aimed to assess safety and feasibility, and to collect preliminary efficacy data on depressive symptoms and related psychosocial outcomes, using a single high-dose (25 mg) group psilocybin session embedded within group preparatory and integration sessions for cohorts of four participants.
Design and overall procedures: The HOPE trial was a single-arm, open-label pilot study conducted under Institutional Review Board, FDA, and DEA approvals. Each cohort comprised four participants and the intervention spanned three weeks: three 120-minute group preparatory sessions (with 30 minutes of 1:1 time per participant within each session), a single group psilocybin administration session (25 mg, day 0), and three 120-minute group integration sessions. Preparatory and integration groups used a supportive-expressive process and psychoeducation; therapists emphasised nondirective, supportive engagement during dosing. Sessions were delivered with a 1:1 therapist-to-participant ratio plus an additional lead therapist; a multidisciplinary 10-person therapist team had completed standard training in psychedelic-assisted therapy. COVID-19 precautions (masking) were observed throughout. Participants and screening: Recruitment was open to patients with any cancer type or stage who met DSM-5 criteria for a depressive disorder; referrals came from interdisciplinary care teams. Screening included chart review, telephone pre-screening, and an in-person psychiatric and medical assessment with PHQ-9 and Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS). Laboratory screening included a comprehensive metabolic panel, urine drug screen and pregnancy test when applicable. The protocol specified a 42-day window for screening/enrolment after the in-person visit. Three cohorts (total n = 12) were enrolled between October 2021 and May 2022; participants were paired with an individual therapist prior to starting preparatory sessions. Intervention specifics and safety monitoring: The group dosing took place in a partitioned clinical space with reclining chairs and a communal music playlist; a private break-out room was available but not used. Vital signs were monitored frequently during the dosing day (every 30 minutes for two hours, then hourly). Adverse events were assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 and the C-SSRS throughout preparatory, dosing and integration sessions. Participants were followed for 27 days for emergent suicidal ideation or behaviour and had contact information for their therapist and study team. Outcomes and timing: Feasibility benchmarks were recruitment and retention, defined as completing ≥75% of preparatory and integration sessions plus the dosing session. The pre-specified primary clinical outcome was change in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) score at two weeks post-intervention (day 27), with baseline HAM-D taken on the day of the first preparatory session. Secondary outcomes included the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy—Spiritual Well-Being Scale (FACIT-Sp), the Death Transcendence Scale, and the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ-30) administered at the end of the dosing day. Assessments occurred at seven time points from baseline through 26-week follow-up. Statistical analysis: The investigators performed power calculations based on prior within-group effect sizes, targeting a sample size of 10 evaluable patients to detect d = 1.20 with 84% power and enrolling 12 to allow for dropout. Hypothesis testing used mixed effects models with time as the primary fixed effect and a random intercept to account for repeated measures; a secondary analysis model included all seven time points with an AR(1) covariance structure. Effect sizes are reported as Cohen's d.
Feasibility was assessed by rates of recruitment and retention of enrolled participants with the benchmark of completing 75% of preparatory and integration sessions as well as the psilocybin dosing session. Qualitative feedback on the study was collected through surveys at the end of the intervention. Safety was evaluated with the common terminology criteria for adverse events v.5as well as the Columbia Suicidality Severity Rating Scale interview.Adverse event assessments occurred during all preparatory and integration sessions as well as the dosing day and included participant self-report and clinical observation. During the psilocybin session vital signs (temperature, heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation) were measured every 30 minutes for the first two hours and then every 60 minutes thereafter. The pre-specified primary clinical outcome measure was change in mean score on the 17-item HAM-Dat two weeks post intervention (day 27). Baseline HAM-D assessments were performed on the day of the first preparatory session. HAM-D assessments were administered by independent raters at baseline and the primary outcome time points. These measures were obtained at seven time points through the course of the study: baseline (Prep Session #1), Prep Sessions #2, #3, Integration Sessions #2, #3, two-week follow up, and 26-week follow up. Secondary clinical outcome measures included the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being Scale, version 4 (FACIT-Sp)and the Death Transcendence Scale. The mystical experience questionnaire (MEQ-30)was administered at the end of the dosing day to all participants. Qualitative outcome measures for the study, including response to the group format, have been previously reported.
This pilot study demonstrated the safety, feasibility, and possible efficacy of psilocybin-assisted group therapy for patients dealing with depressive symptoms associated with a cancer diagnosis. In three cohorts of four participants each there were no serious adverse events and 12 transient adverse reactions across six participants, demonstrating that this group intervention was well tolerated and safe. This frequency of adverse events does not represent an increase in frequency from other studies employing individual models of study drug administration. In terms of feasibility, this study showed a 100% completion rate and 98% attendance rate for study sessions which is remarkably high. For comparison, the best studied group intervention for cancer patients-Meaning Centered Group Psychotherapy-typically has approximately 50% completion rates.We observed clinically substantial reductions in HAM-D scores from baseline across the two study outcome time points (two weeks and 26 weeks). This is consistent with other psilocybin studies in cancer patients.We observed significant improvements in quality of life, spiritual well-being, and death transcendence measures which are consistent with previous psilocybin studies in cancer patients. Overall, this data suggests that this group model did not detract from the benefits of psilocybin-assisted therapy demonstrated in studies employing an individual intervention model. We also observed a significant correlation between MEQ-30 scores and HAM-D scores at the two-week primary outcome timepoint: MEQ-Total scores as well as MEQ-Mystical and MEQ-Ineffability subscale scores were significantly associated with changes in HAM-D scores between baseline and the primary 2-week endpoint. A total of six out of 12 (50%) of participants achieved a complete mystical experience on the MEQ-30 (defined as scoring above 60% on all subscales) which is higher than rates reported in other psilocybin trials we are aware of. Notably, participants who achieved a complete mystical experience on the MEQ-30 showed significantly greater decreases in HAM-D scores. To our knowledge this study is the first modern study to employ a full group model intervention with psilocybin-assisted therapy throughout all study sessions including the psilocybin dosing session. Each participant received a total of 20 hours of therapy, for a total of 240 therapy hours for all twelve participants distributed among five therapists (four individual therapists plus a lead therapist). This involved a sum total of 300 individual therapist hours devoted to run the entire study. To run this study with the standard 2:1 therapist to participant ratio with individual sessions would Fig.. FACIT outcomes at baseline and 2-week endpoint. FACIT, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being Scale. require 480 therapist hours. This represents a 37.5% reduction in total therapist hours. A 37.5% reduction in costs makes this form of therapy much more accessible for patients with limited resources and has significant implications for clinical implementation particularly given that psilocybin is on the path towards FDA approval over the next few years. There are a number of limitations in this study that are characteristic of small, open-label pilot studies. This includes the lack of a control group and associated amplifications of likely expectancy effects. Five out of 12 study participants had prior exposure to classic psychedelics: this is significantly higher than estimated population prevalence data for the U.S. (approximately 10%)and suggests possible selection bias. (Additionally, five out of 12 participants had prior exposure to THC-containing cannabis products). Notably our participant sample was predominantly Caucasian with limited diversity: to some degree this is influenced by demographic trends in Salt Lake City but likely represents a concerning trend present in other psychedelic-assisted therapy studies to date and an ongoing issue for the field. Another limitation to this study is that the nonmanualized supportive-expressive group therapeutic approach in this study represent challenges in terms of replicability as well as disentangling relative effects of psilocybin vs. group therapy. The tension between open-ended and nondirective therapeutic modalities and more directed approaches remains a question for the field as a whole. This trial included participants with a range of cancer types with heterogeneous prognosis. While the study was not large enough to detect treatment, differences based on prognosis or stage, we suspect this is a significant factor for individuals undergoing this kind of intervention, particularly in a group format. While we feel the group, model holds significant promise for the field, we also feel it prudent to insert a note of caution in regards to possible harms related to enhanced social suggestibility in groups at baseline which are likely amplified by psilocybin. Certainly, this psychological effect can be directed in therapeutic fashion, however, it is worth noting that it also likely plays a significant role in documented coercive or abuse behaviors of psychedelic therapists, which has received more visibility recently.This suggests a requisite level of care, deliberation, consistency, and ethical oversight for group interventions. Qualitative measures from this study have been previously reported by this group.Briefly summarizing these results, a significant majority of participants reported that the group format enhanced individual therapeutic response and was perceived as a critical element to the experience. While a direct comparison of individual vs. group formats, ideally with a factorial design, would be required to characterize the relative contributions of the therapeutic format in treatment effect this study suggests that a full group model is a promising format for this treatment which is otherwise resource intensive and difficult to scale. Group psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy offers an important new treatment option that may harness the benefits of both psilocybin and therapeutic group processes. The social support and meaning-making that occurs through group dialogue may facilitate psychedelic integration and lead to long-term consolidation of psychological growth occasioned by the psychedelic experience. Observations and qualitative reports gathered in the studysupport the hypothesis that psilocybin-assisted therapy may enhance the therapeutic effects of groupbased psychotherapies via enhanced sense of connection, empathy, interpersonal sharing, and social learning, particularly in relation to an illness that is often isolating. Further research on group model interventions would help elucidate mechanisms of therapeutic change and relative impact of group engagement in this process. Moreover, the sine qua non of mystical experience, the sense of oneness or interconnectedness, might be fostered through group interaction and cohesion proximal to the psilocybin dosing session.
Create a free account to open full-text PDFs.
Ross, S., Bossis, A. P., Guss, J. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2016)
Grob, C. S., Danforth, A. L., Chopra, G. S. et al. · JAMA Psychiatry (2011)
Agin-Liebes, G. I., Malone, T., Yalch, M. M. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2020)
Nichols, D. E. · Pharmacological Reviews (2016)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Leech, R., Shanahan, M. et al. · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (2014)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Friston, K. J. · Pharmacological Reviews (2019)
Johnson, M. W., Richards, W. A., Griffiths, R. R. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2008)
Rucker, J., Iliff, J., Nutt, D. J. · Neuropharmacology (2017)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Goodwin, G. M. · Neuropsychopharmacology (2017)
Nygart, V., Pommerencke, L. M., Carhart-Harris, R. L. et al. · Frontiers in Psychology (2021)
Pokorny, T., Preller, K. H., Kometer, M. et al. · International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology (2017)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Bolstridge, &. M., Day, C. M. J. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2017)
Barrett, F. S., Johnson, M. W., Griffiths, R. R. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2015)
Lewis, B. R., Byrne, K., Hendrick, J. et al. · Journal of Psychedelic Studies (2023)
Papers in Blossom that reference this study
Williams, Z. J., Barnett, H., Szigeti, B. · JAMA Psychiatry (2026)
Jacobs, E., Zahid, Z., Hinkle, J. et al. · BMJ (2026)
Back, A. L., McGregor, B. A., Thorn, L. L. et al. · Psychedelic Medicine (2026)
Back, A. L., McGregor, B. A., Billingsley, L. et al. · Psychedelic Medicine (2025)
Beaussant, Y., Sager, Z., Brennan, C. et al. · BMJ Open (2025)
Lewis, B. R., Hendrick, J., Byrne, K. et al. · PLOS Medicine (2025)
Ross, M. L., Iyer, R., Williams, M. L. et al. · General Hospital Psychiatry (2025)
Williams, Z. J., Barnett, H., Szigeti, B. · OSF Preprints (2025)
Seybert, C., Schimmers, N., Silva, L. et al. · Lancet (2024)
Gordon, A. R., Carrithers, B. M., Pagni, B. A. et al. · Research Square (2024)
Enrollment and sample characteristics: Of 42 potential patients prescreened, 14 proceeded to formal screening and 12 were enrolled into three cohorts of four participants (October 2021–May 2022). The final six-month follow-up contacts occurred in December 2022. The sample was majority female (8 female, 4 male), mean age 48.2 years (range 30–71), and predominantly Caucasian. Cancer types, stage and prognosis were heterogeneous; most participants had terminal diagnoses while three had likely curable cancers. All participants met DSM-5 criteria for a depressive disorder. The extracted text does not provide a full breakdown of cancer stages or all baseline comorbidities. Retention, attendance and safety: All 12 participants completed the intervention and primary endpoint assessments at two weeks and six months; overall attendance was 98% (two participants each missed one integration session). No serious adverse events were attributed to psilocybin. During dosing, no participant required the private break-out room or emergent psychiatric medications. Four participants received short-term medications for general medical complaints during the dosing day (two received promethazine 25 mg for nausea, one received acetaminophen 325 mg for headache, one received propranolol 10 mg for sustained hypertension). One participant experienced nausea followed by hypotension, vomiting and diarrhoea the next day; these prolonged symptoms were later attributed to a viral gastroenteritis affecting the participant’s family. No emergent suicidal ideation or suicidal behaviour was detected during monitoring. Primary depression outcomes: The pre-specified primary outcome, change in HAM-D score from baseline to two weeks, showed a clinically substantial reduction: mean HAM-D decreased from 21.5 at baseline to 10.09 at two weeks (F1,9.00 = 33.81, P < 0.001, d = 1.71). At 26 weeks the mean HAM-D was 14.83 (baseline 21.5 to 14.83; F1,6.49 = 15.58, P = 0.006, d = 1.28). Six of 12 participants (50%) met remission at two weeks, defined as HAM-D < 7. Regarding categorical change magnitudes, three of 12 showed a clinically significant change of 4–6 points and eight of 12 showed a clinically substantial change of 7–12 points. Across all time points the main effect of time was significant (F6,36.98 = 14.02, P < 0.001). Secondary and exploratory outcomes: Several FACIT subscales showed significant improvements from baseline to the two-week follow-up: FACIT-Emotional, FACIT-Functional, FACIT-Spiritual Meaning, FACIT-Spiritual Peace, and FACIT-Spiritual Faith reached significance (other FACIT subscales did not). On the Death Transcendence Scale, the Mysticism subscale showed a significant time effect (F1,8.62 = 9.54, P = 0.014, d = 1.08). On the MEQ-30, six of 12 participants (50%) experienced a complete mystical experience (defined as >60% on all MEQ subscales). MEQ-Total scores correlated with HAM-D change between baseline and two weeks (r = -0.71, P = 0.015); MEQ-Mystical (r = -0.63, P = 0.038) and MEQ-Ineffability (r = -0.68, P = 0.021) subscales were also significantly associated with HAM-D change. Participants who achieved a complete mystical experience had greater reductions in HAM-D than those who did not (t = 2.35, P = 0.04, Cohen's d = 1.42).
Lewis and colleagues interpret these pilot data as supporting the safety, feasibility, and potential efficacy of a full group-format psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy protocol for cancer patients with depressive disorders. In three cohorts of four participants there were no psilocybin-attributed serious adverse events, 12 transient adverse reactions across six participants, 100% completion of the intervention, and 98% session attendance—outcomes the authors contrast with lower completion rates typically reported for other group interventions in cancer populations. The observed reductions in HAM-D scores at two and 26 weeks align with results from prior individual-format psilocybin trials in cancer populations, and improvements were also seen in several domains of quality of life, spiritual well-being and death transcendence. The investigators highlight an association between mystical-type experiences (MEQ-30) and reductions in depressive symptoms, noting that half the sample achieved a complete mystical experience and that MEQ scores correlated with HAM-D change. They also quantify a plausible efficiency advantage for the group model: reporting that participants collectively received 240 therapy hours distributed among five therapists (300 individual therapist hours to run the study) versus an estimated 480 therapist hours if delivered with a standard 2:1 individual-session model, representing a 37.5% reduction in therapist hours. Several limitations are acknowledged. The open-label, single-arm pilot design lacks a control group and is therefore vulnerable to expectancy and selection biases. The sample was small and predominantly Caucasian, limiting generalisability; five of 12 participants reported prior classic psychedelic use and five had prior THC exposure, suggesting possible selection bias relative to population prevalences. The intervention used a non-manualised supportive-expressive group approach, which may hinder replicability and makes it difficult to disentangle effects of psilocybin from group-therapy processes. Heterogeneity in cancer types and prognoses further limits inferences about differential effects by disease status. The authors also caution about the potential for amplified social suggestibility in group settings—which may have therapeutic value but also raises ethical concerns and underscores the need for rigorous oversight. In closing, the study team suggests that the full group model is a promising, more resource-efficient format that appears to preserve benefits observed in individual psilocybin trials, and they recommend further controlled research (including direct comparisons of individual versus group formats and investigations of mechanisms) before broad implementation is pursued.