Quality of life and health status in older adults (≥65 years) up to five years following colorectal cancer treatment: Findings from the ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is common in older adults, with more than 70% of diagnoses in people aged ≥65 years. Despite this, there is a knowledge gap regarding longer-term outcomes in this population. Here, we identify those older people most at risk of poor quality of life (QoL) and health status in the five years following CRC treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CREW is a UK longitudinal cohort study investigating factors associated with health and wellbeing recovery following curative-intent CRC surgery. Participants completed self-report questionnaires pre-surgery, then at least annually up to five years. Longitudinal analyses explored the prevalence and pre-surgery risk factors of poor QoL (QLACS-GSS) and health status (EQ-5D: presence/absence of problems in five domains) in older (≥65 years) participants over five years. RESULTS: 501 participants aged ≥65years completed questionnaires pre-surgery; 45% completed questionnaires five years later. Oldest-old participants (≥80 years) reported poorer QoL (18% higher QLACS-GSS) and 2-4 times higher odds of having problems with mobility or usual activities, compared with the youngest-old (65-69 years) over follow-up. Baseline higher self-efficacy was significantly associated with better QoL (10-30% lower QLACS-GSS scores compared to those with low self-efficacy) and lower odds of problems in all EQ-5D domains. Adequate social support was significantly associated with better QoL (8% lower QLACS-GSS) and lower odds of problems with usual activities (OR = 0.62) and anxiety/depression (OR = 0.56). CONCLUSION: There are important differences in QoL and health status outcomes for the oldest-old during CRC recovery. CREW reveals pre-surgery risk factors that are amenable to intervention including self-efficacy and social support.

Prevalence and determinants of depression up to 5 years after colorectal cancer surgery: results from the ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) study.

AIM: Depression experienced by people with colorectal cancer (CRC) is an important clinical problem affecting quality of life. Recognition of depression at key points in the pathway enables timely referral to support. This study aimed to examine depression before and 5 years after surgery to examine its prevalence and identify determinants. METHOD: The ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) study is a prospective UK cohort study involving 872 adults with nonmetastatic CRC recruited before surgery with curative intent. Questionnaires completed before surgery and 3, 9, 15, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months after surgery captured socio-demographics and assessed depression (Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, CES-D) and other psychosocial factors. Clinical details were also gathered. We present the prevalence of clinically significant depression (CES-D ≥ 20) over time and its predictors assessed before and 2 years after surgery. RESULTS: Before surgery, 21.0% of the cohort reported CES-D ≥ 20 reducing to 14.7% 5 years after surgery. Presurgery risk factors predicting subsequent depression were clinically significant depression and anxiety, previous mental health service use, low self-efficacy, poor health, having neoadjuvant treatment and low social support. Postsurgery risk factors at 2 years predicting subsequent depression were clinically significant depression, negative affect, cognitive dysfunction, accommodation type and poor health. CONCLUSION: Depression is highly pervasive in people with CRC, exceeding prevalence in the general population across follow-up. Our findings emphasize the need to screen and treat depression across the pathway. Our novel data highlight key risk factors of later depression at important and opportune time points: before surgery and at the end of routine surveillance. Early recognition and timely referral to appropriate support is vital to improve long-term psychological outcomes.

Prevalence and predictors of poor sexual well-being over 5 years following treatment for colorectal cancer: results from the ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) prospective longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe prevalence and predictors of poor sexual well-being for men and women over 5 years following treatment for colorectal cancer. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study, from presurgery to 5 years postsurgery, with eight assessment points. Logistic regression models predicted sexual well-being from presurgery to 24 months and 24 months to 60 months; time-adjusted then fully adjusted models were constructed at each stage. SETTING: Twenty-nine hospitals in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with Dukes' stage A-C, treated with curative intent, aged ≥18 years and able to complete questionnaires were eligible. OUTCOME MEASURES: The dependent variable was the Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors sexual function score. Independent variables included sociodemographic, clinical and psychosocial characteristics. RESULTS: Seven hundred and ninety participants provided a sexual well-being score for at least one time point. Thirty-seven per cent of men and 14% of women reported poor sexual well-being at 5 years. Baseline predictors for men at 24 months included having a stoma (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.20) and high levels of depression (OR 2.69/2.01, 95% CI 1.68 to 4.32/1.12 to 3.61); men with high self-efficacy (OR confident 0.33/0.48, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.61/0.24 to 1.00; very confident 0.25/0.42, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.49/0.19 to 0.94) and social support (OR 0.52/0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.81/0.35 to 0.91) were less likely to report poor sexual well-being. Predictors at 60 months included having a stoma (OR 2.30/2.67, 95% CI 1.22 to 4.34/1.11 to 6.40) and high levels of depression (OR 5.61/2.58, 95% CI 2.58 to 12.21/0.81 to 8.25); men with high self-efficacy (very confident 0.14, 95% CI 0.047 to 0.44), full social support (OR 0.26; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.53) and higher quality of life (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.98) were less likely to report poor sexual well-being. It was not possible to construct models for women due to low numbers reporting poor sexual well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Several psychosocial variables were identified as predictors of poor sexual well-being among men. Interventions targeting low self-efficacy may be helpful. More research is needed to understand women's sexual well-being.

Does quality of life return to pre-treatment levels five years after curative intent surgery for colorectal cancer? Evidence from the ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) study.

BACKGROUND: The ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) study is the first study to prospectively recruit colorectal cancer (CRC) patients, carry out the baseline assessment pre-treatment and follow patients up over five years to delineate the impact of treatment on health and wellbeing. METHODS: CRC patients received questionnaires at baseline (pre-surgery), 3, 9, 15, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months. The primary outcome was Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors (QLACS); self-efficacy, mental health, social support, affect, socio-demographics, clinical and treatment characteristics were also assessed. Representativeness was evaluated. Predictors at baseline and at 24 months of subsequent worsened quality of life (QOL) were identified using multivariable regression models. RESULTS: A representative cohort of 1017 non-metastatic CRC patients were recruited from 29 UK cancer centres. Around one third did not return to pre-surgery levels of QOL five years after treatment. Baseline factors associated with worsened QOL included >2 comorbidities, neoadjuvant treatment, high negative affect and low levels of self-efficacy, social support and positive affect. Predictors at 24 months included older age, low positive affect, high negative affect, fatigue and poor cognitive functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Some risk factors for poor outcome up to five years following CRC surgery, such as self-efficacy, social support and comorbidity management, are amenable to change. Assessment of these factors from diagnosis to identify those most likely to need support in their recovery is warranted. Early intervention has the potential to improve outcomes.

HORIZONS protocol: a UK prospective cohort study to explore recovery of health and well-being in adults diagnosed with cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding the impact of cancer and its treatment on people's everyday lives will help prepare people for what to expect, enable health professionals to predict likely recovery trajectories and shape care management according to needs. HORIZONS will recruit people awaiting treatment and follow them up at regular intervals to assess recovery of health and well-being. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: What impact does cancer diagnosis and treatment have on people's lives in the short, medium and long term? What are people's health and well-being outcomes, experiences and self-management activities over time across different cancer types and what influences these? How do people connect with and relate to others in mobilising resources that enable them to self-manage the consequences of cancer and treatment? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: HORIZONS is a multicentre, prospective cohort study exploring recovery of health and well-being in 3000 people diagnosed with breast cancer (<50 years), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or gynaecological cancer. Recruitment will take place across National Health Service (NHS) sites in the UK between September 2016 and March 2019, before primary treatment starts. Participants will be identified through clinical teams and invited to complete questionnaires including assessments of quality of life, symptoms and functioning (Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors; European Organisation for Research and Treatment Consortium Core quality of life questionnaire, EORTC-QLQ-C30), health status (EuroQol-5 dimensions, EQ-5D), self-efficacy, social support, social networks and lifestyle. Clinical data will also be collected. Descriptive statistics will characterise outcomes. Changes over time will be investigated. Factors that may influence recovery and self-management will be included in regression models to determine which influence health and well-being and self-management. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics and Health Research Authority approvals granted (IRAS Project ID: 202342, REC reference number 16/NW/0425). Adopted onto the National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network portfolio. We will engage with our Scientific Advisory Board, Tumour Specific Expert Panels, User Reference Group, Macmillan and the University of Southampton to ensure maximum publicity and benefit.

Comorbidities are associated with poorer quality of life and functioning and worse symptoms in the 5 years following colorectal cancer surgery: Results from the ColoREctal Well-being (CREW) cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: More people are living with the consequences of cancer and comorbidity. We describe frequencies of comorbidities in a colorectal cancer cohort and associations with health and well-being outcomes up to 5 years following surgery. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 872 colorectal cancer patients recruited 2010 to 2012 from 29 UK centres, awaiting curative intent surgery. Questionnaires administered at baseline (pre-surgery), 3, 9, 15, 24 months, and annually up to 5 years. Comorbidities (and whether they limit activities) were self-reported by participants from 3 months. The EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 assessed global health/quality of life (QoL), symptoms, and functioning. Longitudinal analyses investigated associations between comorbidities and health and well-being outcomes. RESULTS: At baseline, the mean age of participants was 68 years, with 60% male and 65% colon cancer. Thirty-two per cent had 1 and 40% had ≥2 comorbidities. The most common comorbidities were high blood pressure (43%), arthritis/rheumatism (32%), and anxiety/depression (18%). Of those with comorbidities, 37% reported at least 1 that limited their daily activities. Reporting any limiting comorbidities was associated with poorer global health/QoL, worse symptoms, and poorer functioning on all domains over 5-year follow-up. Controlling for the most common individual comorbidities, depression/anxiety had the greatest deleterious effect on outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical assessment should prioritise patient-reported comorbidities and whether these comorbidities limit daily activities, as important determinants of recovery of QoL, symptoms, and functioning following colorectal cancer. Targeted interventions and support services, including multiprofessional management and tailored assessment and follow-up, may aid recovery of health and well-being in these individuals.

Cost analysis of open radical cystectomy versus robot-assisted radical cystectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a cost analysis comparing the cost of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with open RC (ORC) in a UK tertiary referral centre and to identify the key cost drivers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on hospital length of stay (LOS), operative time (OT), transfusion rate, and volume and complication rate were obtained from a prospectively updated institutional database for patients undergoing RARC or ORC. A cost decision tree model was created. Sensitivity analysis was performed to find key drivers of overall cost and to find breakeven points with ORC. Monte Carlo analysis was performed to quantify the variability in the dataset. RESULTS: One RARC procedure costs £12 449.87, or £12 106.12 if the robot was donated via charitable funds. In comparison, one ORC procedure costs £10 474.54. RARC is 18.9% more expensive than ORC. The key cost drivers were OT, LOS, and the number of cases performed per annum. CONCLUSION: High ongoing equipment costs remain a large barrier to the cost of RARC falling. However, minimal improvements in patient quality of life would be required to offset this difference.

Social support following diagnosis and treatment for colorectal cancer and associations with health-related quality of life: Results from the UK ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Social support is acknowledged as important in cancer survivorship, but little is known about change in support after cancer diagnosis and factors associated with this, particularly in colorectal cancer. The CREW cohort study investigated social support up to 2 years following curative intent surgery for colorectal cancer. METHODS: A total of 871 adults recruited pre-treatment from 29 UK centres 2010 to 2012 consented to follow-up. Questionnaires at baseline, 3, 9, 15, and 24 months post-surgery included assessments of social support (Medical Outcomes Study-Social Support Survey, MOS-SSS) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Socio-demographic, clinical and treatment details were collected. Longitudinal analyses assessed social support over follow-up, associations with participant characteristics, and HRQoL. RESULTS: Around 20% were living alone and 30% without a partner. Perceived social support declined in around 29% of participants, with 8% of these reporting very low levels overall from baseline to 2 years (mean MOS-SSS overall score < 40 on a scale from 0 to 100). Older age, female gender, greater neighbourhood deprivation, presence of co-morbidities, and rectal cancer site were significantly associated with reductions in perceived support. Poorer HRQoL outcomes (generic health/QoL, reduced wellbeing, anxiety, and depression) were significantly associated with lower levels of social support. CONCLUSIONS: Levels of social support decline following colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment in nearly a third of patients and are an important risk factor for recovery of HRQoL. Assessment of support early on and throughout follow-up would enable targeted interventions to improve recovery, particularly in the more vulnerable patient groups at risk of poorer social support.

Colorectal cancer patient's self-efficacy for managing illness-related problems in the first 2 years after diagnosis, results from the ColoREctal Well-being (CREW) study.

PURPOSE: There is a growing emphasis on self-management of cancer aftercare. Little is known about patient's self-efficacy (confidence) to manage illness-related problems and how this changes over time. This paper describes the patterns of self-efficacy for managing illness-related problems amongst colorectal cancer patients in the 2 years following diagnosis. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, questionnaires were administered at baseline (pre-surgery), 3, 9, 15 and 24 months to 872 colorectal cancer patients. Self-efficacy (confidence to manage illness-related problems), anxiety, social support, affect, socio-demographics, physical symptoms and clinical and treatment characteristics were assessed. Group-based trajectory analysis identified trajectories of self-efficacy up to 24 months and predictors. RESULTS: Four trajectories of self-efficacy were identified: group 1 (very confident) 16.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 10.7-21.3%), group 2 (confident) 45.6% (95% CI 40.3-51.0%), group 3 (moderately confident) 29.5% (95% CI 25.1-33.8%) and group 4 (low confidence) 8.9% (95% CI 6.4-11.4%). Greater deprivation, domestic status, more co-morbidities, worse fatigue and pain, lower positivity and greater negativity were significantly associated with lower self-efficacy. There was an increase in mean scores for self-efficacy over time for the whole sample, but this did not reach the cut-off for minimally important differences. At 2 years, the lowest level of confidence to manage was for symptoms or health problems. CONCLUSION: Around 40% of patients had suboptimal levels of confidence to manage illness-related problems with little change from the time of diagnosis across the four groups. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Screening for self-efficacy at diagnosis would enable targeted, early intervention which could in turn enhance health-related quality of life.

Pre-Surgery Depression and Confidence to Manage Problems Predict Recovery Trajectories of Health and Wellbeing in the First Two Years following Colorectal Cancer: Results from the CREW Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: This paper identifies predictors of recovery trajectories of quality of life (QoL), health status and personal wellbeing in the two years following colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS: 872 adults receiving curative intent surgery during November 2010 to March 2012. Questionnaires at baseline, 3, 9, 15, 24 months post-surgery assessed QoL, health status, wellbeing, confidence to manage illness-related problems (self-efficacy), social support, co-morbidities, socio-demographic, clinical and treatment characteristics. Group-based trajectory analyses identified distinct trajectories and predictors for QoL, health status and wellbeing. RESULTS: Four recovery trajectories were identified for each outcome. Groups 1 and 2 fared consistently well (scores above/within normal range); 70.5% of participants for QoL, 33.3% health status, 77.6% wellbeing. Group 3 had some problems (24.2% QoL, 59.3% health, 18.2% wellbeing); Group 4 fared consistently poorly (5.3% QoL, 7.4% health, 4.2% wellbeing). Higher pre-surgery depression and lower self-efficacy were significantly associated with poorer trajectories for all three outcomes after adjusting for other important predictors including disease characteristics, stoma, anxiety and social support. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial factors including self-efficacy and depression before surgery predict recovery trajectories in QoL, health status and wellbeing following colorectal cancer treatment independent of treatment or disease characteristics. This has significant implications for colorectal cancer management as appropriate support may be improved by early intervention resulting in more positive recovery experiences.

A web-based intervention (RESTORE) to support self-management of cancer-related fatigue following primary cancer treatment: a multi-centre proof of concept randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a frequent and distressing symptom experienced after cancer treatment. RESTORE is the first web-based resource designed to enhance self-efficacy to manage CRF following curative-intent treatment. The aim of this study is to test the proof of concept and inform the design of an effectiveness trial. METHODS: A multi-centre parallel-group two-armed (1:1) exploratory randomised controlled trial (RCT) with qualitative process evaluation was employed in the study. Participants (≥18 years; ≤5 years post treatment with moderate to severe fatigue) were recruited and randomly assigned to RESTORE or a leaflet. Feasibility and acceptability were measured by recruitment, attrition, intervention adherence, completion of outcome measures and process evaluation. Change in self-efficacy to manage CRF was also explored. Outcome measures were completed at baseline (T0), 6 weeks (T1) and 12 weeks (T2). Data were analysed using mixed-effects linear regression and directed content analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-three people participated in the trial and 19 in the process evaluation. The intervention was feasible (39 % of eligible patients consented) and acceptable (attrition rate 36 %). There was evidence of higher fatigue self-efficacy at T1 in the intervention group vs comparator (mean difference 0.51 [-0.08 to 1.11]), though the difference in groups decreased by 12 weeks. Time since diagnosis influenced perceived usefulness of the intervention. Modifications were suggested. CONCLUSION: Proof of concept was achieved. The RESTORE intervention should be subject to a definitive trial with some adjustments. Provision of an effective supportive resource would empower cancer survivors to manage CRF after treatment completion. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN67521059.

Lessons learnt recruiting to a multi-site UK cohort study to explore recovery of health and well-being after colorectal cancer (CREW study).

BACKGROUND: The UK leads the world in recruitment of patients to cancer clinical trials, with a six-fold increase in recruitment during 2001-2010. However, there are large variations across cancer centres. This paper details recruitment to a large multi-centre prospective cohort study and discusses lessons learnt to enhance recruitment. METHODS: During CREW (ColoREctal Wellbeing) cohort study set up and recruitment, data were systematically collected on all centres that applied to participate, time from study approval to first participant recruited and the percentage of eligible patients recruited into the study. RESULTS: 30 participating NHS cancer centres were selected through an open competition via the cancer networks. Time from study approval to first participant recruited took a median 124 days (min 53, max 290). Of 1350 eligible people in the study time frame, 78% (n = 1056) were recruited into the study, varying from 30-100% eligible across centres. Recruitment of 1056 participants took 17 months. CONCLUSION: In partnership with the National Cancer Research Network, this successful study prioritised relationship building and education. Key points for effective recruitment: pre-screening and selection of centres; nurses as PIs; attendance at study days; frequent communication and a reduced level of consent to enhance uptake amongst underrepresented groups.

RESTORE: an exploratory trial of an online intervention to enhance self-efficacy to manage problems associated with cancer-related fatigue following primary cancer treatment: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There are over 25 million people worldwide living with or beyond cancer and this number is increasing. Cancer survivors face a range of problems following primary treatment. One of the most frequently reported and distressing symptoms experienced by cancer survivors is fatigue. There is growing support for survivors who are experiencing problems after cancer treatment to engage in supported self-management. To date there is some evidence of effective interventions to manage fatigue in this population; however, to our knowledge there are no online resources that draw on this information to support self-management of fatigue. This paper describes the protocol for an exploratory randomized controlled trial of an online intervention to support self-management of cancer-related fatigue after primary cancer treatment. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a parallel-group two-armed (1:1) exploratory randomized controlled trial including 125 cancer survivors experiencing fatigue (scoring ≥4 on a unidimensional 11-point numeric rating scale for fatigue intensity) within five years of primary treatment completion with curative intent. Participants will be recruited from 13 NHS Trusts across the UK and randomized to either the online intervention (RESTORE), or a leaflet comparator (Macmillan Cancer Backup, Coping with Fatigue). The primary outcome is a change in Perceived Self-Efficacy for Fatigue Self-Management (as measured by the Perceived Self-Efficacy for Fatigue Self-Management Instrument). Secondary outcomes include impact on perception and experience of fatigue (measured by the Brief Fatigue Inventory), and quality of life (measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General and the Personal Wellbeing Index). Outcome measures will be collected at baseline, 6 weeks (completion of intervention), and 3 months. Process evaluation (including telephone interviews with recruiting staff and participants) will determine acceptability of the intervention and trial processes. DISCUSSION: Data from this trial will be used to refine the intervention and contribute to the design of an effectiveness trial. This intervention will be expanded to address other cancer-related problems important to cancer survivors following primary cancer treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN67521059.