Study protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial of comparing enhanced acceptance and commitment therapy plus (+) added to usual aftercare versus usual aftercare only, in patients living with or beyond cancer: SUrvivors' Rehabilitation Evaluation after CANcer (SURECAN) trial.

BACKGROUND: Two million people in the UK are living with or beyond cancer and a third of them report poor quality of life (QoL) due to problems such as fatigue, fear of cancer recurrence, and concerns about returning to work. We aimed to develop and evaluate an intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), suited to address the concerns of cancer survivors and in improving their QoL. We also recognise the importance of exercise and vocational activity on QoL and therefore will integrate options for physical activity and return to work/vocational support, thus ACT Plus (+). METHODS: We will conduct a multi-centre, pragmatic, theory driven, randomised controlled trial. We will assess whether ACT+ including usual aftercare (intervention) is more effective and cost-effective than usual aftercare alone (control). The primary outcome is QoL of participants living with or beyond cancer measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General scale (FACT-G) at 52 weeks. We will recruit 344 participants identified from secondary care sites who have completed hospital-based treatment for cancer with curative intent, with low QoL (determined by the FACT-G) and randomise with an allocation ratio of 1:1 to the intervention or control. The intervention (ACT+) will be delivered by NHS Talking Therapies, specialist services, and cancer charities. The intervention consists of up to eight sessions at weekly or fortnightly intervals using different modalities of delivery to suit individual needs, i.e. face-to-face sessions, over the phone or skype. DISCUSSION: To date, there have been no robust trials reporting both clinical and cost-effectiveness of an ACT based intervention for people with low QoL after curative cancer treatment in the UK. We will provide high quality evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding ACT+ to usual aftercare provided by the NHS. If shown to be effective and cost-effective then commissioners, providers and cancer charities will know how to improve QoL in cancer survivors and their families. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN67900293 . Registered on 09 December 2019. All items from the World Health Organization Trial Registration Data Set for this protocol can be found in Additional file 2 Table S1.

Cancer survivorship: Reproductive health outcomes should be included in standard toxicity assessments.

It is well established that cancer and its treatment, whether by chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy, or surgery, can adversely impact reproductive function in both women and men. The effects of cancer treatment on reproductive function in both sexes may lead to loss of fertility, sexual desire and function, and hormone deficiency, which results in additional long-term morbidity in more than a third of patients. Given the importance of reproductive function to most people, and the often devastating effect of cancer treatment on it, we propose that proactive assessment of the functional and endocrinological impact of treatment be made a vital component of the assessment of modern cancer treatment, and should be a routine part of discussions with patients before and after treatment, both in trials and in routine care. Reproductive counselling should be proactive and encouraged, as implementation of such counselling has been shown to be beneficial to patient mental health, quality of life, and adherence to treatment. Similarly, efforts should be made to provide more adequate and accurate information to patients, as well as to offer appropriate fertility preservation approaches, which may potentially influence their treatment decisions.

A randomized controlled trial of the impact of protein supplementation on leg lean mass and integrated muscle protein synthesis during inactivity and energy restriction in older persons.

Background: In older persons, muscle loss is accelerated during physical inactivity and hypoenergetic states, both of which are features of hospitalization. Protein supplementation may represent a strategy to offset the loss of muscle during inactivity, and enhance recovery on resumption of activity. Objective: We aimed to determine if protein supplementation, with proteins of substantially different quality, would alleviate the loss of lean mass by augmenting muscle protein synthesis (MPS) while inactive during a hypoenergetic state. Design: Participants (16 men, mean ± SD age: 69 ± 3 y; 15 women, mean ± SD age: 68 ± 4 y) consumed a diet containing 1.6 g protein · kg-1 · d-1, with 55% ± 9% of protein from foods and 45% ± 9% from supplements, namely, whey protein (WP) or collagen peptides (CP): 30 g each, consumed 2 times/d. Participants were in energy balance (EB) for 1 wk, then began a period of energy restriction (ER; -500 kcal/d) for 1 wk, followed by ER with step reduction (ER + SR; <750 steps/d) for 2 wk, before a return to habitual activity in recovery (RC) for 1 wk. Results: There were significant reductions in leg lean mass (LLM) from EB to ER, and from ER to ER + SR in both groups (P < 0.001) with no differences between WP and CP or when comparing the change from phase to phase. During RC, LLM increased from ER + SR, but in the WP group only. Rates of integrated muscle protein synthesis decreased during ER and ER + SR in both groups (P < 0.01), but increased during RC only in the WP group (P = 0.05). Conclusions: Protein supplementation did not confer a benefit in protecting LLM, but only supplemental WP augmented LLM and muscle protein synthesis during recovery from inactivity and a hypoenergetic state. This trial was registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03285737.

Reduction in surgical site infections in the Southern Cross Hospitals network, 2004-2015: successful outcome of a long-term surveillance and quality improvement project.

AIM: To report on the reduction in the surgical site infection (SSI) rate in the Southern Cross Hospitals network over a 12-year period, 2004-2015, following active surveillance and quality improvement actions. METHODS: Ten hospitals in the network performed prospective SSI surveillance using standard definitions across a range of ten surgical procedure groups. Data was manually collected on a standardised form and entered into a bespoke database. Information collected included timing and dose of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis, type of surgical site skin preparation used, and patient information on smoking, diabetes and body mass index (BMI). Patients were contacted 30 days after their elective surgery to detect SSIs presenting after discharge from hospital. Surveillance results were widely reported to infection control and clinical review committees. Quality improvement activities to increase use of best practice interventions for surgical antibiotic prophylaxis and alcohol-based skin preparations were initiated during the surveillance period. RESULTS: 42,792 procedures performed in ten hospitals were analysed. There were 932 (2.2%) SSIs. The SSI rate decreased from 3.5% in 2004 to 1.2% in 2015, r-0.865, p=<0.0001, a decrease of 59%, approximately 5% a year. Rates decreased in seven of the 10 hospitals, p≤0.02 for each, and in five of the ten procedure groups, p≤0.02 for each. Diabetic patients, odds ratio (OR) 1.4 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-1.9), obese patients (BMI>30), OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.6-2.4), and those with a surgical risk score of ≥1 OR 1.3 (95% CI 1.1-1.6) had higher SSI rates. These three patient risk factors increased during the 12-year period. The use of alcohol-based skin preparations increased during the period from 63% to 84% in the first two and last two years respectively, p<0.0001. Use of an alcohol-based skin preparation was associated with a reduction in SSIs OR 0.54 (95% CI 0.47-0.62). On time prophylaxis improved from 72% to 95% over the 12 years, p<0.0001, and on time prophylaxis was associated with a reduction in SSIs, OR=0.62 (95% CI 0.51-0.75). The use of 2g doses of cefazolin increased significantly after 2010, p<0.0001. The most common cause of SSI was Staphylococcus aureus which was present in 54% of cases with a positive culture. CONCLUSIONS: This long-term surveillance and quality improvement programme has made a significant contribution to the overall reduced rate of SSIs in Southern Cross Hospitals. This reduction occurred despite patient risk factors for SSI increasing. Further reduction is possible with higher adherence to best practice and interventions aimed at reducing S. aureus SSIs.

Adjuvant endocrine therapy after breast cancer: a qualitative study of factors associated with adherence.

INTRODUCTION: Despite evidence of the efficacy of adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) in reducing the risk of recurrence and mortality after treatment for primary breast cancer, adherence to AET is suboptimal. This study aimed to explore factors that influence adherence and nonadherence to AET following breast cancer to inform the development of supportive interventions. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 32 women who had been prescribed AET, 2-4 years following their diagnosis of breast cancer. Both adherers (n=19) and nonadherers (n=13) were recruited. The analysis was conducted using the Framework approach. RESULTS: Factors associated with adherence were as follows: managing side effects including information and advice on side effects and taking control of side effects, supportive relationships, and personal influences. Factors associated with nonadherence were as follows: burden of side effects, feeling unsupported, concerns about long-term AET use, regaining normality, including valuing the quality of life over length of life, and risk perception. CONCLUSION: Provision of timely information to prepare women for the potential side effects of AET and education on medication management strategies are needed, including provision of timely and accurate information on the efficacy of AET in reducing breast cancer recurrence and on potential side effects and ways to manage these should they arise. Trust in the doctor-patient relationship and clear patient pathways for bothersome side effects and concerns with AET are important. Training and education on AET for GPs should be considered alongside novel care pathways such as primary care nurse cancer care review and community pharmacist follow-up.

Review of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological interventions to improve quality of life in cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVES: Over two million people in the UK are living with and beyond cancer. A third report diminished quality of life. DESIGN: A review of published systematic reviews to identify effective non-pharmacological interventions to improve the quality of life of cancer survivors. DATA SOURCES: Databases searched until May 2017 included PubMed, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO. STUDY SELECTION: Published systematic reviews of randomised trials of non-pharmacological interventions for people living with and beyond cancer were included; included reviews targeted patients aged over 18. All participants had already received a cancer diagnosis. Interventions located in any healthcare setting, home or online were included. Reviews of alternative therapies or those non-English reports were excluded. Two researchers independently assessed titles, abstracts and the full text of papers, and independently extracted the data. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome of interest was any measure of global (overall) quality of life. ANALYTICAL METHODS: Quality assessment assessing methdological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR) and narrative synthesis, evaluating effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions and their components. RESULTS: Of 14 430 unique titles, 21 were included in the review of reviews. There was little overlap in the primary papers across these reviews. Thirteen reviews covered mixed tumour groups, seven focused on breast cancer and one focused on prostate cancer. Face-to-face interventions were often combined with online, telephone and paper-based reading materials. Interventions included physical, psychological or behavioural, multidimensional rehabilitation and online approaches. Yoga specifically, physical exercise more generally, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) programmes showed benefit in terms of quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise-based interventions were effective in the short (less than 3-8 months) and long term. CBT and MBSR also showed benefits, especially in the short term. The evidence for multidisciplinary, online and educational interventions was equivocal.

Value of Information Analysis of Multiparameter Tests for Chemotherapy in Early Breast Cancer: The OPTIMA Prelim Trial.

BACKGROUND: Precision medicine is heralded as offering more effective treatments to smaller targeted patient populations. In breast cancer, adjuvant chemotherapy is standard for patients considered as high-risk after surgery. Molecular tests may identify patients who can safely avoid chemotherapy. OBJECTIVES: To use economic analysis before a large-scale clinical trial of molecular testing to confirm the value of the trial and help prioritize between candidate tests as randomized comparators. METHODS: Women with surgically treated breast cancer (estrogen receptor-positive and lymph node-positive or tumor size ≥30 mm) were randomized to standard care (chemotherapy for all) or test-directed care using Oncotype DX™. Additional testing was undertaken using alternative tests: MammaPrintTM, PAM-50 (ProsignaTM), MammaTyperTM, IHC4, and IHC4-AQUA™ (NexCourse Breast™). A probabilistic decision model assessed the cost-effectiveness of all tests from a UK perspective. Value of information analysis determined the most efficient publicly funded ongoing trial design in the United Kingdom. RESULTS: There was an 86% probability of molecular testing being cost-effective, with most tests producing cost savings (range -£1892 to £195) and quality-adjusted life-year gains (range 0.17-0.20). There were only small differences in costs and quality-adjusted life-years between tests. Uncertainty was driven by long-term outcomes. Value of information demonstrated value of further research into all tests, with Prosigna currently being the highest priority for further research. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular tests are likely to be cost-effective, but an optimal test is yet to be identified. Health economics modeling to inform the design of a randomized controlled trial looking at diagnostic technology has been demonstrated to be feasible as a method for improving research efficiency.

Hit-and-run epigenetic editing prevents senescence entry in primary breast cells from healthy donors.

Aberrant promoter DNA hypermethylation is a hallmark of cancer; however, whether this is sufficient to drive cellular transformation is not clear. To investigate this question, we use a CRISPR-dCas9 epigenetic editing tool, where an inactive form of Cas9 is fused to DNA methyltransferase effectors. Using this system, here we show simultaneous de novo DNA methylation of genes commonly methylated in cancer, CDKN2A, RASSF1, HIC1 and PTEN in primary breast cells isolated from healthy human breast tissue. We find that promoter methylation is maintained in this system, even in the absence of the fusion construct, and this prevents cells from engaging senescence arrest. Our data show that the key driver of this phenotype is repression of CDKN2A transcript p16 where myoepithelial cells harbour cancer-like gene expression but do not exhibit anchorage-independent growth. This work demonstrates that hit-and-run epigenetic events can prevent senescence entry, which may facilitate tumour initiation.

Management of hot flushes in UK breast cancer patients: clinician and patient perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: Menopausal problems are among the most prevalent and distressing problems following breast cancer treatment, with 70% women experiencing hot flushes and night sweats (HFNS). A working party was set up to support the development of new research into the management of these problems. METHODS: We conducted surveys to explore the need as perceived by women with breast cancer and establish current UK management practices. A patient survey was conducted through a charity, Breast Cancer Care, and a health professional survey via the UK Breast Intergroup. The HFNS Problem Rating Scale was used, as well as specific questions addressing the aims of the study. RESULTS: Six hundred and sixty-five patients responded and 185 health professionals. Twenty-eight percent women had considered stopping adjuvant endocrine treatment because of HFNS, yet 34% had never been asked about HFNS by any health professional. The most commonly offered interventions were SSRIs, such as venlafaxine, yet only 25% patients had been offered these drugs. Cognitive behavioural therapy was rarely suggested (2%) despite good evidence. DISCUSSION: This study shows a lack of coherence in the management of HFNS in breast cancer survivors, which may lead to reduced adherence to adjuvant therapy. There is an urgent need to develop guidelines to support management of HFNS after breast cancer.

Psychometric properties of the Beliefs about Medicine Questionnaire-adjuvant endocrine therapy (BMQ-AET) for women taking AETs following early-stage breast cancer.

This study evaluated the Beliefs about Medicine Questionnaire to explore adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy after treatment for breast cancer (BMQ-AET). Factor structure of the BMQ-AET was explored alongside internal consistency, convergent validity and acceptability. The BMQ-AET Specific Scale fitted the original 10 item model. Internal consistency of the BMQ-AET was much improved compared to the original BMQ and convergent validity showed predicted direction of correlation, although correlation with BMQ-AET concerns scale was low. Acceptability was good. The evaluation of the BMQ-AET is encouraging, and could facilitate future research around adherence to AET.

OPTIMA prelim: a randomised feasibility study of personalised care in the treatment of women with early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty about the chemotherapy sensitivity of some oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancers. Multiparameter assays that measure the expression of several tumour genes simultaneously have been developed to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for this breast cancer subtype. The assays provide prognostic information and have been claimed to predict chemotherapy sensitivity. There is a dearth of prospective validation studies. The Optimal Personalised Treatment of early breast cancer usIng Multiparameter Analysis preliminary study (OPTIMA prelim) is the feasibility phase of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) designed to validate the use of multiparameter assay directed chemotherapy decisions in the NHS. OBJECTIVES: OPTIMA prelim was designed to establish the acceptability to patients and clinicians of randomisation to test-driven treatment assignment compared with usual care and to select an assay for study in the main RCT. DESIGN: Partially blinded RCT with adaptive design. SETTING: Thirty-five UK hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥ 40 years with surgically treated ER-positive HER2-negative primary breast cancer and with 1-9 involved axillary nodes, or, if node negative, a tumour at least 30 mm in diameter. INTERVENTIONS: Randomisation between two treatment options. Option 1 was standard care consisting of chemotherapy followed by endocrine therapy. In option 2, an Oncotype DX(®) test (Genomic Health Inc., Redwood City, CA, USA) performed on the resected tumour was used to assign patients either to standard care [if 'recurrence score' (RS) was > 25] or to endocrine therapy alone (if RS was ≤ 25). Patients allocated chemotherapy were blind to their randomisation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The pre-specified success criteria were recruitment of 300 patients in no longer than 2 years and, for the final 150 patients, (1) an acceptance rate of at least 40%; (2) recruitment taking no longer than 6 months; and (3) chemotherapy starting within 6 weeks of consent in at least 85% of patients. RESULTS: Between September 2012 and 3 June 2014, 350 patients consented to join OPTIMA prelim and 313 were randomised; the final 150 patients were recruited in 6 months, of whom 92% assigned chemotherapy started treatment within 6 weeks. The acceptance rate for the 750 patients invited to participate was 47%. Twelve out of the 325 patients with data (3.7%, 95% confidence interval 1.7% to 5.8%) were deemed ineligible on central review of receptor status. Interviews with researchers and recordings of potential participant consultations made as part of the integral qualitative recruitment study provided insights into recruitment barriers and led to interventions designed to improve recruitment. Patient information was changed as the result of feedback from three patient focus groups. Additional multiparameter analysis was performed on 302 tumour samples. Although Oncotype DX, MammaPrint(®)/BluePrint(®) (Agendia Inc., Irvine, CA, USA), Prosigna(®) (NanoString Technologies Inc., Seattle, WA, USA), IHC4, IHC4 automated quantitative immunofluorescence (AQUA(®)) [NexCourse BreastTM (Genoptix Inc. Carlsbad, CA, USA)] and MammaTyper(®) (BioNTech Diagnostics GmbH, Mainz, Germany) categorised comparable numbers of tumours into low- or high-risk groups and/or equivalent molecular subtypes, there was only moderate agreement between tests at an individual tumour level (kappa ranges 0.33-0.60 and 0.39-0.55 for tests providing risks and subtypes, respectively). Health economics modelling showed the value of information to the NHS from further research into multiparameter testing is high irrespective of the test evaluated. Prosigna is currently the highest priority for further study. CONCLUSIONS: OPTIMA prelim has achieved its aims of demonstrating that a large UK clinical trial of multiparameter assay-based selection of chemotherapy in hormone-sensitive early breast cancer is feasible. The economic analysis shows that a trial would be economically worthwhile for the NHS. Based on the outcome of the OPTIMA prelim, a large-scale RCT to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multiparameter assay-directed chemotherapy decisions in hormone-sensitive HER2-negative early breast would be appropriate to take place in the NHS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42400492. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The Government of Ontario funded research at the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research. Robert C Stein received additional support from the NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre.