The role of social networks in the self-management support for young women recently diagnosed with breast cancer.

It is widely acknowledged that social network support plays an important role in the quality of life and illness management of breast cancer survivors. However, the factors and processes that enable and sustain such support are less well understood. This paper reports baseline findings from a prospective UK national cohort of 1,202 women with breast cancer (aged <50 years at diagnosis), recruited before starting treatment, conducted in 2016-2019. Descriptive, univariate and multivariate regression analyses explored associations between the individual, and network member characteristics, and the type of support provided. Social network members provided a substantial level of illness-related, practical and emotional support. Highest contribution was provided by friends, followed by close family members. The social network members of women who did not have a partner provided a higher level of support than those in networks with a partner. Women without higher education were more reliant on close family members than those with higher education, and this was more so for women without a partner. Women with higher education without a partner were more reliant on friends and were overall best supported. Women without higher education who did not have a partner were overall least well supported. They had much smaller networks, were highly reliant on close family members, and on high level contributions from all network members. There is a need to develop network-based interventions to support people with a cancer diagnosis, prioritising support for the groups identified as most at risk. Interventions that support engagement with existing network members during treatment, and those that help extend such networks after treatment, are likely to be of benefit. A network perspective can help to develop tailored support and interventions by recognising the interactions between network and individual level processes.

Same storm, different boat: The global impact of COVID-19 on palliative care.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a complex and profound impact on the provision of palliative care globally. To support learning from palliative care providers and researchers worldwide, the Education Subcommittee of International Psycho-Oncology Society (IPOS) Palliative Care Special Interest Group developed a webinar with presentations by and discussion with eight international palliative care leaders. METHODS: Presentations were content rich; the speakers used both quantitative (e.g., sharing recent statistical findings) and qualitative (e.g., narrative storytelling, anecdotal experiences) approaches to portray the effect of COVID-19 in their region. Subsequent to the webinar, the committee collectively identified five themes conveyed by the presenters through consensus. RESULTS: The themes included: (1) altered accessibility to palliative care, with socio-economic status impacting virtual health availability; (2) reduced opportunities to preserve dignity, as survival has been prioritized over preserving the humanity of patients and their loved ones; (3) complicated grief and bereavement arising from social distancing requirements; (4) greater awareness of the importance of sustaining health provider well-being; and (5) the development of valuable innovations across nations, institutions, disciplines, and communities. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the webinar facilitated valuable connection for global learning and identified opportunities for research and clinical interventions. In an ongoing crisis that has exacerbated isolation, we will need to continue to learn and lean on one another as a global community to navigate ongoing challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic.

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.

Modifiable pre-treatment factors are associated with quality of life in women with gynaecological cancers at diagnosis and one year later: Results from the HORIZONS UK national cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Personalised care requires the identification of modifiable risk factors so that interventions can be implemented rapidly following a gynaecological cancer diagnosis. Our objective was to determine what pre-treatment factors are associated with quality of life (QOL) at baseline (pre-treatment) and 12 months. METHODS: 1222 women with a confirmed diagnosis of endometrial, ovarian, cervical or vulvar cancer from 82 UK NHS hospitals agreed to complete questionnaires at baseline, three and 12 months. Questionnaires included measures of QOL, health, lifestyle, support and self-management. The primary outcome measure was QOL as measured by Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors (QLACS). Sites provided clinical data at baseline, six and 12 months. Linear regression models were constructed to examine the association between baseline characteristics and QOL outcomes. RESULTS: QOL declined between baseline and 3 months, followed by an improvement at 12 months. Baseline (pre-treatment) factors associated with worse QOL at both baseline and 12 months were depression, anxiety, living in a more deprived area and comorbidities which limit daily activities, whereas higher self-efficacy and age of 50+ years were associated with better QOL. CONCLUSIONS: Depression, anxiety and self-efficacy are modifiable risk factors that can impact on QOL. Screening for these, and assessment of whether comorbidities limit daily activities, should be incorporated in a holistic needs assessment and interventions to improve self-efficacy should be made available. Care can then be personalised from the outset to enable all women with a gynaecological cancer the opportunity to have the best QOL.

Self-management by older people living with cancer and multi-morbidity: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: Over half of individuals diagnosed with cancer are aged over 70 years, and more than 75% of those with cancer report at least one other medical condition. Having multiple conditions alongside cancer in old age may lower functional status, greater likelihood of treatment complications and less favourable prognoses. This qualitative study explored how older people with long-term chronic conditions manage their health and meet their health-related goals after they have completed treatment for cancer. METHODS: One-to-one face-to-face qualitative interviews were conducted with 8 older people and 2 informal caregivers based in the UK. Older adults were eligible to participate if they were over 70 and had completed primary cancer treatment with curative intent and had at least one other chronic health condition. A semi-structured interview schedule developed a priori based on Shippee's cumulative complexity model was used. We aimed to explore experiences that could influence self-management, utilisation of healthcare services and health outcomes. A framework analysis was used to describe and interpret the data. RESULTS: Four overarching themes were identified in the analysis. These themes related to factors that influenced the everyday health-related workload and capacity of the participants. These factors included their health, resources, and opportunities, as well their motivation and sense of perceived control over their lives. CONCLUSIONS: Fragmented healthcare systems and relationships with healthcare professionals also influenced the participants' self-management of their health. Our findings highlight the interaction between an individuals' needs, capacity, treatment burden, and the services and resources available to them. These findings support calls to promote person-centred care to better support older adults to manage their health.

'It feels it's wasting whatever time I've got left': A qualitative study of living with treatable but not curable cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: People living with cancer that is treatable but not curable have complex needs, often managing health at home, supported by those close to them. Challenges are likely to be exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic and the risk-reducing measures introduced in response. The impact of COVID-19 on those living with incurable, life-threatening conditions is little understood. AIM: To investigate the experiences and identify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic for people living with treatable not curable cancer and their informal carers. DESIGN: Qualitative semi-structured phone interviews were conducted with 21 patients living with cancer that is treatable but not curable and 14 carers. SETTING/ PARTICIPANTS: Participants were part of a larger longitudinal qualitative study (ENABLE) on supported self-management for people living with cancer that is treatable but not curable. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic magnified uncertainty and anxiety and led to loss of opportunities to do things important to patients in the limited time they have left to live. Lack of face-to-face contact with loved ones had a significant impact on patients' and carers' emotional wellbeing. Carers experienced increased responsibilities but less access to formal and informal support and respite. While changes to treatment led to some concern about longer-term impact on health, most patients felt well-supported by healthcare teams. CONCLUSION: The study provides rich insights into the nature of challenges, uncertainty and lost opportunities resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic for patients and carers living with cancer that is treatable but not curable, which has wider resonance for people living with other life-limiting conditions.

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.

International perspectives on suboptimal patient-reported outcome trial design and reporting in cancer clinical trials: A qualitative study.

PURPOSE: Evidence suggests that the patient-reported outcome (PRO) content of cancer trial protocols is frequently inadequate and non-reporting of PRO findings is widespread. This qualitative study examined the factors influencing suboptimal PRO protocol content, implementation, and reporting, and use of PRO data during clinical interactions. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with four stakeholder groups: (1) trialists and chief investigators; (2) people with lived experience of cancer; (3) international experts in PRO cancer trial design; (4) journal editors, funding panelists, and regulatory agencies. Data were analyzed using directed thematic analysis with an iterative coding frame. RESULTS: Forty-four interviews were undertaken. Several factors were identified that could influenced effective integration of PROs into trials and subsequent findings. Participants described (1) late inclusion of PROs in trial design; (2) PROs being considered a lower priority outcome compared to survival; (3) trialists' reluctance to collect or report PROs due to participant burden, missing data, and perceived reticence of journals to publish; (4) lack of staff training. Strategies to address these included training research personnel and improved communication with site staff and patients regarding the value of PROs. Examples of good practice were identified. CONCLUSION: Misconceptions relating to PRO methodology and its use may undermine their planning, collection, and reporting. There is a role for funding, regulatory, methodological, and journalistic institutions to address perceptions around the value of PROs, their position within the trial outcomes hierarchy, that PRO training and guidance is available, signposted, and readily accessible, with accompanying measures to ensure compliance with international best practice guidelines.

Peer Mentors for People with Advanced Cancer: Lessons Learnt from Recruiting and Training Peer Mentors for a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.

Peer mentors may offer distinctive forms of support to people with advanced cancer. Whilst peer mentor programmes are known, little is understood about recruiting and training peer mentors to support those with advanced cancer. The purpose of this study is to determine the feasibility of recruiting and training peer mentors for a novel peer mentor intervention to promote well-being in people with advanced cancer. Feasibility study testing proactive introduction to a trained peer mentor for 12 weeks in the context of a randomized controlled two-arm trial and nested qualitative process evaluation was used. Peer mentors have/had cancer, recruited via an open call. Two-day training included a new bespoke module on coping with cancer. Descriptive recruitment and training data were captured, supplemented by qualitative interviews, analysed thematically. Forty-eight people expressed interest, mostly female (69%), with breast cancer (32%), and recruited via social media (49%). Twelve people completed training, with attrition often due to availability or mentors' own health; many had advanced cancer themselves. They wanted to 'give something back', but also formed supportive bonds with fellow mentors. It is feasible to recruit and train people with lived experience of cancer to be peer mentors, but those with particular characteristics may predominate. Broad social media based recruitment may have merit in widening the pool of potential peer mentors.

The Frequency and Content of Discussions About Alcohol Use in Primary Care and Application of the Chief Medical Officer's Low-Risk Drinking Guidelines: A Cross-Sectional Survey of General Practitioners and Practice Nurses in the UK.

AIMS: To examine how often general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses (PNs) working in primary care discuss alcohol with patients, what factors prompt discussions, how they approach patient discussions and whether the Chief Medical Officers' (CMO) revised low-risk drinking guidelines are appropriately advised. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey with GPs and PNs working in primary care in the UK, conducted January-March 2017 (n = 2020). A vignette exercise examined what factors would prompt a discussion about alcohol, whether they would discuss before or after a patient reported exceeded the revised CMO guidelines (14 units per week) and whether the CMO drinking guidelines were appropriately advised. For all patients, participants were asked how often they discussed alcohol and how they approached the discussion (e.g. used screening tool). RESULTS: The most common prompts to discuss alcohol in the vignette exercise were physical cues (44.7% of participants) or alcohol-related symptoms (23.8%). Most practitioners (70.1%) said they would wait until a patient was exceeding CMO guidelines before instigating discussion. Two-fifths (38.1%) appropriately advised the CMO guidelines in the vignette exercise, with PNs less likely to do so than GPs (odds ratio [OR] = 0.77, P = 0.03). Less than half (44.7%) reportedly asked about alcohol always/often with all patients, with PNs more likely to ask always/often than GPs (OR = 2.22, P < 0.001). Almost three-quarters said they would enquire by asking about units (70.3%), compared to using screening tools. CONCLUSION: Further research is required to identify mechanisms to increase the frequency of discussions about alcohol and appropriate recommendation of the CMO drinking guidelines to patients.

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.

Planning and optimising CHAT&PLAN: A conversation-based intervention to promote person-centred care for older people living with multimorbidity.

BACKGROUND: Older people are more likely to be living with cancer and multiple long-term conditions, but their needs, preferences for treatments, health priorities and lifestyle are often not identified or well-understood. There is a need to move towards a more comprehensive person-centred approach to care that focuses on the cumulative impact of a number of conditions on daily activities and quality of life. This paper describes the intervention planning process for CHAT& PLANTM, a structured conversation intervention to promote personalised care and support self-management in older adults with complex conditions. METHODS: A theory-, evidence- and person-based approach to intervention development was undertaken. The intervention planning and development process included reviewing relevant literature and existing guidelines, developing guiding principles, conducting a behavioural analysis and constructing a logic model. Optimisation of the intervention and its implementation involved qualitative interviews with older adults with multimorbidity (n = 8), family caregivers (n = 2) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) (n = 20). Data were analysed thematically and informed changes to the intervention prototype. RESULTS: Review findings reflected the importance of HCPs taking a person-centred (rather than disease-centred) approach to their work with older people living with multimorbidity. This approach involves HCPs giving health service users the opportunity to voice their priorities, then using these to underpin the treatment and care plan that follow. Findings from the planning stage indicated that taking a structured approach to interactions between HCPs and health service users would enable elicitation of individual concerns, development of a plan tailored to that individual, negotiation of roles and review of goals as individual priorities change. In the optimisation stage, older adults and HCPs commented on the idea of a structured conversation to promote person-centred care and on its feasibility in practice. The idea of a shared, person-centred approach to care was viewed positively. Concerns were raised about possible extra work for those receiving or delivering care, time and staffing, and risk of creating another "tick-box" exercise for staff. Participants concluded that anyone with the appropriate skills could potentially deliver the intervention, but training was likely to be required to ensure correct utilisation and self-efficacy to deliver to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: CHAT&PLAN, a structured person-centred conversation guide appears acceptable and appealing to HCPs and older adults with multimorbidity. Further development of the CHAT&PLAN intervention should focus on ensuring that staff are adequately trained and supported to implement the intervention.

Peer support to maintain psychological wellbeing in people with advanced cancer: findings from a feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Advanced cancer affects people's lives, often causing stress, anxiety and depression. Peer mentor interventions are used to address psychosocial concerns, but their outcomes and effect are not known. Our objective was to determine the feasibility of delivering and investigating a novel peer mentor intervention to promote and maintain psychological wellbeing in people with advanced cancer. METHODS: A mixed methods design incorporating a two-armed controlled trial (random allocation ratio 1:1) of a proactive peer mentor intervention plus usual care, vs. usual care alone, and a qualitative process evaluation. Peer mentors were recruited, trained, and matched with people with advanced cancer. Quantitative data assessed quality of life, coping styles, depression, social support and use of healthcare and other supports. Qualitative interviews probed experiences of the study and intervention. RESULTS: Peer mentor training and numbers (n = 12) met feasibility targets. Patient participants (n = 12, from 181 eligible who received an information pack) were not recruited to feasibility targets. Those who entered the study demonstrated that intervention delivery and data collection were feasible. Outcome data must be treated with extreme caution due to small numbers, but indicate that the intervention may have a positive effect on quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Peer mentor interventions are worthy of further study and researchers can learn from these feasibility data in planning participant recruitment and data collection strategies. Pragmatic trials, where the effectiveness of an intervention is tested in real-world routine practice, may be most appropriate. Peer mentor interventions may have merit in enabling survivors with advanced cancer cope with their disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered 13.6.2016: ISRCTN10276684 .

Self-management in older people living with cancer and multi-morbidity: A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative studies.

OBJECTIVE: Many older people with cancer live with multimorbidity. Little is understood about the cumulative impact of old age, cancer and multimorbidity on self-management. This qualitative systematic review and synthesis aimed to identify what influences self-management from the perspective of older adults living with cancer and multimorbidity. METHODS: Six databases were systematically searched for primary qualitative research reporting older adults' experiences of living with cancer and multimorbidity (eg, Medline, Embase, and CINAHL). A thematic synthesis was guided by Shippee's model of cumulative complexity. Text labelled as results in the included papers was treated as data. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were included. While the included studies varied in their focus, our analysis highlighted a number of important themes consistent across the studies. Health conditions with the greatest negative impact on independent living assumed the greatest importance, sometimes meaning their cancer was a low priority. Self-management practices seen as likely to interfere with quality of life were deprioritized unless viewed as necessary to maintain independence. When burden outweighed capacity, people were reluctant to ask for help from others in their social network. The contribution of formal healthcare services to supporting self-management was relatively peripheral. CONCLUSIONS: Old age and multimorbidity together may complicate self-management after cancer, threatening health and well-being, creating burden and diminishing capacity. Older adults prioritized self-management practices they considered most likely to enable them to continue to live independently. The protocol was registered with Prospero (CRD42018107272).

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.

The ENABLE study protocol: Understanding and characterising the value and role of self-management support for people living with cancer that is treatable but not curable.

OBJECTIVE: Attention is turning to the needs of people living with treatable but incurable cancer, a group with complex needs, living with uncertainty over time. More research is needed to understand how this group self-manage the impact of cancer to strengthen the evidence base for interventions. This study aims to understand the value and outcomes of self-management support for people living with treatable but incurable cancer. METHODS: Qualitative longitudinal methods will examine how support needs change over time in relation to self-management and unpredictable disease trajectories. Thirty patients and 30 carers will be recruited from two hospitals, each participating in three interviews over 1 year. Patients will be purposively sampled according to age, gender, cancer type and anticipated survival. Carers will be recruited via nomination by patients but interviewed separately. One-off interviews will be conducted with 20 healthcare professionals, providing data from multiple perspectives. Based on interview findings, a modified Delphi process will map areas of consensus and disparity regarding conceptualisations and outcomes of self-management support. CONCLUSION: The key output will be practice recommendations in relation to self-management support, producing evidence to inform service innovation for those living with treatable but incurable cancer.