Evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on supportive care needs, psychological distress and quality of life in UK cancer survivors and their support network.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic is having considerable impact on cancer care, including restricted access to hospital-based care, treatment and psychosocial support. We investigated the impact on unmet needs and psychosocial well-being. METHODS: One hundred and forty four participants (77% female), including people with cancer and their support networks, were recruited. The most prevalent diagnosis was breast cancer. Forty-one participants recruited pre-pandemic were compared with 103 participants recruited during the COVID-19 pandemic. We measured participants' unmet supportive care needs, psychological distress and quality of life. RESULTS: Half of our patient respondents reported unexpected changes to treatment following pandemic onset, with widespread confusion about their longer-term consequences. Although overall need levels have not increased, specific needs have changed in prominence. People with cancer reported significantly reduced anxiety (p = 0.049) and improved quality of life (p = 0.032) following pandemic onset, but support network participants reported reduced quality of life (p = 0.009), and non-significantly elevated anxiety, stress and depression. CONCLUSION: Psychological well-being of people with cancer has not been detrimentally affected by pandemic onset. Reliance on home-based support to compensate for the lost availability of structured healthcare pathways may, however, explain significant and detrimental effects on the well-being and quality of life of people in their support and informal care networks.

Weekly platinum-based chemotherapy versus 3-weekly platinum-based chemotherapy for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer (ICON8): quality-of-life results of a phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The ICON8 study reported no significant improvement in progression-free survival (a primary endpoint) with weekly chemotherapy compared with standard 3-weekly treatment among patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. All ICON8 patients were eligible to take part in the accompanying health-related quality-of-life study, which measured the effect of treatment on self-reported wellbeing, reported here. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3, three-arm, Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) trial done at 117 hospital sites in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, and Republic of Ireland, women (aged at least 18 years) with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IC-IV ovarian cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were randomly assigned (1:1:1) centrally using minimisation to group 1 (intravenous carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]5 or AUC6 and 175 mg/m2 intravenous paclitaxel every 3 weeks), group 2 (carboplatin AUC5 or AUC6 every 3 weeks and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly), or group 3 (carboplatin AUC2 weekly and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly). Randomisation was stratified by GCIG group, disease stage, and outcome and timing of surgery. Patients and clinicians were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients underwent immediate or delayed primary surgery according to clinicians' choice. Patients were asked to complete European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OV28 questionnaires at enrolment, before each chemotherapy cycle, then 6-weekly up to 9 months, 3-monthly up to 2 years, and 6-monthly up to 5 years. Quality of life was a prespecified secondary outcome of the ICON8 study. Within the quality-of-life study, the co-primary endpoints were QLQ-C30 global health score at 9 months (cross-sectional analysis) and mean QLQ-C30 global health score from randomisation to 9 months (longitudinal analysis). Data analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01654146 and ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN10356387, and is currently in long-term follow up. FINDINGS: Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 patients were recruited into ICON8 (522 were included in group 1, 523 in group 2, and 521 in group 3). Baseline quality-of-life questionnaires were completed by 1438 (92%) of 1566 patients and 9-month questionnaires by 882 (69%) of 1280 patients. We observed no significant difference in global health score at 9 months (cross-sectional analysis) between study groups (group 2 vs group 1, difference in mean score 2·3, 95% CI -0·4 to 4·9, p=0·095; group 3 vs group 1, -0·8, -3·8 to 2·2, p=0·61). Using longitudinal analysis, we found lower global health scores for those receiving weekly paclitaxel than for those receiving 3-weekly chemotherapy (group 2 vs group 1, mean difference -1·8, 95% CI -3·6 to -0·1, p=0·043; group 3 vs group 1, -2·9, -4·7 to -1·1, p=0·0018). INTERPRETATION: We found no evidence of a difference in global quality of life between treatment groups at 9 months; however, patients receiving weekly treatment reported lower mean quality of life across the 9-month period after randomisation. Taken together with the lack of progression-free survival benefit, these findings do not support routine use of weekly paclitaxel-containing regimens in the management of newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Health Research Board Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, and Cancer Australia.

Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT)-enhanced communication skills: development and evaluation of a novel training programme.

BACKGROUND: Psychological suffering is ubiquitous with cancer and frequently presents as an unmet supportive care need. In clinical practice, distress-related needs are often addressed by nurses and non-psychologist allied healthcare professionals who may have limited training in psychological therapeutic frameworks, particularly more recently developed interventions such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT). AIMS: We developed a single-day training programme for professionals working in supportive and palliative cancer care settings to change the nature of clinical communication about psychological distress and suffering towards an ACT-consistent approach. METHOD: We report on experiences of training delivery, and evaluation data about training satisfaction and intention to apply the training to clinical practice, from three training iterations in British and Australian, government-funded and charitable sectors. One hundred and sixteen cancer care professionals participated in the training. Evaluation data were collected from 53 participants (at either 2-week or 3-month follow-ups, or both) using self-report survey, including both quantitative and free-text questions. RESULTS: At 2 week follow-up, 73% of trainees rating our course as having relevance to their work, and at 3 month follow-up, 46% agreed that they were better placed to provide improved clinical services. Qualitative feedback supported the inclusion of experiential learning and theoretical explanations underpinning ACT techniques. Undertaking this training did not significantly increase trainees' stress levels, nor did implementation of this new way of working negatively affect staff well-being. Positive, ACT-consistent, changes in communication behaviours and attitudes were reported, however there was a lack of significant change in psychological flexibility. DISCUSSION: Acceptability and applicability of this training to supportive and palliative healthcare is positive. The lack of change in psychological flexibility suggests a potential need for more experiential content in the training programme. Logistical challenges in one training group suggests the need for more robust train-the-trainer models moving forward.

Self-efficacy and diabetes: why is emotional 'education' important and how can it be achieved?

Adequate age-appropriate diabetes knowledge and skills are essential to the success of diabetes self- and parental care. Health professionals have a central role in providing diabetes education. A direct link between diabetes knowledge and diabetes regimen behaviour cannot be assumed. Health professionals have to help children and their parents to develop the emotional concept of 'self-efficacy for diabetes self-care', to ensure optimal diabetes control.