Supportive care needs of patients following treatment for colorectal cancer: risk factors for unmet needs and the association between unmet needs and health-related quality of life—results from the ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) study

AbstractPURPOSE:To investigate unmet needs of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) at the end of treatment and whether unmet needs improve over time. Identify predictors of need following treatment and whether unmet need is associated with worse health-related quality of life (HRQoL).METHODS:As part of the UK ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) cohort study, patients treated for CRC completed the Supportive Care Needs Survey Short Form-34 (SCNS SF-34) 15 and 24 months following surgery, along with questionnaires measuring HRQoL, wellbeing, life events, social support, and confidence to manage their cancer before surgery, 3, 9, 15, and 24 months post-surgery.RESULTS:The SCNS SF-34 was completed by 526 patients at 15 months and 510 patients at 24 months. About one-quarter of patients had at least one moderate or severe unmet need at both time points. Psychological and physical unmet needs were the most common and did not improve over time. Over 60% of patients who reported 5 or more moderate or severe unmet needs at 15 months experienced the same level of unmet need at 24 months. HRQoL at the beginning of treatment predicted unmet needs at the end of treatment. Unmet needs, specifically physical, psychological, and health system and information needs, were associated with poorer health and HRQoL at the end of treatment.CONCLUSIONS:Unmet needs persist over time and are associated with HRQoL. Evaluation of HRQoL at the start of treatment would help inform the identification of vulnerable patients. Assessment and care planning in response to unmet needs should be integrated into person-centred care.IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS:Early identification of CRC patients at risk of unmet needs will help infrom personalised survivorship care plans. The implementation of personalised and tailored services are likely to confer HRQoL gains

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

. 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. Supportive Care in Cancer, 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

Clinical Significance of Myocardial Injury in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Prospective, Multicenter, Cohort Study

\ua9 2024 The AuthorsBackground: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients with troponin elevation have a higher prevalence of cardiac abnormalities than control individuals. However, the progression and impact of myocardial injury on COVID-19 survivors remain unclear. Objectives: This study sought to evaluate myocardial injury in COVID-19 survivors with troponin elevation with baseline and follow-up imaging and to assess medium-term outcomes. Methods: This was a prospective, longitudinal cohort study in 25 United Kingdom centers (June 2020 to March 2021). Hospitalized COVID-19 patients with myocardial injury underwent cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) scans within 28 days and 6 months postdischarge. Outcomes were tracked for 12 months, with quality of life surveys (EuroQol-5 Dimension and 36-Item Short Form surveys) taken at discharge and 6 months. Results: Of 342 participants (median age: 61.3 years; 71.1% male) with baseline CMR, 338 had a 12-month follow-up, 235 had a 6-month CMR, and 215 has baseline and follow-up quality of life surveys. Of 338 participants, within 12 months, 1.2% died; 1.8% had new myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, or coronary revascularization; 0.8% had new myopericarditis; and 3.3% had other cardiovascular events requiring hospitalization. At 6 months, there was a minor improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (1.8% \ub1 1.0%; P < 0.001), stable right ventricular ejection fraction (0.4% \ub1 0.8%; P = 0.50), no change in myocardial scar pattern or volume (P = 0.26), and no imaging evidence of continued myocardial inflammation. All pericardial effusions (26 of 26) resolved, and most pneumonitis resolved (95 of 101). EuroQol-5 Dimension scores indicated an overall improvement in quality of life (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Myocardial injury in severe hospitalized COVID-19 survivors is nonprogressive. Medium-term outcomes show a low incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events and improved quality of life. (COVID-19 Effects on the Heart; ISRCTN58667920

A dyadic approach to understanding the impact of breast cancer on relationships between partners during early survivorship

© 2016 The Author(s). Background: The shared impact of breast cancer for women and their male partners is emerging as an important consideration during the experience of a breast cancer diagnosis, particularly during survivorship. This study aimed to explore the experiences of women and their partners during early survivorship and contributes a range of insights into the lives of those intimately affected by breast cancer. Methods: In-depth interviews were completed with Australian women survivors of breast cancer (n = 8) and their partners (n = 8), between six months and five years following cessation of treatment. Questions included a focus on the women and their partners' daily experiences during early survivorship, including the management of ongoing symptoms, engagement in leisure and social interests, returning to work, communicating with each other, maintenance of the current relationship and other important roles and responsibilities. Thematic analysis was employed to determine key themes arising from the dyadic accounts of women and their partners' experiences during early breast cancer survivorship. Results: Women and their partners experienced many changes to their previous roles, responsibilities and relationships during early breast cancer survivorship. Couples also reported a range of communication, intimacy and sexuality concerns which greatly impacted their interactions with each other, adding further demands on the relationship. Three significant themes were determined: (1) a disconnection within the relationship - this was expressed as the woman survivor of breast cancer needing to prioritise her own needs, sometimes at the expense of her partner and the relationship; (2) reformulating the relationship - this reflects the strategies used by couples to negotiate changes within the relationship; and (3) support is needed to negotiate the future of the relationship - couples emphasised the need for additional support and resources to assist them in maintaining their relationship during early survivorship. Conclusion: It can be concluded that the early survivorship period represents a crucial time for both women and their partners and there are currently limited options available to meet their shared needs and preferences for support. Findings indicate that a suitable model of care underpinned by a biopsychosocial framework, access to comprehensive assessment, timely support and the provision of targeted resources are urgently needed to assist women and their partners during this critical time

Erratum to: 36th International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1208-6.]

Rehabilitation versus surgical reconstruction for non-acute anterior cruciate ligament injury (ACL SNNAP): a pragmatic randomised controlled trial

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is a common debilitating injury that can cause instability of the knee. We aimed to investigate the best management strategy between reconstructive surgery and non-surgical treatment for patients with a non-acute ACL injury and persistent symptoms of instability. Methods: We did a pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial in 29 secondary care National Health Service orthopaedic units in the UK. Patients with symptomatic knee problems (instability) consistent with an ACL injury were eligible. We excluded patients with meniscal pathology with characteristics that indicate immediate surgery. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by computer to either surgery (reconstruction) or rehabilitation (physiotherapy but with subsequent reconstruction permitted if instability persisted after treatment), stratified by site and baseline Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score—4 domain version (KOOS4). This management design represented normal practice. The primary outcome was KOOS4 at 18 months after randomisation. The principal analyses were intention-to-treat based, with KOOS4 results analysed using linear regression. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN10110685, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02980367. Findings: Between Feb 1, 2017, and April 12, 2020, we recruited 316 patients. 156 (49%) participants were randomly assigned to the surgical reconstruction group and 160 (51%) to the rehabilitation group. Mean KOOS4 at 18 months was 73·0 (SD 18·3) in the surgical group and 64·6 (21·6) in the rehabilitation group. The adjusted mean difference was 7·9 (95% CI 2·5–13·2; p=0·0053) in favour of surgical management. 65 (41%) of 160 patients allocated to rehabilitation underwent subsequent surgery according to protocol within 18 months. 43 (28%) of 156 patients allocated to surgery did not receive their allocated treatment. We found no differences between groups in the proportion of intervention-related complications. Interpretation: Surgical reconstruction as a management strategy for patients with non-acute ACL injury with persistent symptoms of instability was clinically superior and more cost-effective in comparison with rehabilitation management. Funding: The UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome