Differences in baseline characteristics and 1-year psychological factors between participants and non-participants in the randomized, controlled trial regarding patient-led follow-up after rectal cancer (FURCA)

Quality of life and symptom burden after rectal cancer surgery: a randomised controlled trial comparing patient-led versus standard follow-up

PURPOSE

After curatively intended rectal cancer (RC) surgery, new follow-up strategies are warranted, seeking more individualised care and targeting health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and functional outcomes. The FURCA trial aimed to investigate the effect of patient-led follow-up on HRQoL and symptom burden 3 years after surgery.

METHODS

RC patients from four Danish centres were randomised 1:1 to intervention (patient-led follow-up with patient education and self-referral to a specialist nurse) or control (standard follow-up with five routine doctor visits). Patients in both groups had a computed tomography (CT) at 1 and 3 years. The primary outcome (HRQoL) was assessed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - colorectal (FACT-C) score (Ward et al. in Qual Life Res. 8(3):181-95, 18). Secondary outcomes were functional measures, patient involvement and satisfaction and cancer recurrence at 3 years.

RESULTS

From Feb 2016 to Aug 2018, 336 patients were included of whom 248 completed 3 years of follow-up. Between-group differences were found neither for the primary endpoint, nor for functional outcomes. The recurrence rate did not differ between the groups. Patient involvement and satisfaction were higher in the intervention group with statistical significance in almost half of the items.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no effect on HRQoL and symptom burden from patient-led follow-up, although it may improve patient-perceived involvement and satisfaction.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

The findings in this study suggest that patient-led follow-up is a more tailored approach to meet cancer survivors' needs and might improve their ability to cope with survivorship.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

R97-A6511-14-S23.

Individualised follow-up for head and neck cancer-design of a prospective cohort study to assess its feasibility

INTRODUCTION

It is a common practice for many cancer types to monitor patients after treatment to detect new disease manifestations early. For head and neck cancer (HNC), however, long-term routine follow-up is up for debate for several reasons. The benefits of prolonged routine follow-up on survival have not been proven. Also, cancer follow-up is putting increasing pressure on healthcare resources due to rising incidence and survival rates. Therefore, this study investigates a novel follow-up approach among HNC patients, giving them the opportunity to choose their own follow-up programme.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

HNC patients are offered a decision-aided choice between standardised or individualised follow-up after 1.5 years of uncomplicated guideline-prescribed follow-up. Standardised follow-up entails continuing the 5-year guideline-prescribed schedule. Individualised follow-up means the patient only attends the outpatient clinic on their own initiative in case of physical symptoms or supportive care needs. Patients are educated on self-examination and when a control visit is necessary. The primary outcome measure is the feasibility of offering patients this choice. Secondary outcome measures are quality of life, costs, productivity loss and detection of new disease.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

We believe that it is essential to let patients determine their follow-up programme based on their own values and preferences. If this choice is feasible, it can be implemented and investigated in other HNC care centres.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05386225.

Experiences of bowel symptoms in patients with rectal cancer after sphincter-preserving surgery: a qualitative meta-synthesis

PURPOSE

This study is to identify and synthesize the available evidence of bowel symptom experiences of patients with rectal cancer after sphincter-preserving surgery (SPS).

METHODS

This qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) qualitative systematic review methodology and reported following the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) guidelines. Seven databases were searched on 22 December 2021. The selected studies were reviewed by two independent reviewers, and disagreements were resolved by discussion or with a third reviewer.

RESULTS

Seven qualitative articles were included in the meta-synthesis with 192 total rectal cancer patients. The review summarized 53 qualitative findings into three synthesized findings: (a) Patients experienced bowel symptoms and triggered additional physiological problems, and they underestimated bowel symptoms; (b) patients had many negative emotions, and their daily life and social interaction were disturbed; and (c) patients adopted strategies to adapt or control their bowel symptoms. According to the ConQual evidence grading approach, the confidence of the synthesized findings was rated as moderate to low.

CONCLUSIONS

The bowel symptoms of patients with rectal cancer after SPS have troubled their lives. Timely acquisition of symptom-related knowledge and enhancement of their coping abilities are important for the control and management of bowel symptoms. Healthcare professionals should clearly understand the bowel symptoms that patients may experience after SPS and provide supportive care for patients to improve patients' self-management abilities and quality of life.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42021242610.

What is the prevalence of fear of cancer recurrence in cancer survivors and patients? A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

Objective

Care for fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is considered the most common unmet need among cancer survivors. Yet the prevalence of FCR and predisposing factors remain inconclusive. To support targeted care, we provide a comprehensive overview of the prevalence and severity of FCR among cancer survivors and patients, as measured using the short form of the validated Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI‐SF). We also report on associations between FCR and clinical and demographic characteristics.

Methods

This is a systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta‐analysis on the prevalence of FCR. In the review, we included all studies that used the FCRI‐SF with adult (≥18 years) cancer survivors and patients. Date of search: 7 February 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool.

Results

IPD were requested from 87 unique studies and provided for 46 studies comprising 11,226 participants from 13 countries. 9311 respondents were included for the main analyses. On the FCRI‐SF (range 0–36), 58.8% of respondents scored ≥13, 45.1% scored ≥16 and 19.2% scored ≥22. FCR decreased with age and women reported more FCR than men. FCR was found across cancer types and continents and for all time periods since cancer diagnosis.

Conclusions

FCR affects a considerable number of cancer survivors and patients. It is therefore important that healthcare providers discuss this issue with their patients and provide treatment when needed. Further research is needed to investigate how best to prevent and treat FCR and to identify other factors associated with FCR.

The protocol was prospectively registered (PROSPERO CRD42020142185).

Patient-led follow-up reduces outpatient doctor visits and improves patient satisfaction. One-year analysis of secondary outcomes in the randomised trial Follow-Up after Rectal CAncer (FURCA)

BACKGROUND

FURCA (Follow-Up after Rectal Cancer) is a multi-centre randomised trial comparing patient-led follow-up with standard outpatient follow-up. This paper reports one-year follow-up data from the FURCA trial on selected secondary outcomes including type and number of contacts, patient-reported involvement and satisfaction with health care services during follow-up.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with rectal cancer (stage < IV) from four Danish surgical centres were randomised (1:1) into intervention (education and self-referral to project nurse) or standard follow-up (routine clinical doctor visits). The present analysis involved data on hospital contacts during the first year after surgery, patient involvement and satisfaction measured at one year, and baseline patient-reported and clinical variables.

RESULTS

Of 512 eligible patients, 168 were allocated to patient-led follow-up (intervention) and 168 to standard follow-up (control). The total number of hospital contacts in the intervention arm did not differ significantly from the number of contacts in the control arm (p = 0.44). More patients had ≥15 contacts in the intervention arm than in the control arm (p = 0.004). The total number of outpatient doctor visits was significantly lower in the intervention arm (p < 0.001). Patients in both arms rated involvement and satisfaction high; yet patients in the intervention arm scored significantly higher on two of six items regarding involvement and all five items regarding satisfaction. Of the 168 patients in the intervention arm, 43% made direct contact (self-referral) to the project nurse, and 14 of these patients (8%) had ≥4 contacts. The primary reason for self-referral was bowel dysfunction.

DISCUSSION

The findings indicate the value of a patient-led follow-up program in terms of direct access and more individually tailored intervention based on patients' needs, with most tasks being managed by nurses. Patient-led follow-up came with improved patient-perceived involvement and satisfaction; thus, it was both acceptable and favourable for the patients.

Completeness and accuracy of the registration of recurrences in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry (SCRCR) and an update of recurrence risk in colon cancer

BACKGROUND

The completeness and accuracy of the registration of synchronous metastases and recurrences in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry has not been investigated. Knowing how accurate these parameters are in the registry is a prerequisite to adequately measure the current recurrence risk.

METHODS

All charts for patients diagnosed with stage I-III colorectal cancer (CRC) in two regions were reviewed. In one of the regions, all registrations of synchronous metastases were similarly investigated. After the database had been corrected, recurrence risk in colon cancer was calculated stratified by risk group as suggested by ESMO in 2020.

RESULTS

In patients operated upon more than five years ago (N = 1235), there were 20 (1.6%) recurrences not reported. In more recent patients, more recurrences were unreported (4.0%). Few synchronous metastases were wrongly registered (3.6%) and, likewise, few synchronous metastases were not registered (about 1%). The five-year recurrence risk in stage II was 6% for low-risk, 11% for intermediate risk, and 23% for high-risk colon cancer patients. In stage III, it was 25% in low- and 45% in high-risk patients. Incorporation of risk factors in stage III modified the risks substantially even if this is not considered by ESMO. Adjuvant chemotherapy lowered the risk in stage III but not to any relevant extent in stage II.

CONCLUSION

The registration of recurrences in the registry after 5 years is accurate to between 1 and 2% but less accurate earlier. A small number of unreported recurrences and falsely reported recurrences were discovered in the chart review. The recurrence risk in this validated and updated patient series matches what has been recently reported, except for the risk of recurrence in stage II low risk colon cancers which seem to be even a few percentage points lower (6 vs. 9%).

Spotlight on the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI)

Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a pervasive concern for people living with cancer. The rapidly expanding FCR literature has been weakened somewhat by use of miscellaneous FCR measures of varying quality. The Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory (FCRI) has been widely used in observational and intervention studies and the FCRI severity subscale, also known as the FCRI-Short Form (FCRI-SF), is often used to identify potential cases of clinically significant FCR. Given the FCRI's increasing use in research and clinical practice, we aimed to provide an overview, critique, and suggested improvements of the FCRI. Studies citing the original FCRI validation paper were identified and synthesised using narrative and meta-analytic methods. The 42-item FCRI has demonstrated a reasonably robust 7-factor structure across evaluations in multiple languages, although certain subscales (eg, Coping) demonstrate sub-optimal reliability. Confirmation of the cross-cultural equivalence of several FCRI translations is needed. Meta-analysis of FCRI-SF scores revealed a combined weighted mean score of 15.7/36, a little above the lowest proposed cut-off score (≥13) for clinical FCR. Depending on the FCRI-SF cut-off used, between 30.0% and 53.9% of the cancer population (ie, patients and survivors) appear to experience sub-clinical or clinical FCR. Higher FCRI scores were associated with younger age and female gender, pain/physical symptoms and psychological morbidity, consistent with the FCR literature generally. Issues regarding the application and interpretation of the FCRI remain. Whether the FCRI is well suited to assessing fear of progression as well as recurrence is unclear, the meaningfulness of the FCRI total score is debatable, and the use of the FCRI-SF to screen for clinical FCR is problematic, as items do not reflect established characteristics of clinical FCR. Refinement of the FCRI is needed for it to remain a key FCR assessment tool in future research and clinical practice.

Recurrence Risk after Radical Colorectal Cancer Surgery-Less Than before, But How High Is It?

Simple Summary

Evidence indicates that recurrence risk after colon cancer today is less than it was when trials performed decades ago showed that adjuvant chemotherapy reduces the risk and prolong disease-free and overall survival. After rectal cancer surgery, local recurrence rates have decreased but it is unclear if systemic recurrences have. After a systematic review of available literature reporting recurrence risks after curative colorectal cancer surgery we report that the risks are lower today than they were in the past and that this risk reduction is not solely ascribed to the use of adjuvant therapy. Adjuvant therapy always means overtreatment of many patients, already cured by the surgery. Fewer recurrences mean that progress in the care of these patients has happened but also that the present guidelines giving recommendations based upon old data must be adjusted. The relative gains from adding chemotherapy are not altered, but the absolute number of patients gaining is less.

Abstract

Adjuvant chemotherapy aims at eradicating tumour cells sometimes present after radical surgery for a colorectal cancer (CRC) and thereby diminish the recurrence rate and prolong time to recurrence (TTR). Remaining tumour cells will lead to recurrent disease that is usually fatal. Adjuvant therapy is administered based upon the estimated recurrence risk, which in turn defines the need for this treatment. This systematic overview aims at describing whether the need has decreased since trials showing that adjuvant chemotherapy provides benefits in colon cancer were performed decades ago. Thanks to other improvements than the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy, such as better staging, improved surgery, the use of radiotherapy and more careful pathology, recurrence risks have decreased. Methodological difficulties including intertrial comparisons decades apart and the present selective use of adjuvant therapy prevent an accurate estimate of the magnitude of the decreased need. Furthermore, most trials do not report recurrence rates or TTR, only disease-free and overall survival (DFS/OS). Fewer colon cancer patients, particularly in stage II but also in stage III, today display a sufficient need for adjuvant treatment considering the burden of treatment, especially when oxaliplatin is added. In rectal cancer, neo-adjuvant treatment will be increasingly used, diminishing the need for adjuvant treatment.