Dataset Information

Trans-sectoral care in patients with colorectal cancer: Protocol of the randomized controlled multi-center trial Supportive Cancer Care Networkers (SCAN).

ABSTRACT: Managing therapy-related side-effects and improving health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer is still challenging. The need for an effective management of adverse events and unmet supportive care needs have been widely discussed. In the past decade, interventions by nursing staff gained more and more importance. Evidence suggests that a majority of patients even in early stages of the disease experience substantial impairments potentially resulting in diminished therapy adherence as well as impaired quality of life. However, evidence for the effectiveness of nurse-led interventions on symptom management and quality of life is still very limited. This especially applies to care transitions between different inpatient and outpatient health care providers throughout the course of treatment and aftercare.Supportive Cancer Care Networkers (SCAN) is a prospective randomized controlled trial conducted in eight large and middle-sized German cancer centers and municipal hospitals. The target population is adults with colorectal cancer UICC I-III after initial R-0 resection scheduled for adjuvant chemotherapy or guideline-based aftercare only. 370 patients will be randomly assigned to either intervention or control group. Patients in the intervention group will receive an additional support by specialized oncology nurses for eight weeks after discharge from hospital by telephone, consisting of symptom monitoring, counselling on self-assessment and self-management and dealing with individual resources for coping and psychosocial well-being. The primary endpoint will be health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at eight weeks after discharge from the initial treating hospital.The presented SCAN trial is to provide information that will be useful to advance our understanding of complex interdependencies between symptom severity, supportive care needs, functioning and the risk for diminished HRQoL. Most importantly, these patient-reported outcomes are not fully implemented in today's clinical routine practice potentially resulting in therapy cessations and lower chemotherapy treatment rates for colorectal cancer especially in older patients.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01651832.

SUBMITTER: Bauer A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4689007 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Trans-sectoral care in patients with colorectal cancer: Protocol of the randomized controlled multi-center trial Supportive Cancer Care Networkers (SCAN).

Bauer Alexander A Vordermark Dirk D Seufferlein Thomas T Schmoll Hans-Joachim HJ Dralle Henning H Mau Wilfried W Unverzagt Susanne S Boese Stephanie S Fach Eva-Maria EM Landenberger Margarete M

BMC cancer 20151222

<h4>Background</h4>Managing therapy-related side-effects and improving health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer is still challenging. The need for an effective management of adverse events and unmet supportive care needs have been widely discussed. In the past decade, interventions by nursing staff gained more and more importance. Evidence suggests that a majority of patients even in early stages of the disease experience substantial impairments potentially resulting in ...[more]

PMID: 26694748

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRegorafenib improves progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Here, we report the treatment patterns of regorafenib in the third- or late-line setting for mCRC in four centers in China.Patients and methodsPatients with refractory mCRC in four centers in China administered regorafenib from February 1, 2018 to June 31, 2021 were enrolled. Patients were grouped into 3 cohorts, namely, the monotherapy (regorafenib alone), chemo (regorafenib plus chemotherapy), and immune [regorafenib plus anti-PD1 (programmed cell death 1) antibodies] groups. Demographic, clinical, survival and safety data were retrospectively analyzed.ResultsA total of 177 patients were included in this study. Of them, 116 (65.5%) were treated with regorafenib alone, while 28 (15.9%) and 33 (18.6%) were administered regorafenib plus chemotherapy and anti-PD1 antibodies, respectively. The median followed-up time was 9.2 months. The disease control rate (DCR) was 40.7%. The median PFS (mPFS) was 2.43 months and the median OS (mOS) was 12.2 months. The immune group had longer median PFS (3.5 m vs. 2.2 m, p = 0.043) compared with the monotherapy group. Patients administered regorafenib plus chemotherapy had longer median OS (15.9 m vs. 8.4 m, p = 0.032) compared with the monotherapy group. Patients who began regorafenib treatment at 120 mg had longer median PFS and OS compared with those who began at 80 mg (PFS: 3.7 m vs. 2.0 m; p <0.001; OS: 13.4 m vs. 10.2 m; p = 0.005). Patients with a final dose of 120 mg had longer median PFS and OS compared with the 80 mg or less group (PFS: 5.0 m vs. 2.3 m; p = 0.045; OS: UR (unreach) vs. 10.9 m; p = 0.003). There were 87.0% (154/177) patients who experienced AEs. Three groups had similar rates of AEs (86.2% vs. 89.3% vs. 87.9%; p = 0.89).ConclusionPatients administered regorafenib alone or regorafenib in combination with other agents were relieved to some extent, with a disease control rate of 40.7%. Regorafenib plus anti-PD1 antibodies showed better PFS, while regorafenib plus chemotherapy had the most benefit in OS. There was no significant difference among three groups in terms of AEs.

Project description:BackgroundCancer-related fatigue (CRF) affects a majority of patients (pts) with symptoms lasting up to several years after finishing therapy. These symptoms lead to decreased health related quality of life. Fatigue during treatment for colorectal cancer is common, but poorly understood and can affect compliance with post-surgical cancer therapy. We examined the fatigue levels during first-line chemo- or radio-chemotherapy protocols, which were supported by a pharmaceutical mistletoe preparation (Iscador(®)Qu) (181patients). We compared the outcome to a parallel control group (143 patients), which did not receive this supportive care treatment.MethodsThe medical records of 324 patients with non-metastasized colorectal cancer (UICC stage I-III), which were obtained from hospitals and resident physicians, were assessed. The documented treatment decision by chemo- or radio-chemotherapy supported by mistletoe interventions was followed for a median treatment period of 8.6 months. During the post-surgical treatment period the patients were diagnosed twice for the presence of fatigue symptoms by structural interviews carried out by physicians.ResultsAt the end of the median treatment period, 16/181 patients (8.8%) were diagnosed with CRF in the supportive care group and 86/143 (60.1%) in the chemo- or radio-chemotherapy group without supportive mistletoe medication. Multivariable-adjusted ORs provided evidence for a chance to improve CRF by supportive mistletoe medication compared to chemo- or radio-chemotherapy alone over the time of treatment. The OR = 10.651 (95% CI 5.09-22.28; p < 0.001) declined from the first visit to OR = 0.054 (95 CI 0.02-0.13; p < 0.001) at the end of therapy. Furthermore, 14 confounding factors for risk assessment of CRF were compared by means of forest plots. It turned out that the hospital versus office-based treatment and the co-morbidity/inflammation represent independent but important determinants for fatigue levels.ConclusionThe clinically used mistletoe medication (Iscador(®)Qu) is the first candidate to be included in a supportive care modus into chemo- or chemo-radiotherapy protocols for colorectal patients to improve CRF without discernable toxicities.

Project description:IntroductionPharmacogenomics is about selecting the "right drug in the right amount for the right patient." In metastatic colorectal cancer, germline pharmacogenomics testing presents a unique opportunity to improve outcomes, since the genes dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase and UDP-glucuronosyltransferase metabolizing the chemotherapy drugs, 5-fluorouracil, and irinotecan are already well known. In a retrospective analysis of the landmark TRIBE clinical trial [(TRIBE - TRIplet plus BEvacizumab multicenter, phase III trial by the Italian Cooperative GONO (Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest) group (NCT00719797)], the proportion of patients with serious adverse events was higher in those with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase/UDP-glucuronosyltransferase aberrations and was dose dependent. We aimed to report on the feasibility and the results of incorporating pharmacogenomics testing into clinical practice.MethodsAs a quality improvement initiative and a center of individualized medicine grant, we integrated the use of OneOme RightMed comprehensive test, which reports on 27 genes related to pharmacogenomics and over 300 medications of interest. We limited initial testing to patients with colorectal cancer. Pharmacists provided dosage recommendations based on test results in real-time.ResultsAt our cancer center, 155 patients underwent pharmacogenomics testing from November 2017 to January 2019. Results were available within 3 to 5 days of testing for most patients and were integrated into treatment decision-making. Of 155 sampled participants, a total of 89 (57.4%) participants had an UGT1A1 variant genotype, NM_000463.2: c.-53_-52[8] *1/*28, n = 74 (47.7%); *28/*28, n = 15 (9.7%). Additionally, 4 (2.6%) participants were heterozygous for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase. Two (1.3%) individuals were heterozygous for both UDP-glucuronosyltransferase and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase genes. All (100%) the patients had at least 1 actionable aberration related to supportive care medications (CYP-family) of all the possible medications listed on their pharmacogenomics report.ConclusionPreemptive comprehensive pharmacogenomics testing can be integrated into clinical practice in real-time for patients with cancer given faster turnaround and low cost. Pharmacist-driven, patient-specific medication management consults add further value given the number of genes/drugs. This sets the stage for a prospective randomized clinical trial to demonstrate the amount of benefit this can result in these patients.

Project description:IntroductionColorectal cancer (CRC) and its treatments can cause distressing sequelae. We conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial aiming to improve psychological distress, supportive care needs (SCNs), and quality of life (QOL) of patients with CRC. The intervention, called SurvivorCare (SC), comprised educational materials, needs assessment, survivorship care plan, end-of-treatment session, and three follow-up telephone calls.MethodsAt the end of treatment for stage I-III CRC, eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to usual care (UC) or to UC plus SC. Distress (Brief Symptom Inventory 18), SCNs (Cancer Survivors' Unmet Needs measure), and QOL (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] QOL questionnaires C30 and EORTC CRC module CR29) were assessed at baseline and at 2 and 6 months (follow-up 1 [FU1] and FU2, respectively). The primary hypothesis was that SC would have a beneficial effect on distress at FU1. The secondary hypotheses were that SC would have a beneficial effect on (a) SCN and QOL at FU1 and on (b) distress, SCNs, and QOL at FU2. A total of 15 items assessed experience of care.ResultsOf 221 patients randomly assigned, 4 were ineligible for the study and 1 was lost to FU, leaving 110 in the UC group and 106 in the SC group. Patients' characteristics included the following: median age, 64 years; men, 52%; colon cancer, 56%; rectal cancer, 35%; overlapping sites of disease, 10%; stage I disease, 7%; stage II, 22%; stage III, 71%. Baseline distress and QOL scores were similar to population norms. Between-group differences in distress at FU1 (primary outcome) and at FU2, and SCNs and QOL at FU1 and FU2 were small and nonsignificant. Patients in the SC group were more satisfied with survivorship care than those in the UC group (significant differences on 10 of 15 items).ConclusionThe addition of SC to UC did not have a beneficial effect on distress, SCNs, or QOL outcomes, but patients in the SC group were more satisfied with care.Implications for practiceSome survivors of colorectal cancer report distressing effects after completing treatment. Strategies to identify and respond to survivors' issues are needed. In a randomized controlled trial, the addition of a nurse-led supportive care package (SurvivorCare) to usual post-treatment care did not impact survivors' distress, quality of life, or unmet needs. However, patients receiving the SurvivorCare intervention were more satisfied with survivorship care. Factors for consideration in the design of subsequent studies are discussed.

Dataset Information

Trans-sectoral care in patients with colorectal cancer: Protocol of the randomized controlled multi-center trial Supportive Cancer Care Networkers (SCAN).

Publications

Trans-sectoral care in patients with colorectal cancer: Protocol of the randomized controlled multi-center trial Supportive Cancer Care Networkers (SCAN).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets