BackgroundThe 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. MethodsCRC 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); selfefficacy, 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. ResultsA 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.

ObjectiveMore people are living with the consequences of cancer and comorbidity. We describe frequencies of comorbidities in a colorectal cancer cohort and associations with health and well‐being outcomes up to 5 years following surgery.MethodsProspective cohort study of 872 colorectal cancer patients recruited 2010 to 2012 from 29 UK centres, awaiting curative intent surgery. Questionnaires administered at baseline (pre‐surgery), 3, 9, 15, 24 months, and annually up to 5 years. Comorbidities (and whether they limit activities) were self‐reported by participants from 3 months. The EORTC QLQ‐C30 and QLQ‐CR29 assessed global health/quality of life (QoL), symptoms, and functioning. Longitudinal analyses investigated associations between comorbidities and health and well‐being outcomes.ResultsAt baseline, the mean age of participants was 68 years, with 60% male and 65% colon cancer. Thirty‐two per cent had 1 and 40% had ≥2 comorbidities. The most common comorbidities were high blood pressure (43%), arthritis/rheumatism (32%), and anxiety/depression (18%). Of those with comorbidities, 37% reported at least 1 that limited their daily activities. Reporting any limiting comorbidities was associated with poorer global health/QoL, worse symptoms, and poorer functioning on all domains over 5‐year follow‐up. Controlling for the most common individual comorbidities, depression/anxiety had the greatest deleterious effect on outcomes.ConclusionsClinical assessment should prioritise patient‐reported comorbidities and whether these comorbidities limit daily activities, as important determinants of recovery of QoL, symptoms, and functioning following colorectal cancer. Targeted interventions and support services, including multiprofessional management and tailored assessment and follow‐up, may aid recovery of health and well‐being in these individuals.

PurposeTo 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).MethodsAs 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionsUnmet 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 SurvivorsEarly 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.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s11764-019-00805-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective To assess the effectiveness of oral spironolactone for acne vulgaris in adult women. Design Pragmatic, multicentre, phase 3, double blind, randomised controlled trial. Setting Primary and secondary healthcare, and advertising in the community and on social media in England and Wales. Participants Women (≥18 years) with facial acne for at least six months, judged to warrant oral antibiotics. Interventions Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either 50 mg/day spironolactone or matched placebo until week six, increasing to 100 mg/day spironolactone or placebo until week 24. Participants could continue using topical treatment. Main outcome measures Primary outcome was Acne-Specific Quality of Life (Acne-QoL) symptom subscale score at week 12 (range 0-30, where higher scores reflect improved QoL). Secondary outcomes were Acne-QoL at week 24, participant self-assessed improvement; investigator’s global assessment (IGA) for treatment success; and adverse reactions. Results From 5 June 2019 to 31 August 2021, 1267 women were assessed for eligibility, 410 were randomly assigned to the intervention (n=201) or control group (n=209) and 342 were included in the primary analysis (n=176 in the intervention group and n=166 in the control group). Baseline mean age was 29.2 years (standard deviation 7.2), 28 (7%) of 389 were from ethnicities other than white, with 46% mild, 40% moderate, and 13% severe acne. Mean Acne-QoL symptom scores at baseline were 13.2 (standard deviation 4.9) and at week 12 were 19.2 (6.1) for spironolactone and 12.9 (4.5) and 17.8 (5.6) for placebo (difference favouring spironolactone 1.27 (95% confidence interval 0.07 to 2.46), adjusted for baseline variables). Scores at week 24 were 21.2 (5.9) for spironolactone and 17.4 (5.8) for placebo (difference 3.45 (95% confidence interval 2.16 to 4.75), adjusted). More participants in the spironolactone group reported acne improvement than in the placebo group: no significant difference was reported at week 12 (72% v 68%, odds ratio 1.16 (95% confidence interval 0.70 to 1.91)) but significant difference was noted at week 24 (82% v 63%, 2.72 (1.50 to 4.93)). Treatment success (IGA classified) at week 12 was 31 (19%) of 168 given spironolactone and nine (6%) of 160 given placebo (5.18 (2.18 to 12.28)). Adverse reactions were slightly more common in the spironolactone group with more headaches reported (20% v 12%; p=0.02). No serious adverse reactions were reported. Conclusions Spironolactone improved outcomes compared with placebo, with greater differences at week 24 than week 12. Spironolactone is a useful alternative to oral antibiotics for women with acne. Trial registration ISRCTN12892056