The impact of chemotherapy on cognitive performance post-surgery in patients with colorectal cancer: A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Subjective reports of cognitive impairment following chemotherapy are frequent in cancer patients. Objective cognitive impairment has been observed in cancer patients regardless of treatment regimen suggesting the relationship between cognitive impairment and chemotherapy is not clear cut. Little research has explored the effects of chemotherapy on cognition following surgery in colorectal cancer (CRC). The present study explored the effects of chemotherapy on cognitive performance in a sample of CRC patients. METHODS: 136 participants were recruited into a prospective cohort study: 78 CRC patients undergoing surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy, 58 CRC patients undergoing surgery only. A battery of neuropsychological tests was administered to participants 4 weeks post-surgery (T1), 12 weeks after first chemotherapy (T2) and 3 months after last chemotherapy (T3) or equivalent time-points. RESULTS: Using the criterion of scoring at least two standard-deviations below the group norm on at least one neuropsychological test, 45%-55% of all CRC patients showed cognitive deficits 10 months after surgery (T3) and 14% on at least 3 tests. However, cognition did not significantly differ between patients who had chemotherapy and those who did not. A time by group interaction effect was found on the composite cognition score using multi-level modelling suggesting a greater improvement in cognition in the surgery only group over time (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: CRC patients display cognitive impairment 10 months after surgery. Chemotherapy did not worsen cognitive impairment but did appear to slow cognitive recovery relative to those undergoing surgery only. The findings demonstrate a clear need for supportive cognitive interventions for all CRC patients following treatment.

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in primary care: a follow-up service evaluation.

AIM: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer in the UK. Following National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance for faecal immunochemical testing (FIT), we introduced a service for the measurement of faecal haemoglobin (f-Hb) in symptomatic patients. Previously, we evaluated the first 6 months of the service in three local boroughs, here we re-examine the use of FIT, over a similar 6 months in the two successive years. METHODS: Patients who had FIT requested in April-September 2020 and 2021 were studied. Results were obtained from the laboratory information systems and matched with the clinical outcomes of those referred via the urgent lower gastrointestinal cancer pathway. Patient demographics, reason for referral, clinical outcome and diagnostic test performance are reported. RESULTS: In 2020, 4042 samples were analysed and 57 CRC detected. In 2021, 10 508 samples were analysed and 65 CRC detected. Six (4.9%) patients with CRC had f-Hb <10 µg/g, of whom three were anaemic. In 2020, 27.7% of samples were from patients under 50 years; and in 2021, 32.8%. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of f-Hb at ≥10 µg/g for CRC were 92.9%, 46.6%, 6.4% and 99.4% in 2020 and 96.9%, 29.9%, 3.2% and 99.8% in 2021. CONCLUSIONS: As currently used in primary care in North East London, specificity of FIT at a cut-off of 10 µg/g is much lower than in published studies and the impact of this on colorectal services needs to be considered.

Faecal immunochemical testing for haemoglobin in detecting bowel polyps in symptomatic patients: multicentre prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Measurement of faecal haemoglobin using faecal immunochemistry testing is recommended in patients presenting with symptoms suspicious for colorectal cancer, to aid in triage and prioritization of definitive investigations. While its role in colorectal cancer has been extensively investigated, the ability of faecal immunochemistry testing to detect adenomas in symptomatic patients is unclear. METHODS: A multicentre prospective observational study was conducted between April 2017 and March 2019, recruiting adults from 24 hospitals across England and 59 general practices in London who had been urgently referred with suspected colorectal cancer symptoms. Each patient provided a stool sample for faecal immunochemistry testing, in parallel with definitive investigation. A final diagnosis for each patient was recorded, including the presence, size, histology, and risk type of colonic polyps. The outcome of interest was the sensitivity of faecal immunochemistry testing in detecting the presence of adenomas. RESULTS: Of 3496 patients included in the analysis, 553 (15.8 per cent) had polyps diagnosed. Sensitivity of faecal immunochemistry testing for polyp detection was low across all ranges; with a cut-off for faecal haemoglobin of 4 µg/g or lower, sensitivity was 34.9 per cent and 46.8 per cent for all polyp types and high-risk polyps respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in detection probability was relatively low for both intermediate-risk (0.63) and high-risk polyps (0.63). CONCLUSION: While faecal immunochemistry testing may be useful in prioritizing investigations to diagnose colorectal cancer, if used as a sole test, the majority of polyps would be missed and the opportunity to prevent progression to colorectal cancer may be lost.

Healthcare Professional and Patient Perceptions of Changes in Colorectal Cancer Care Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Impact on Health Inequalities.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic changed the way in which people were diagnosed and treated for cancer. We explored healthcare professional and patient perceptions of the main changes to colorectal cancer delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic and how they impacted on socioeconomic inequalities in care. METHODS: In 2020, using a qualitative approach, we interviewed patients (n = 15) who accessed primary care with colorectal cancer symptoms and were referred for further investigations. In 2021, we interviewed a wide range of healthcare professionals (n = 30) across the cancer care pathway and gathered national and local documents/guidelines regarding changes in colorectal cancer care. RESULTS: Changes with the potential to exacerbate inequalities in care, included: the move to remote consultations; changes in symptomatic triage, new COVID testing procedures/ways to access healthcare, changes in visitor policies and treatment (e.g., shorter course radiotherapy). Changes that improved patient access/convenience or the diagnostic process have the potential to reduce inequalities in care. DISCUSSION: Changes in healthcare delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic have the ongoing potential to exacerbate existing health inequalities due to changes in how patients are triaged, changes to diagnostic and disease management processes, reduced social support available to patients and potential over-reliance on digital first approaches. We provide several recommendations to help mitigate these harms, whilst harnessing the gains.

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in patients with signs or symptoms of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC): a joint guideline from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG).

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has a high sensitivity for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). In a symptomatic population FIT may identify those patients who require colorectal investigation with the highest priority. FIT offers considerable advantages over the use of symptoms alone, as an objective measure of risk with a vastly superior positive predictive value for CRC, while conversely identifying a truly low risk cohort of patients. The aim of this guideline was to provide a clear strategy for the use of FIT in the diagnostic pathway of people with signs or symptoms of a suspected diagnosis of CRC. The guideline was jointly developed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology, specifically by a 21-member multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG). A systematic review of 13 535 publications was undertaken to develop 23 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the triage of people with symptoms of a suspected CRC diagnosis in primary care. In order to achieve consensus among a broad group of key stakeholders, we completed an extended Delphi of the GDG, and also 61 other individuals across the UK and Ireland, including by members of the public, charities and primary and secondary care. Seventeen research recommendations were also prioritised to inform clinical management.

Socioeconomic differences in help seeking for colorectal cancer symptoms during COVID-19: a UK-wide qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has led to rapid changes in healthcare delivery, raising concern that these changes may exacerbate existing inequalities in patient outcomes. AIM: To understand how patients' help-seeking experiences in primary care for colorectal cancer symptoms during COVID-19 were affected by their socioeconomic status (SES). DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative semi-structured interviews with males and females across the UK, recruited using purposive sampling by SES. METHOD: Interviews were carried out with 39 participants (20 higher SES; 19 lower SES) who contacted primary care about possible symptoms of colorectal cancer during COVID-19. Data were analysed using framework analysis followed by comparative thematic analysis to explore differences between groups. RESULTS: Three themes were identified with differences between SES groups: 1) how people decided to seek medical help through appraisal of symptoms; 2) how people navigated services; and 3) impact of COVID-19 on how patients interacted with healthcare professionals. The lower SES group expressed uncertainty appraising symptoms and navigating services (in terms of new processes resulting from COVID-19 and worries about infection). There was also potential for increased disparity in diagnosis and management, with other methods of getting in touch (for example, email or 111) taken up more readily by higher SES patients. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that COVID-19 exacerbated disparities between higher and lower SES participants. This study raises awareness around challenges in help seeking in the context of the pandemic, which are likely to persist (post-COVID-19) as healthcare systems settle on new models of care (for example, digital). Recommendations are provided to reduce inequalities of care.

Faecal immunochemical test for patients with 'high-risk' bowel symptoms: a large prospective cohort study and updated literature review.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) can rule out colorectal cancer (CRC) among patients presenting with 'high-risk' symptoms requiring definitive investigation. METHODS: Three thousand five hundred and ninety-six symptomatic patients referred to the standard urgent CRC pathway were recruited in a multi-centre observational study. They completed FIT in addition to standard investigations. CRC miss rate (percentage of CRC cases with low quantitative faecal haemoglobin [f-Hb] measurement) and specificity (percentage of patients without cancer with low f-Hb) were calculated. We also provided an updated literature review. RESULTS: Ninety patients had CRC. At f-Hb < 10 µg/g, the miss rate was 16.7% (specificity 80.1%). At f-Hb < 4 µg/g, the miss rate was 12.2% (specificity 73%), which became 3.3% if low FIT plus the absence of anaemia and abdominal pain were considered (specificity 51%). Within meta-analyses of 9 UK studies, the pooled miss rate was 7.2% (specificity 74%) for f-Hb < 4 µg/g. DISCUSSION: FIT alone as a triage tool would miss an estimated 1 in 8 cases in our study (1 in 14 from meta-analysis), while many people without CRC could avoid investigations. FIT can focus secondary care diagnostic capacity on patients most at risk of CRC, but more work on safety netting is required before incorporating FIT triage into the urgent diagnostic pathway.

Use of Pulsed Lavage Reduces the Rate of Surgical Site Infection After Laparotomy.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infections (SSI) are a preventable and common post-operative complication within general surgery. Intra-operative irrigation of surgical incisions is an inexpensive method to reduce post-operative SSI rates, however its use is predominantly limited to orthopaedic surgery. We aimed to assess the effects of pulsed lavage (PL) irrigation on SSI rates following elective and emergency laparotomies. METHODS: Elective and emergency patients who underwent a laparotomy between 2018 and 2019 were included. Relevant demographic and peri-operative risk factors collected retrospectively, following strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) criteria. The primary outcome was rate of superficial SSI within 30 days of the operation. Independent risk factors were assessed via multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: 176 patients were identified, with an average age of 60.7 ± 19.1 y. 82.4% (145/176) were emergencies and the mean ASA grade was 2.8. Fifty-two patients (29.5%) had PL used during their operation. Thirty-seven patients (29.8%, 37/124) in the control group developed a SSI, compared to seven patients (13.5%, 7/52) in the PL group (P = 0.022). At multi-variate analysis, the use PL conferring an Odds Ratio 0.36 (CI 0.12-0.94, P= 0.047) for developing a SSI. CONCLUSION: PL appears to significantly reduced the rate of SSI following laparotomy. There remains scope to reduce the incidence of this common and expensive post-operative complication, and PL could provide a potential cost-effective means to deliver improved outcomes. Future prospective randomised trials are essential to fully assess its benefits and wider use within general surgery.

FDG-PET/CT in colorectal cancer: potential for vascular-metabolic imaging to provide markers of prognosis.

PURPOSE: This study assesses the potential for vascular-metabolic imaging with FluoroDeoxyGlucose (FDG)-Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (PET/CT) perfusion to provide markers of prognosis specific to the site and stage of colorectal cancer. METHODS: This prospective observational study comprised of participants with suspected colorectal cancer categorized as either (a) non-metastatic colon cancer (M0colon), (b) non-metastatic rectal cancer (M0rectum), or (c) metastatic colorectal cancer (M+). Combined FDG-PET/CT perfusion imaging was successfully performed in 286 participants (184 males, 102 females, age: 69.60 ± 10 years) deriving vascular and metabolic imaging parameters. Vascular and metabolic imaging parameters alone and in combination were investigated with respect to overall survival. RESULTS: A vascular-metabolic signature that was significantly associated with poorer survival was identified for each patient group: M0colon - high Total Lesion Glycolysis (TLG) with increased Permeability Surface Area Product/Blood Flow (PS/BF), Hazard Ratio (HR) 3.472 (95% CI: 1.441-8.333), p = 0.006; M0rectum - high Metabolic Tumour Volume (MTV) with increased PS/BF, HR 4.567 (95% CI: 1.901-10.970), p = 0.001; M+ participants, high MTV with longer Time To Peak (TTP) enhancement, HR 2.421 (95% CI: 1.162-5.045), p = 0.018. In participants with stage 2 colon cancer as well as those with stage 3 rectal cancer, the vascular-metabolic signature could stratify the prognosis of these participants. CONCLUSION: Vascular and metabolic imaging using FDG-PET/CT can be used to synergise prognostic markers. The hazard ratios suggest that the technique may have clinical utility.

Service evaluation of faecal immunochemical testing introduced for use in North East London for patients at low risk of colorectal cancer.

AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer in the UK. Following National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance for faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) (DG30), we introduced a service for the measurement of faecal haemoglobin (fHb) in symptomatic patients in line with the 2017 update of the NG12 guidance. The purpose of this study was to audit the use of FIT, focussing on the indication for request and referral for diagnostic tests as recommended in NICE guidance. METHODS: Testing was rolled out after careful introduction with extensive education led by the local Cancer Alliance and reinforced by the laboratory. After 6 months, the outcomes of all patients tested were reviewed. RESULTS: 1203 samples were received, of which 894 (74.3%) were suitable for analysis. Of these, 482 (53.9%) actually met the criteria for FIT analysis stipulated in our patient pathway. Eight patients were diagnosed with CRC; fHb was detectable in all and was ≥200 µg/g in seven and <10 µg/g in one. 217 patients underwent gastrointestinal investigations, and the sensitivity and specificity of FIT for CRC were found to be 87.5% (95% CI 46.6% to 99.7%) and 52.6% (95% CI 45.6% to 59.6%), respectively. Patients with anaemia were more likely to have fHb ≥10 µg/g. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest benefits from the introduction of FIT in terms of more efficient use of diagnostic investigations, while revealing initial problems relating to familiarity with a new test. This merits further intervention with education and awareness programmes for Primary Care and further audit.

Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of brief, habit-based, lifestyle advice for cancer survivors: exploring behavioural outcomes for the Advancing Survivorship Cancer Outcomes Trial (ASCOT).

INTRODUCTION: Positive health behaviours such as regular physical activity and a healthy diet have significant effects on cancer outcomes. There is a need for simple but effective behaviour change interventions with the potential to be implemented within the cancer care pathway. Habit-based advice encourages repetition of a behaviour in a consistent context so that the behaviour becomes increasingly automatic in response to a specific contextual cue. This approach therefore encourages long-term behaviour change and can be delivered through printed materials. 'Healthy Habits for Life' is a brief intervention based on habit theory, and incorporating printed materials plus a personally tailored discussion, that has been designed specifically for patients with a diagnosis of cancer. The aim of this trial was to test the effect of 'Healthy Habits for Life' on a composite health behaviour risk index (CHBRI) over 3 months in patients with a diagnosis of breast, colorectal or prostate cancer. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: A 2-arm, individually randomised controlled trial in patients with breast, colorectal and prostate cancer. Patients will be recruited over 18 months from 7 National Health Service Trusts in London and Essex. Following baseline assessments and allocation to intervention or usual care, patients are followed up at 3 and 6 months. The primary outcome will be change in CHBRI at 3 months. Maintenance of any changes over 6 months, and changes in individual health behaviours (including dietary intake, physical activity, alcohol consumption and smoking status) will also be explored. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained through the National Research Ethics Service Committee South Central-Oxford B via the Integrated Research Application System (reference number 14/SC/1369). Results of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and scientific presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 17421871.

Ingestion of an orthodontic archwire resulting in a perforated bowel: A case report.

Accidentally, ingesting components of an orthodontic appliance can result in serious consequences for the patient. This paper presents one such complication, not previously reported, where the patient needed emergency surgery to retrieve part of an orthodontic appliance. This case report highlights the consequences of and possible solutions to prevent patients inhaling or ingesting parts of their appliance.