Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38566197›Full record

ArticleTrials2024

Study protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial of comparing enhanced acceptance and commitment therapy plus (+) added to usual aftercare versus usual aftercare only, in patients living with or beyond cancer: SUrvivors' Rehabilitation Evaluation after CANcer (SURECAN) trial.

Imran Khan, Stephanie J C Taylor, Clare Robinson, Elisavet Moschopoulou, Paul McCrone, Liam Bourke, Mohamed Thaha, Kamaldeep Bhui, Derek Rosario, Damien Ridge and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Financial toxicity, coping strategies, and quality of life among Chinese patients with hematologic malignancies: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Imran Khan *Barts and the London Centre for Primary Care, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. Imran.Khan@qmul.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2069-7410
Stephanie J C Taylor *Barts and the London Centre for Primary Care, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. s.j.c.taylor@qmul.ac.uk.
Clare RobinsonBarts and the London Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Elisavet MoschopoulouBarts and the London Centre for Primary Care, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Paul McCroneInstitute for Lifecourse Development, University of Greenwich, London, UK.
Liam BourkeDept. Allied Health Professionals, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK.
Mohamed ThahaBlizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Kamaldeep BhuiNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Wadham College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Derek RosarioThe Academic Urology Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Damien RidgeSchool of Social Sciences, University of Westminster, New Cavendish St, London, UK.
Sheila DonovanBarts and the London Centre for Primary Care, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Ania KorszunThe Barts and the London Unit for Psychological Medicine, Centre for Psychiatry and Mental Health, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Paul LittlePrimary Care Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Adrienne MorganIndependent Cancer Patient's Voice (ICPV), 17 Woodbridge Street, London, UK.
Olivier QuentinBarts and the London Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Centre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Rebecca RoylanceUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Peter White *The Academic Urology Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Trudie Chalder *Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience (IoPPN), King's College London, DeCrespigny Park, London, UK.
Queen Mary University of London · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GBKing's College London · GBSheffield Hallam University · GBUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Greenwich · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Southampton · GBUniversity of Westminster · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTwo million people in the UK are living with or beyond cancer and a third of them report poor quality of life (QoL) due to problems such as fatigue, fear of cancer recurrence, and concerns about returning to work. We aimed to develop and evaluate an intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), suited to address the concerns of cancer survivors and in improving their QoL. We also recognise the importance of exercise and vocational activity on QoL and therefore will integrate options for physical activity and return to work/vocational support, thus ACT Plus (+).

methodsWe will conduct a multi-centre, pragmatic, theory driven, randomised controlled trial. We will assess whether ACT+ including usual aftercare (intervention) is more effective and cost-effective than usual aftercare alone (control). The primary outcome is QoL of participants living with or beyond cancer measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General scale (FACT-G) at 52 weeks. We will recruit 344 participants identified from secondary care sites who have completed hospital-based treatment for cancer with curative intent, with low QoL (determined by the FACT-G) and randomise with an allocation ratio of 1:1 to the intervention or control. The intervention (ACT+) will be delivered by NHS Talking Therapies, specialist services, and cancer charities. The intervention consists of up to eight sessions at weekly or fortnightly intervals using different modalities of delivery to suit individual needs, i.e. face-to-face sessions, over the phone or skype. DISCUSSION: To date, there have been no robust trials reporting both clinical and cost-effectiveness of an ACT based intervention for people with low QoL after curative cancer treatment in the UK. We will provide high quality evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding ACT+ to usual aftercare provided by the NHS. If shown to be effective and cost-effective then commissioners, providers and cancer charities will know how to improve QoL in cancer survivors and their families.

trial registrationISRCTN: ISRCTN67900293 . Registered on 09 December 2019. All items from the World Health Organization Trial Registration Data Set for this protocol can be found in Additional file 2 Table S1.

Indexed as

Acceptance and Commitment TherapyNeoplasmsAftercareCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicQuality of LifeSurvivorsAcceptance and Commitment Therapycancer survivorPragmatic trialQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID38566197
PMCPMC10985882
OpenAlexW4393488559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.