S J Moug1, N Mutrie2, S J E Barry3, G Mackay4, R J C Steele5, C Boachie6, C Buchan7, A S Anderson8. 1. Department of Surgery, Royal Alexandra Hospital, Paisley, UK. 2. Institute of Sport, Physical Education and Health Sciences, Moray House School of Education, Edinburgh, UK. 3. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Strathclyde University, Glasgow, UK. 4. Department of Surgery, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK. 5. Head of Cancer Research Division, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK. 6. Robertson Centre for Biostatistics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. 7. Department of Surgery (Patient Representative), Royal Alexandra Hospital, Paisley, UK. 8. Public Health Nutrition, Division of Cancer Research, Ninewells Medical School, Dundee, UK.
Abstract
AIM: Rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) experience physical deterioration and reductions in their quality of life. This feasibility study assessed prehabilitation (a walking intervention) before, during and after NACRT to inform a definitive multi-centred randomized clinical trial (REx trial). METHODS: Patients planned for NACRT followed by potentially curative surgery were approached (August 2014-March 2016) (www.isrctn.com; 62859294). Prior to NACRT, baseline physical and psycho-social data were recorded using validated tools. Participants were randomized to either the intervention group (exercise counselling session followed by a 13-17 week telephone-guided walking programme) or a control group (standard care). Follow-up testing was undertaken 1-2 weeks before surgery. RESULTS: Of the 296 screened patients, 78 (26%) were eligible and 48 (61%) were recruited. N = 31 (65%) were men with a mean age of 65.9 years (range 33.7-82.6). Mean intervention duration was 14 weeks with 75% adherence. n = 40 (83%) completed follow-up testing. Both groups recorded reductions in daily walking but the reduction was less in the intervention group although not statistically significant. Participants reported high satisfaction and fidelity to trial procedures. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that prehabilitation is feasible in rectal cancer patients undergoing NACRT. Good recruitment, adherence, retention and patient satisfaction rates support the development of a fully powered trial. The effects of the intervention on physical outcomes were promising. Colorectal Disease
AIM: Rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) experience physical deterioration and reductions in their quality of life. This feasibility study assessed prehabilitation (a walking intervention) before, during and after NACRT to inform a definitive multi-centred randomized clinical trial (REx trial). METHODS: Patients planned for NACRT followed by potentially curative surgery were approached (August 2014-March 2016) (www.isrctn.com; 62859294). Prior to NACRT, baseline physical and psycho-social data were recorded using validated tools. Participants were randomized to either the intervention group (exercise counselling session followed by a 13-17 week telephone-guided walking programme) or a control group (standard care). Follow-up testing was undertaken 1-2 weeks before surgery. RESULTS: Of the 296 screened patients, 78 (26%) were eligible and 48 (61%) were recruited. N = 31 (65%) were men with a mean age of 65.9 years (range 33.7-82.6). Mean intervention duration was 14 weeks with 75% adherence. n = 40 (83%) completed follow-up testing. Both groups recorded reductions in daily walking but the reduction was less in the intervention group although not statistically significant. Participants reported high satisfaction and fidelity to trial procedures. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that prehabilitation is feasible in rectal cancer patients undergoing NACRT. Good recruitment, adherence, retention and patient satisfaction rates support the development of a fully powered trial. The effects of the intervention on physical outcomes were promising. Colorectal Disease
Authors: Melissa J J Voorn; Bart C Bongers; Vivian E M van Kampen-van den Boogaart; Elisabeth J M Driessen; Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-05-12 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Daniel Steffens; Jane Young; Paula R Beckenkamp; James Ratcliffe; Freya Rubie; Nabila Ansari; Neil Pillinger; Cherry Koh; Phillip A Munoz; Michael Solomon Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2021-01-13
Authors: Iona Pearson; Sue Blackwell; Rebecca Fish; Sarah Daniels; Malcolm West; Nanette Mutrie; P Kelly; Stephen Knight; Nicola S Fearnhead; Susan Moug Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-03-24 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Jamie L Waterland; Orla McCourt; Lara Edbrooke; Catherine L Granger; Hilmy Ismail; Bernhard Riedel; Linda Denehy Journal: Front Surg Date: 2021-03-19
Authors: S J Moug; S J E Barry; S Maguire; N Johns; D Dolan; R J C Steele; C Buchan; G Mackay; A S Anderson; N Mutrie Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2020-06-20 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Lisa Loughney; Malcolm A West; Michael P W Grocott; Sandy Jack; Helen Moyses; Andrew Bates; Graham J Kemp; Lesley Hawkins; Judit Varkonyi-Sepp; Shaunna Burke; Christopher P Barben; Peter M Calverley; Trevor Cox; Daniel H Palmer; Michael G Mythen Journal: Perioper Med (Lond) Date: 2021-06-22