The findings suggest a majority of long-term breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors who have no signs of recurrence report good health and do not have psychological morbidity or large numbers of unmet supportive care needs. A minority of long-term survivors may benefit from ongoing support. The identification and support of those long-term survivors with ongoing needs is a key challenge for health care professionals.

Background: A cancer diagnosis can have a profound impact on partners and close family members of patients. Little is currently known about the long-term impact.Objectives: The objective of this study is to describe health status, levels of anxiety and depression, unmet supportive care needs and positive outcomes in the partners/family members of breast, prostate and colorectal cancer survivors 5-16 years post-diagnosis.Methods: Patients in a linked study were asked to invite a partner or other close family member to complete a self-administered postal questionnaire. Data were analysed by cancer site and time since diagnosis. Matched comparisons were made between cancer patients in the linked study and their partners.Results: An expression of interest was received from 330 partners/family members, and 257 questionnaires (77.9%) were returned. Health status and levels of anxiety and depression were comparable with population norms. Respondents reported an average of 2.7 unmet needs from 34 possible options. Hospital parking, information about familial risk, help managing fear of recurrence and coordination of care were the most cited unmet needs. There was little variation in health status, psychological morbidity and unmet needs by cancer site or time since diagnosis. Concordance between patients and partners was low for anxiety but higher with respect to positive outcomes and some unmet needs.Conclusions: Most partners/family members of long-term cancer survivors report few ongoing issues. However, a small proportion (<10%) have high levels of anxiety and/or moderate or strong unmet needs. Strategies for identifying this group and addressing their needs are required, while allowing the majority to resume normal life.

Inequitable healthcare access, experiences and outcomes across ethnic groups are of concern across many countries. Progress on this agenda appears limited in England given the apparently strong legal and policy framework. This disjuncture raises questions about how central government policy is translated into local services. Healthcare commissioning organisations are a potentially powerful influence on services, but have rarely been examined from an equity perspective. We undertook a mixed method exploration of English Primary Care Trust (PCT) commissioning in 2010–12, to identify barriers and enablers to commissioning that addresses ethnic healthcare inequities, employing:- in-depth interviews with 19 national Key Informants; documentation of 10 good practice examples; detailed case studies of three PCTs (70+ interviews; extensive observational work and documentary analysis); three national stakeholder workshops. We found limited and patchy attention to ethnic diversity and inequity within English healthcare commissioning. Marginalization of this agenda, along with ambivalence, a lack of clarity and limited confidence, perpetuated a reinforcing inter-play between individual managers, their organisational setting and the wider policy context. Despite the apparent contrary indications, ethnic equity was a peripheral concern within national healthcare policy; poorly aligned with other more dominant agendas. Locally, consideration of ethnicity was often treated as a matter of legal compliance rather than integral to understanding and meeting healthcare needs. Many managers and teams did not consider tackling ethnic healthcare inequities to be part-and-parcel of their job, lacked confidence and skills to do so, and questioned the legitimacy of such work. Our findings indicate the need to enhance the skills, confidence and competence of individual managers and commissioning teams and to improve organizational structures and processes that support attention to ethnic inequity. Greater political will and clearer national direction is also required to produce the system change needed to embed action on ethnic inequity within healthcare commissioning.