A Psychosocial Support Program for Young Adult Childhood Cancer Survivors in Austria: a Qualitative Evaluation Study.

Many adolescents and young adult (AYAs) childhood cancer survivors face disease- or therapy-related late-effects, which limit their participation in various areas of daily life. AYAs are often left alone in our health care system, and many worry about their ability to cope with long-term sequelae, and some are even lost to follow-up. Therefore, in the present study, a targeted aftercare program was developed and evaluated with the goal of facilitating three important "life skills": (1) self-perception, (2) social interaction and conflict management, and (3) self-conscious communication of support needs. A total of n = 13 participants (19.2-30.2 years, mean age 22.8 years) completed a 3-day aftercare seminar, at the end of which each participant wrote a reflection letter ("letter to my future self"), elaborating on observed effects of the seminar, applicability of the given information in daily life, and the direct impact of the seminar on their individual circumstances. The reflection letters were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. All target life skills were mentioned in the reflection letters. The participants reported individual benefits from the program especially with respect to self-perception and self-confidence, giving and taking feedback, and acceptance of personal strengths and weaknesses. Moreover, the feeling of "not being alone" was associated with the survivors' experience of emotional and social support. This evaluation highlights the potential of a one weekend aftercare seminar to address important life skills that are known to positively influence health behavior in AYAs. The detailed description of the seminar can serve as a basis for making this kind of aftercare accessible for other people in similar circumstances.

TIS - Talking in Symbols. Development of a Tool for Nonverbal Communication after Language Barriers in Pediatric Oncology.

Language barriers have been reported to have a detrimental effect on various outcomes in paediatric care, such as therapy adherence, and may even cause medical treatment errors. To address this issue, we developed a set of 63 cards with which a wide range of specific messages can be conveyed nonverbally in a clinical context. The conceptualization of the tool involved multiple phases. In Study 1, we held a workshop with 11 children and adolescents between 8 and 19 years that had received treatment for oncological conditions to gain an understanding of the specific challenges. In Study 2, we presented a first prototype to 3 children and 14 adults; participants were asked to rate the cards on multiple dimensions. Based on information from the previous trials, we developed a second prototype and asked 10 children and 7 adults to rate the cards on multiple dimensions. In this multidisciplinary approach in addition to our experts of clinical psychology we involved patient advocators and graphic designers in the process to achieve high feasibility and comprehensibility; based on the workshop, expert consensus surveys, data gathered in evaluation, all prototypes and the final card set were developed in close collaboration. Participants had little difficulty interpreting the cards and rated the information content as adequate. Importantly, a majority of participants indicated that they would keep using the tool during their stay at the hospital. Overall, the evaluation implied high acceptance and usability. The final card set is a promising communication tool in clinical paediatric settings with various language barriers. Further research should address how patient outcomes are impacted by using the tool.

Challenges for children and adolescents with cancer in Europe: the SIOP-Europe agenda.

In Europe, 6,000 young people die of cancer yearly, the commonest disease causing death beyond the age of 1 year. In addition, 300,000-500,000 European citizens are survivors of a childhood cancer and up to 30% of them have severe long-term sequelae of their treatment. Increasing both cure and quality of cure are the two goals of the European paediatric haematology/oncology community. SIOPE coordinates and facilitates research, care and training which are implemented by the 18 European study groups and 23 national paediatric haematology/oncology societies. SIOPE is the European branch of the International Society of Paediatric Oncology and one of the six founding members of the European Cancer Organisation. SIOPE is preparing its strategic agenda to assure long-term sustainability of clinical and translational research in paediatric malignancies over the next 15 years. SIOPE tackles the issues of equal access to standard care and research across Europe and improvement of long term follow up. SIOPE defined a comprehensive syllabus for training European specialists. A strong partnership with parent, patient and survivor organisations is being developed to successfully achieve the goals of this patient-centred agenda. SIOPE is advocating in the field of EU policies, such as the Clinical Trials Regulation and the Paediatric Medicine Regulation, to warrant that the voice of young people is heard and their needs adequately addressed. SIOPE and the European community are entirely committed to the global agenda against childhood cancers to overcome the challenges to increasing both cure and quality of cure of young people with cancer.

The organization of care in pediatric radiotherapy across SIOP Europe affiliated centers: A multicenter survey in the framework of the 'Joint Action on Rare Cancers' project.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: To reduce inequalities among SIOPE-affiliated countries, standard and optional levels to deliver 'Good Clinical Practice' compliant treatment in pediatric radiation oncology have been published. The aim of this project was to map the availability of pediatric radiotherapy resources across SIOPE-affiliated radiotherapy departments. MATERIALS/METHODS: An online survey with 34 questions was distributed to 246 radiotherapy departments across 35 SIOPE-affiliated countries. In addition to demographic data, 15 general items related to the organization of the radiotherapy process, and 10 radiotherapy-specific items were defined. For each of the 25 items, sum scores were calculated per center and country. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to analyze associations. RESULTS: Between March-June 2019, 121 departments (49 %) out of 31 countries (89 %) completed the survey. At center level, involvement of core disciplines in tumor boards (28 %), and integration of dedicated pediatric radiation therapy technologists (24 %) are limited, while rare & complex brachytherapy procedures are performed in many centers (23 %). For general and radiotherapy-specific items respectively, a relevant variation of sum scores was observed across countries (Δgeneral: ≤10 points; ΔRT_specific: ≤5 points) and among centers within a country (Δgeneral: ≤9 points; ΔRT_specific: ≤6 points). Sum scores for general and radiotherapy-specific items were higher in countries with a high-income (p < 0.01) and higher health development index (p < 0.01). A larger annual number of irradiated pediatric patients was associated with higher sum scores for general items (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: This survey demonstrates the disparities in organization of pediatric radiotherapy departments between SIOPE-affiliated countries and centers within the same country. Investment is needed to reduce inequalities in pediatric radiotherapy care.

Asking those who know their needs best: A framework for active engagement and involvement of childhood cancer survivors and parents in the process of psychosocial research-A workshop report.

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in healthcare research is crucial for effectively addressing patients' needs and setting appropriate research priorities. However, there is a lack of awareness and adequate methods for practicing PPIE, especially for vulnerable groups like childhood cancer survivors. AIMS: This project aimed to develop and evaluate engagement methods to actively involve pediatric oncological patients, survivors, and their caregivers in developing relevant research questions and practical study designs. METHODS AND RESULTS: An interdisciplinary working group recruited n = 16 childhood cancer survivors and their caregivers to work through the entire process of developing a research question and a practicable study design. A systematic literature review was conducted to gather adequate PPIE methods which were then applied and evaluated in a series of three workshop modules, each lasting 1.5 days. The applied methods were continuously evaluated, while a monitoring group oversaw the project and continuously developed and adapted additional methods. The participants rated the different methods with varying scores. Over the workshop series, the participants successfully developed a research question, devised an intervention, and designed a study to evaluate their project. They also reported increased expertise in PPIE and research knowledge compared to the baseline. The project resulted in a practical toolbox for future research, encompassing the final workshop structure, evaluated methods and materials, guiding principles, and general recommendations. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that with a diverse set of effective methods and flexible support, actively involving patients, survivors, and caregivers can uncover patients' unmet disease-related needs and generate practical solutions apt for scientific evaluation. The resulting toolbox, filled with evaluated and adaptable methods (workbook, Supplement 1 and 2), equips future scientists with the necessary resources to successfully perform PPIE in the development of health care research projects that effectively integrate patients' perspectives and address actual cancer-related needs. This integration of PPIE practices has the potential to enhance the quality and relevance of health research and care, as well as to increase patient empowerment leading to sustainable improvements in patients' quality of life.

Healthcare providers' expected barriers and facilitators to the implementation of person-centered long-term follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors: A PanCareFollowUp study.

BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer survivors face high risks of adverse late health effects. Long-term follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors is crucial to improve their health and quality of life. However, implementation remains a challenge. To support implementation of high-quality long-term follow-up care, we explored expected barriers and facilitators for establishing this follow-up care among healthcare providers from four European clinics. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using four focus groups comprising 30 healthcare providers in total. The semi-structured interview guide was developed based on the Grol and Wensing framework. Data was analyzed following a thematic analysis, combining both inductive and deductive approaches to identify barriers and facilitators across the six levels of Grol and Wensing: innovation, professional, patient, social, organizational and economic and political. RESULTS: Most barriers were identified on the organizational level, including insufficient staff, time, capacity and psychosocial support. Other main barriers included limited knowledge of late effects among healthcare providers outside the long-term follow-up care team, inability of some survivors to complete the survivor questionnaire and financial resources. Main facilitators included motivated healthcare providers and survivors, a skilled hospital team, collaborations with important stakeholders like general practitioners, and psychosocial care facilities, utilization of the international collaboration and reporting long-term follow-up care results to convince hospital managers. CONCLUSION: This study identified several factors for successful implementation of long-term follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors. Our findings showed that specific attention should be given to knowledge, capacity, and financial issues, along with addressing psychosocial issues of survivors.

Barriers, facilitators, and other factors associated with health behaviors in childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Healthy behaviors are paramount in preventing long-term adverse health outcomes in childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors. We systematically reviewed and synthesized existing literature on barriers, facilitators, and other factors associated with health behaviors in this population. METHODS: MEDLINE and PsycInfo were searched for qualitative and quantitative studies including survivors aged 16-50 years at study, a cancer diagnosis ≤25 years and ≥2 years post diagnosis. Health behaviors included physical activity, smoking, diet, alcohol consumption, sun exposure, and a combination of these behaviors (defined as health behaviors in general). RESULTS: Barriers, facilitators, and other factors reported in ≥2 two studies were considered relevant. Out of 4529 studies, 27 were included (n = 31,905 participants). Physical activity was the most frequently examined behavior (n = 12 studies), followed by smoking (n = 7), diet (n = 7), alcohol (n = 4), sun exposure (n = 4), and health behavior in general (n = 4). Relevant barriers to physical activity were fatigue, lack of motivation, time constraints, and current smoking. Relevant facilitators were perceived health benefits and motivation. Influence of the social environment and poor mental health were associated with more smoking, while increased energy was associated with less smoking. No relevant barriers and facilitators were identified for diet, alcohol consumption, and sun exposure. Barriers to healthy behavior in general were unmet information needs and time constraints whereas lifestyle advice, information, and discussions with a healthcare professional facilitated healthy behavior in general. Concerning other factors, women were more likely to be physically inactive, but less likely to drink alcohol and more likely to comply with sun protection recommendations than men. Higher education was associated with more physical activity, and lower education with more smoking. CONCLUSION: This knowledge can be used as a starting point to develop health behavior interventions, inform lifestyle coaches, and increase awareness among healthcare providers regarding which survivors are most at risk of unhealthy behaviors.

Scaling up and implementing the digital Survivorship Passport tool in routine clinical care - The European multidisciplinary PanCareSurPass project.

BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer survivors (CCS), of whom there are about 500,000 living in Europe, are at an increased risk of developing health problems [1-6] and require lifelong Survivorship Care. There are information and knowledge gaps among CCS and healthcare providers (HCPs) about requirements for Survivorship Care [7-9] that can be addressed by the Survivorship Passport (SurPass), a digital tool providing CCS and HCPs with a comprehensive summary of past treatment and tailored recommendations for Survivorship Care. The potential of the SurPass to improve person-centred Survivorship Care has been demonstrated previously [10,11]. METHODS: The EU-funded PanCareSurPass project will develop an updated version (v2.0) of the SurPass allowing for semi-automated data entry and implement it in six European countries (Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Lithuania and Spain), representative of three infrastructure healthcare scenarios typically found in Europe. The implementation study will investigate the impact on person-centred care, as well as costs and processes of scaling up the SurPass. Interoperability between electronic health record systems and SurPass v2.0 will be addressed using the Health Level Seven (HL7) International interoperability standards. RESULTS: PanCareSurPass will deliver an interoperable digital SurPass with comprehensive evidence on person-centred outcomes, technical feasibility and health economics impacts. An Implementation Toolkit will be developed and freely shared to promote and support the future implementation of SurPass across Europe. CONCLUSIONS: PanCareSurPass is a novel European collaboration that will improve person-centred Survivorship Care for CCS across Europe through a robust assessment of the implementation of SurPass v2.0 in different healthcare settings.

Good to know - This is PPIE! Development of a training tool for public and patient involvement and engagement in pediatric oncological research.

BACKGROUND: Public and Patient Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) in research is still a poorly understood and infrequently practiced concept, although the literature stresses clear benefits for quality of care and research as well as patient satisfaction and empowerment. AIM: The presently described project aimed at using different PPIE methods to evaluate the current state of knowledge about and attitude toward PPIE in research among different stakeholders of pediatric oncology in Europe. Based on the findings a tailored training tool directed toward the different stakeholders will be designed. METHODS AND RESULTS: An interdisciplinary steering group developed a mixed-method 3-stage process to (1) investigate the current knowledge and attitudes about PPIE using a Europe-wide cross-sectional online survey directed toward health care professionals (n = 134) and the patient group (patients, survivors, family members, …) (n = 168). The results were analyzed quantitatively, focusing on group comparisons (t-tests, X2 tests). (2) In a live workshop with n = 36 participants (HCPs and patient group) dual moderation teams (HCPs and patient experts) guided the exploration of effective ways for practicing PPIE. Despite classifying PPIE as relevant, both HCPs and patients indicated a low level of knowledge about the concept and terminology (patients: t(334) = -2.82, p = .004; HCPs: t(270) = -2.88, p = .004). While HCPs assumed to already be involving patients in many research areas, this was not perceived by the patient group (X2 (1, N = 304) = 42.70, p < .001). HCPs and patients named similar obstacles for implementing PPIE in research, though numerous creative solutions were found during the workshop (engagement). (3) The outcomes were integrated into a training tool (White-Board movie). CONCLUSION: Although HCPs and patients acknowledge the benefit of PPIE, the presented results highlight the lack of awareness about the concept, and the need for effective tools for researchers to integrate PPIE throughout the entire research process, thereby contributing to a sustainable change within the scientific culture.

Have we made progress in taking care of adolescents and young adults with cancer? Results of a European multi-professional survey.

BACKGROUND: It is well documented that traditional health care models do not meet the specific needs of Adolescents and Young Adults (AYA) cancer patients. METHODS: We explore a map of the development of age-specific AYA cancer care across Europe, from the perspective of healthcare professionals with an interest in AYA care, in order to understand the specific challenges and map progress over time. An on-line survey was developed by international professional cancer organisations. RESULTS: We had 377 respondents from 60 countries. The majority of respondents were physicians 298 (79%), a minority of survey respondents (39, 10.4%) work exclusively with AYA patients, most respondents declared substantial and routine clinical service collaborations to provide care and treatment to AYA with cancer. Policy for the multidisciplinary management of AYA cancer patients commonly appears in Europe now, and was reported by 234 (78.52%) respondents. Specific professional training for AYA cancer care is not uniformly available. CONCLUSION: There is considerable opportunity for many organisations to work together in raising the profile of AYA cancer related issues, in providing education and in encouraging research and collaboration.

European recommendations for short-term surveillance of health problems in childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer survivors from the end of treatment to 5 years after diagnosis: a PanCare guideline.

PURPOSE: Childhood, adolescent and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors require ongoing surveillance for health problems from the end of cancer treatment throughout their lives. There is a lack of evidence-based guidelines on optimal surveillance strategies for the period from the end of treatment to 5 years after diagnosis. We aimed to address this gap by developing recommendations for short-term surveillance of health problems based on existing long-term follow-up (LTFU) care guidelines. METHODS: The guideline working group, consisting of healthcare professionals, parents and survivor representatives from 10 countries, worked together to identify relevant health problems that may occur in survivors between the end of treatment and 5 years after diagnosis and to develop recommendations for short-term surveillance of health problems. The recommendations were drawn from existing LTFU guidelines and adapted where necessary based on clinical expertise. RESULTS: The working group developed 44 recommendations for short-term surveillance of health problems, which were divided into four categories based on the level of surveillance required: awareness only (n = 11), awareness, history and/or physical examination without surveillance test (n = 15), awareness, history and/or physical examination with potential surveillance test (n = 1) and awareness, history and/or physical examination with surveillance test (n = 17). CONCLUSION: The development of a guideline for short-term surveillance of health problems fills a critical gap in survivorship care for CAYA cancer survivors, providing much-needed support immediately after treatment up to 5 years after diagnosis. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: This guideline will support healthcare professionals to provide appropriate follow-up care and improve the quality of life of CAYA cancer survivors.

Evaluating the feasibility, effectiveness and costs of implementing person-centred follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors in four European countries: the PanCareFollowUp Care prospective cohort study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term survival after childhood cancer often comes at the expense of late, adverse health conditions. However, survivorship care is frequently not available for adult survivors in Europe. The PanCareFollowUp Consortium therefore developed the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention, an innovative person-centred survivorship care model based on experiences in the Netherlands. This paper describes the protocol of the prospective cohort study (Care Study) to evaluate the feasibility and the health economic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes of implementing PanCareFollowUp Care as usual care in four European countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this prospective, longitudinal cohort study with at least 6 months of follow-up, 800 childhood cancer survivors will receive the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention across four study sites in Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy and Sweden, representing different healthcare systems. The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be evaluated according to the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework. Clinical and research data are collected through questionnaires, a clinic visit for multiple medical assessments and a follow-up call. The primary outcome is empowerment, assessed with the Health Education Impact Questionnaire. A central data centre will perform quality checks, data cleaning and data validation, and provide support in data analysis. Multilevel models will be used for repeated outcome measures, with subgroup analysis, for example, by study site, attained age, sex or diagnosis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be conducted in accordance with the guidelines of Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol has been reviewed and approved by all relevant ethics committees. The evidence and insights gained by this study will be summarised in a Replication Manual, also including the tools required to implement the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention in other countries. This Replication Manual will become freely available through PanCare and will be disseminated through policy and press releases. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register (NL8918; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8918).

The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention: A European harmonised approach to person-centred guideline-based survivorship care after childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer.

BACKGROUND: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care, although endorsed, is not available for the majority of adult survivors of childhood, adolescence and young adult (CAYA) cancer. Barriers to implementation include lack of time, knowledge, personnel and funding. Sustainable solutions are urgently needed to address the needs of CAYA cancer survivors to improve the quality of life and reduce the burden of late effects on survivors, health care systems and society. The European Union-funded PanCareFollowUp project, initiated by the Pan-European Network for Care of Survivors after Childhood and Adolescent Cancer, was established to facilitate the implementation of person-centred survivorship care across Europe. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention was co-developed with survivors as part of the PanCareFollowUp project. It is a person-centred approach to survivorship care, supported by guidelines and with flexibility to adapt to local health care settings. The Care Intervention consists of three steps: (1) previsit completion of a Survivor Questionnaire (by the survivor) and Treatment Summary (by the health care provider [HCP]), (2) a clinic visit including shared decision-making, and (3) a follow-up call to finalise the individualised Survivorship Care Plan. RESULTS: We developed the key components of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention: a PanCareFollowUp Survivor Questionnaire, Treatment Summary template, Survivorship Care Plan template, and educational materials for HCPs and survivors. Wide implementation of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be supported with a freely distributed Replication Manual on completion of the PanCareFollowUp project. CONCLUSIONS: The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will support the implementation of person-centred, guideline-based LTFU care in different health care settings across Europe to improve survivors' health and well-being.

The European multistakeholder PanCareFollowUp project: novel, person-centred survivorship care to improve care quality, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and accessibility for cancer survivors and caregivers.

BACKGROUND: The majority of childhood cancer survivors are at risk of treatment-related adverse health outcomes. Survivorship care to mitigate these late effects is endorsed, but it is not available for many adult survivors of childhood cancer in Europe. The PanCareFollowUp project was initiated to improve their health and quality of life (QoL) by facilitating person-centred survivorship care. METHODS: The PanCareFollowUp consortium was established in 2018, consisting of 14 project partners from ten European countries, including survivor representatives. The consortium will develop two PanCareFollowUp Interventions, including a person-centred guideline-based model of care (Care Intervention) and eHealth lifestyle coaching (Lifestyle Intervention). Their development will be informed by several qualitative studies and systematic reviews on barriers and facilitators for implementation and needs and preferences of healthcare providers (HCPs) and survivors. Implementation of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention as usual care will be evaluated prospectively among 800 survivors from Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy and Sweden for survivor empowerment, detection of adverse health conditions, satisfaction among survivors and HCPs, cost-effectiveness and feasibility. The feasibility of the PanCareFollowUp Lifestyle Intervention will be evaluated in the Netherlands among 60 survivors. RESULTS: Replication manuals, allowing for replication of the PanCareFollowUp Care and Lifestyle Intervention, will be published and made freely available after the project. Moreover, results of the corresponding studies are expected within the next five years. CONCLUSIONS: The PanCareFollowUp project is a novel European collaboration aiming to improve the health and QoL of all survivors across Europe by developing and prospectively evaluating the person-centred PanCareFollowUp Care and Lifestyle Interventions.

Surviving Survival-Challenge Accepted!: Perspectives on Survivorship in Pediatric Oncology.

Surviving childhood cancer can be a lifelong challenge: up to 75% of childhood cancer survivors must deal with late effects of their cancer and treatments. Next to keeping the balance between dealing with late-effects and adapting to a life "after cancer" many childhood cancer survivors also face the reality of inadequate or nonexisting follow-up care. Because cure is not enough, patient advocates depict why it is important to #RaiseYourHands4Survivors!

Recommendations for the organisation of care in paediatric radiation oncology across Europe: a SIOPE-ESTRO-PROS-CCI-Europe collaborative project in the framework of the JARC.

Disparities in survival and long-term side-effects from paediatric cancer are observed across European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOPE)-affiliated countries. The Joint Action on Rare Cancers (JARC) is a project supported by the European Union and member states aiming to formulate recommendations on rare cancers, including paediatric malignancies, to reduce inequalities and to improve health outcomes. Most paediatric cancers are treated by a combination of systemic agents, surgery and/or radiotherapy. Radiotherapy for children is becoming increasingly complex because of the growing availability of new modalities and techniques and the evolution in molecular biology. These added challenges have the potential to enhance disparities in survival and side-effects between countries, but also among centres in the same country. To tackle radiotherapy-related inequalities, representatives of SIOPE, European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology, Paediatric Radiation Oncology Society and Childhood Cancer International-Europe defined 'standard' and 'optional' levels to deliver Good Clinical Practice-compliant treatment in paediatric radiation oncology with a focus on patient-related care, education and training. In addition, more than 250 paediatric radiotherapy centres across the SIOPE-affiliated countries have been mapped. For a better understanding of resources in paediatric radiotherapy, JARC representatives are working on an online survey for paediatric radiation oncologists of each centre in SIOPE-affiliated countries. The outcome of this survey will give an insight into the strengths and weaknesses of paediatric radiotherapy across SIOPE-affiliated countries and can be relevant for European Reference Networks in terms of collaboration pathways and referrals in paediatric radiotherapy.

The 'Survivorship Passport' for childhood cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are between 300,000 and 500,000 childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) in Europe. A significant proportion is at high risk, and at least 60% of them develop adverse health-related outcomes that can appear several years after treatment completion. Many survivors are unaware of their personal risk, and there seems to be a general lack of information among healthcare providers about pathophysiology and natural history of treatment-related complications. This can generate incorrect or delayed diagnosis and treatments. METHOD: The Survivorship Passport (SurPass) consists of electronic documents, which summarise the clinical history of the childhood or adolescent cancer survivor. It was developed by paediatric oncologists of the PanCare and SIOPE networks and IT experts of Cineca, together with parents, patients, and survivors' organisations within the European Union-funded European Network for Cancer research in Children and Adolescents. It consists of a template of a web-based, simply written document, translatable in all European languages, to be given to each CCS. The SurPass provides a summary of each survivor's clinical history, with detailed information about the original cancer and of treatments received, together with personalised follow-up and screening recommendations based on guidelines published by the International Guidelines Harmonization Group and PanCareSurFup. RESULTS: The SurPass data schema contains a maximum of 168 variables and uses internationally approved nomenclature, except for radiotherapy fields, where a new classification was defined by radiotherapy experts. The survivor-specific screening recommendations are mainly based on treatment received and are automatically suggested, thanks to built-in algorithms. These may be adapted and further individualised by the treating physician in case of special disease and survivor circumstances. The SurPass was tested at the Istituto Giannina Gaslini, Italy, and received positive feedback. It is now being integrated at the institutional, regional and national level. CONCLUSIONS: The SurPass is potentially an essential tool for improved and more harmonised follow-up of CCS. It also has the potential to be a useful tool for empowering CCSs to be responsible for their own well-being and preventing adverse events whenever possible. With sufficient commitment on the European level, this solution should increase the capacity to respond more effectively to the needs of European CCS.

The European Cancer Patient's Bill of Rights, update and implementation 2016.

In this implementation phase of the European Cancer Patient's Bill of Rights (BoR), we confirm the following three patient-centred principles that underpin this initiative:The right of every European citizen to receive the most accurate information and to be proactively involved in his/her care.The right of every European citizen to optimal and timely access to a diagnosis and to appropriate specialised care, underpinned by research and innovation.The right of every European citizen to receive care in health systems that ensure the best possible cancer prevention, the earliest possible diagnosis of their cancer, improved outcomes, patient rehabilitation, best quality of life and affordable health care. The key aspects of working towards implementing the BoR are:Agree our high-level goal. The vision of 70% long-term survival for patients with cancer in 2035, promoting cancer prevention and cancer control and the associated progress in ensuring good patient experience and quality of life.Establish the major mechanisms to underpin its delivery. (1) The systematic and rigorous sharing of best practice between and across European cancer healthcare systems and (2) the active promotion of Research and Innovation focused on improving outcomes; (3) Improving access to new and established cancer care by sharing best practice in the development, approval, procurement and reimbursement of cancer diagnostic tests and treatments.Work with other organisations to bring into being a Europe based centre that will (1) systematically identify, evaluate and validate and disseminate best practice in cancer management for the different countries and regions and (2) promote Research and Innovation and its translation to maximise its impact to improve outcomes.