Patient autonomy and shared decision-making in the context of clinical trial participation.

AIMS: This study aimed to explore how incorporating shared decision-making (SDM) can address recruitment challenges in clinical trials. Specifically, it examines how SDM can align the trial process with patient preferences, enhance patient autonomy and increase active patient participation. Additionally, it identifies potential conflicts between SDM and certain clinical trial aspects, such as randomization or blinding, and proposes solutions to mitigate these issues. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive review of existing literature on patient recruitment challenges in clinical trials and the role of SDM in addressing these challenges. We analysed case studies and trial reports to identify common obstacles and assess the effectiveness of SDM in improving patient accrual. Additionally, we evaluated three proposed solutions: adequate trial design, communication skill training and patient decision aids. RESULTS: Our review indicates that incorporating SDM can significantly enhance patient recruitment by promoting patient autonomy and engagement. SDM encourages physicians to adopt a more open and informative approach, which aligns the trial process with patient preferences and reduces psychological barriers such as fear and mental stress. However, implementing SDM can conflict with elements such as randomization and blinding, potentially complicating trial design and execution. DISCUSSION: The desire for patient autonomy and active engagement through SDM may clash with traditional clinical trial methodologies. To address these conflicts, we propose three solutions: redesigning trials to better accommodate SDM principles, providing communication skill training for physicians and developing patient decision aids. By focussing on patient wishes and emotions, these solutions can integrate SDM into clinical trials effectively. CONCLUSION: Shared decision-making provides a framework that can promote patient recruitment and trial participation by enhancing patient autonomy and engagement. With proper implementation of trial design modifications, communication skill training and patient decision aids, SDM can support rather than hinder clinical trial execution, ultimately contributing to the advancement of evidence-based medicine.

Extraction of Interoperable Data from Healthcare Documents by Identifying Common Data Elements: An Analysis of Radiation Therapy Planning CT Physician Order Entry Records.

INTRODUCTION: Documentation as well as IT-based management of medical data is of ever-increasing relevance in modern medicine. As radiation oncology is a rather technical, data-driven discipline, standardization, and data exchange are in principle possible. We examined electronic healthcare documents to extract structured information. Planning CT order entry documents were chosen for the analysis, as this covers a common and structured step in radiation oncology, for which standardized documentation may be achieved. The aim was to examine the extent to which relevant information may be exchanged among different institutions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We contacted representatives of nine radiation oncology departments. Departments using standardized electronic documentation for planning CT were asked to provide templates of their records, which were analyzed in terms of form and content. Structured information was extracted by identifying definite common data elements, containing explicit information. Relevant common data elements were identified and classified. A quantitative analysis was performed to evaluate the possibility of data exchange. RESULTS: We received data of seven documents that were heterogeneous regarding form and content. 181 definite common data elements considered relevant for the planning CT were identified and assorted into five semantic groups. 139 data elements (76.8%) were present in only one document. The other 42 data elements were present in two to six documents, while none was shared among all seven documents. CONCLUSION: Structured and interoperable documentation of medical information can be achieved using common data elements. Our analysis showed that a lot of information recorded with healthcare documents can be presented with this approach. Yet, in the analyzed cohort of planning CT order entries, only a few common data elements were shared among the majority of documents. A common vocabulary and consensus upon relevant information is required to promote interoperability and standardization.

Developing a Pan-European Technical Standard for a Comprehensive High-quality Lung Cancer CT Screening Program. An ERS Technical Standard.

Screening for lung cancer with low radiation dose computed tomography (LDCT) has a strong evidence base. The European Council adopted a recommendation in November 2022 that lung cancer screening be implemented using a stepwise approach. The imperative now is to ensure that implementation follows an evidence-based process that delivers clinical and cost effectiveness. This ERS Taskforce was formed to provide a technical standard for a high-quality lung cancer screening program. METHOD: A collaborative group was convened to include members of multiple European societies (see below). Topics were identified during a scoping review and a systematic review of the literature was conducted. Full text was provided to members of the group for each topic. The final document was approved by all members and the ERS Scientific Advisory Committee. RESULTS: Ten topics were identified representing key components of a screening program. The action on findings from the LDCT were not included as they are addressed by separate international guidelines (nodule management and clinical management of lung cancer) and by a linked taskforce (incidental findings). Other than smoking cessation, other interventions that are not part of the core screening process were not included (e.g. pulmonary function measurement). Fifty-three statements were produced and areas for further research identified. CONCLUSION: This European collaborative group has produced a technical standard that is a timely contribution to implementation of LCS. It will serve as a standard that can be used, as recommended by the European Council, to ensure a high quality and effective program.

ERS/ESTS/ESTRO/ESR/ESTI/EFOMP statement on management of incidental findings from low dose CT screening for lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Screening for lung cancer with low radiation dose computed tomography has a strong evidence base, is being introduced in several European countries and is recommended as a new targeted cancer screening programme. The imperative now is to ensure that implementation follows an evidence-based process that will ensure clinical and cost effectiveness. This European Respiratory Society (ERS) task force was formed to provide an expert consensus for the management of incidental findings which can be adapted and followed during implementation. METHODS: A multi-European society collaborative group was convened. 23 topics were identified, primarily from an ERS statement on lung cancer screening, and a systematic review of the literature was conducted according to ERS standards. Initial review of abstracts was completed and full text was provided to members of the group for each topic. Sections were edited and the final document approved by all members and the ERS Science Council. RESULTS: Nine topics considered most important and frequent were reviewed as standalone topics (interstitial lung abnormalities, emphysema, bronchiectasis, consolidation, coronary calcification, aortic valve disease, mediastinal mass, mediastinal lymph nodes and thyroid abnormalities). Other topics considered of lower importance or infrequent were grouped into generic categories, suitable for general statements. CONCLUSIONS: This European collaborative group has produced an incidental findings statement that can be followed during lung cancer screening. It will ensure that an evidence-based approach is used for reporting and managing incidental findings, which will mean that harms are minimised and any programme is as cost-effective as possible.

European Respiratory Society guideline on various aspects of quality in lung cancer care.

This European Respiratory Society guideline is dedicated to the provision of good quality recommendations in lung cancer care. All the clinical recommendations contained were based on a comprehensive systematic review and evidence syntheses based on eight PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) questions. The evidence was appraised in compliance with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Evidence profiles and the GRADE Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to summarise results and to make the decision-making process transparent. A multidisciplinary Task Force panel of lung cancer experts formulated and consented the clinical recommendations following thorough discussions of the systematic review results. In particular, we have made recommendations relating to the following quality improvement measures deemed applicable to routine lung cancer care: 1) avoidance of delay in the diagnostic and therapeutic period, 2) integration of multidisciplinary teams and multidisciplinary consultations, 3) implementation of and adherence to lung cancer guidelines, 4) benefit of higher institutional/individual volume and advanced specialisation in lung cancer surgery and other procedures, 5) need for pathological confirmation of lesions in patients with pulmonary lesions and suspected lung cancer, and histological subtyping and molecular characterisation for actionable targets or response to treatment of confirmed lung cancers, 6) added value of early integration of palliative care teams or specialists, 7) advantage of integrating specific quality improvement measures, and 8) benefit of using patient decision tools. These recommendations should be reconsidered and updated, as appropriate, as new evidence becomes available.

Diagnostic imaging strategies of acute intracerebral hemorrhage in European academic hospitals-a decision-making analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare which factors are relevant to the diagnostic decision-making and imaging workup of intracerebral hemorrhages in large, specialized European centers. METHODS: Expert neuroradiologists from ten large, specialized centers (where endovascular stroke treatment is routinely performed) in nine European countries were selected in cooperation with the European Society of Neuroradiology (ESNR). The experts were asked to describe how and when they would investigate specific causes in a patient who presented with an acute, atraumatic, intracerebral hemorrhage for two given locations: (1) basal ganglia, thalamus, pons or cerebellum; (2) lobar hemorrhage. Answers were collected, and decision trees were compared. RESULTS: Criteria that were considered relevant for decision-making reflect recommendations from current guidelines and were similar in all participating centers. CT Angiography or MR angiography was considered essential by the majority of centers regardless of other factors. Imaging in clinical practice tended to surpass guideline recommendations and was heterogeneous among different centers, e.g., in a scenario suggestive of typical hypertensive hemorrhage, recommendations ranged from no further follow-up imaging to CT angiography and MR angiography. In no case was a consensus above 60% achieved. CONCLUSION: In European clinical practices, existing guidelines for diagnostic imaging strategies in ICH evaluation are followed as a basis but in most cases, additional imaging investigation is undertaken. Significant differences in imaging workup were observed among the centers. Results suggest a high level of awareness and caution regarding potentially underlying pathology other than hypertensive disease.

Single-dose carboplatin followed by involved-node radiotherapy for stage IIA and stage IIB seminoma (SAKK 01/10): a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard treatment options for patients with stage IIA or stage IIB seminoma include either para-aortic and pelvic radiotherapy or three to four cycles of cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy. These options result in 3-year progression free survival rates of at least 90%, but bear risks for acute and late toxic effects, including secondary malignancies. We tested a novel approach combining de-escalated chemotherapy with de-escalated involved node radiotherapy, with the aim of reducing toxicity while preserving efficacy. METHODS: In the single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 SAKK 01/10 trial, patients with stage IIA or IIB classic seminoma (either at primary diagnosis or at relapse during active surveillance for stage I) were enrolled at ten centres of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research and ten centres of the German Testicular Cancer Study Group. WHO performance status 0-2, age 18 years or older, and adequate bone marrow and kidney function were required for eligibility. Treatment comprised one cycle of carboplatin (area under the curve 7) followed by involved-node radiotherapy (30 Gy in 15 fractions for stage IIA disease and 36 Gy in 18 fractions for stage IIB disease). The primary endpoint was 3-year progression-free survival. Efficacy analyses were done on the full analysis set, which comprised all patients who signed the informed consent, were registered in the trial, initiated trial treatment, and met all medically relevant inclusion or exclusion criteria. Safety was assessed in all patients who were treated at least once with one of the trial treatments. The study is ongoing but no longer recruiting, and is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01593241. FINDINGS: Between Oct 18, 2012, and June 22, 2018, 120 patients were registered in the study. 116 patients were eligible and started treatment according to the study protocol (46 patients with stage IIA disease and 70 with stage IIB disease). After a median follow-up of 4·5 years (IQR 3·9-6·0), 3-year progression-free survival was 93·7% (90% CI 88·5-96·6). With a target progression-free survival of 95% at 3 years, the primary endpoint was not met. Acute treatment-related adverse events of any grade were noted in 58 (48%) of 116 patients, and grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in the form of neutropenia in five (4%) patients, thrombocytopenia in three (3%) patients, and vomiting in one (1%) patient. No treatment-related deaths and no late treatment-related adverse events were reported. Serious adverse events were reported in five (4%) of 116 patients (one transient creatinine increase and four second primary tumours). INTERPRETATION: Despite the fact that the primary endpoint was not met, we observed favourable 3-year progression-free survival with single-dose carboplatin area under the curve 7 and involved-node radiotherapy, with minimal toxic effects. Our findings might warrant discussion with patients about the SAKK 01/10 regimen as an alternative to standard-of-care treatment, but more research on this strategy is needed. FUNDING: Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation and Rising Tide Foundation for Clinical Cancer Research.

Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Treatment Options.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) is associated with considerable diminished overall survival (OS). Standard treatment for metastatic PCa has long been androgen deprivation therapy alone, with patients initially responding to this treatment and then progressing to a castration-resistant phase. SUMMARY: The advent of novel therapeutic agents has changed this paradigm, with high-level evidence that upfront combination therapy with either docetaxel or new hormonal agents results in improved OS for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive PCa. In the absence of a comprehensive clinical trial investigating the comparative efficacy and safety of all agents, clinicians are responsible for choosing the most appropriate therapy in close coordination with patients. Furthermore, the same therapeutic agents are also efficient in the castration-resistant phase, leading to the issue of the best therapeutic sequence. Finally, along with systemic therapy and molecular imaging advancements, radiotherapy was investigated in the oligometastatic setting, whether it is to treat the primary tumour or metastases. Key Messages: In this complex landscape, where providers have multiple effective therapeutic options to treat metastatic PCa patients, priority must be given to determine which treatment combination and sequence is best suited to a particular patient, given his comorbidities and preferences.

Variations in Radioiodine Therapy in Europe: Decision-Making after Total Thyroidectomy.

The role of radioiodine therapy (RIT) (used as ablation therapy or adjuvant therapy) following total thyroidectomy for differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) changed. Major revisions of the American Thyroid Association (ATA) Guidelines in 2015 resulted in significant differences in treatment recommendations in comparison to the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) 2008 guidelines. Recently, we presented the effects on daily practice for RIT among Swiss Nuclear Medicine centres. We now performed a study at the European level and hypothesized that there is also considerable variability among European experts. We performed a decision-tree-based analysis of management strategies from all members of the EANM thyroid committee to map current practice among experts. We collected data on whether or not RIT is administered, on which criteria these decisions are based and collected details on treatment activities and patient preparation. Our study shows discrepancies for low-risk DTC, where "follow-up only" is recommended by some experts, while RIT with significant doses is used by other experts. E.g., for pT1b tumours without evidence of metastases, the level of agreement for the use of RIT is as low as 50%. If RIT is administered, activities of I-131 range from 1.1 GBq to 3.0 GBq. In other constellations (e.g., pT1a), experts diverge from current clinical guidelines as up to 75% administer RIT in certain cases. For intermediate and high-risk patients, RIT is generally recommended. However, dosing and treatment preparation (rhTSH vs. thyroid hormone withdrawal) vary distinctly. In comparison to the Swiss study, the general level of agreement is higher among the European experts. The recently proposed approach on the use of RIT, based on integrated post-surgery assessment (Martinique article) and results of ongoing prospective randomized studies are likely to reduce uncertainty in approaching RIT treatment. In certain constellations, consensus identified among European experts might be helpful in formulating future guidelines.

Postoperative radiotherapy for meningiomas - a decision-making analysis.

BACKGROUND: The management of meningiomas is challenging, and the role of postoperative radiotherapy is not standardized. METHODS: Radiation oncology experts in Swiss centres were asked to participate in this decision-making analysis on the use of postoperative radiotherapy (RT) for meningiomas. Experts from ten Swiss centres agreed to participate and provided their treatment algorithms. Their input was converted into decision trees based on the objective consensus methodology. The decision trees were used as a basis to identify consensus and discrepancies in clinical routine. RESULTS: Several criteria used for decision-making in postoperative RT in meningiomas were identified: histological grading, resection status, recurrence, location of the tumour, zugzwang (therapeutic need to treat and/or severity of symptoms), size, and cell division rate. Postoperative RT is recommended by all experts for WHO grade III tumours as well as for incompletely resected WHO grade II tumours. While most centres do not recommend adjuvant irradiation for WHO grade I meningiomas, some offer this treatment in recurrent situations or routinely for symptomatic tumours in critical locations. The recommendations for postoperative RT for recurrent or incompletely resected WHO grade I and II meningiomas were surprisingly heterogeneous. CONCLUSIONS: Due to limited evidence on the utility of postoperative RT for meningiomas, treatment strategies vary considerably among clinical experts depending on the clinical setting, even in a small country like Switzerland. Clear majorities were identified for postoperative RT in WHO grade III meningiomas and against RT for hemispheric grade I meningiomas outside critical locations. The limited data and variations in clinical recommendations are in contrast with the high prevalence of meningiomas, especially in elderly individuals.

Progesterone, cervical cerclage or cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth: a decision-making analysis of international guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate guidelines on preterm birth, analyze decision-criteria, and to identify consensus and discrepancies among these guidelines. DESIGN: Objective consensus analysis of guidelines. SAMPLE: Ten international guidelines on preterm birth. METHODS: Relevant decision criteria were singleton vs. twin pregnancy, history, cervical length, and cervical surgery / trauma or Mullerian anomaly. Eight treatment recommendations were extracted. For each decision-making criteria the most commonly recommended treatment was identified, and the level of consensus was evaluated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Consensus and Discrepancies among recommendations. RESULTS: In a case of singleton pregnancies with no history of preterm birth and shortened cervix, most guidelines recommend progesterone. In singleton pregnancies with a positive history and shortened cervix, all guidelines recommend a cerclage as an option, alternative or conjunct to progesterone. The majority of the guidelines advise against treatment in twin pregnancies. CONCLUSIONS: A shortened cervix and a history of preterm birth are relevant in singleton pregnancies. In twins, most guidelines recommend no active treatment. Among international guidelines a shortened cervix and a history of preterm birth are relevant in singleton pregnancies. With no history of preterm birth and with a shortened cervix most guidelines recommend progesterone treatment.

Retrospective evaluation of routine in-hospital observation in 433 patients after CT-guided biopsies.

BACKGROUND: After computed tomography (CT)-guided interventions, routine in-hospital observation is recommended by the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe. PURPOSE: To evaluate the frequency of delayed major complications or hospitalizations after CT-guided biopsies in patients with initially no or minor complications and to assess whether routine in-hospital observation is justified. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 433 outpatients after CT-guided biopsy of the thoracic (n = 176), abdominal (n = 129), or musculoskeletal (n = 128) region with subsequent in-hospital observation. Complications were graded according to the current Society of Interventional Radiology recommendations and grouped into minor or major. A complication that occurred during in-hospital observation was defined as delayed complication. A delayed major complication was a newly developed major complication or a progression from an initially minor to a major complication. Hospitalization frequencies were evaluated similarly. Occurrence, 95% confidence intervals (CI), and P values for significant differences between the three organ groups were calculated. If delayed major complications were more frequent than 1%, routine in-hospital observation was considered justified. RESULTS: Delayed, major complication frequencies were: thoracic, 8.2% (95% CI 4.6-13.4); abdominal, 0.0% (95% CI 0.0-2.9); and musculoskeletal, 0.0% (95% CI 0.0-2.9) (P < 0.001). Delayed hospitalization frequencies were: thoracic, 8.8% (95% CI 5.0-14.2); abdominal, 1.6% (95% CI 0.2-5.6); and musculoskeletal, 0.0% (95% CI 0.0-2.9) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: After thoracic interventions, routine observation is considered justified for patient safety whereas routine observation may be omitted after musculoskeletal interventions. In the abdominal group, no delayed complications were observed, but delayed hospitalization occurred. Thus, in-hospital observation could be justified in a safe patient environment, but remains an individual decision.

Localized and Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: Treatment Options.

BACKGROUND: There are many treatment options for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer with radiotherapy and surgery representing the main local therapeutic strategies. SUMMARY: Depending on the risk of disease recurrence, we can stratify patients into low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, which will guide patients' treatment. For low-risk patients, active surveillance is an option. Brachytherapy is also an option for low- and intermediate-risk patients and can be used as a boost following external beam radiotherapy for high-risk patients. For intermediate- and high-risk patients, radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy should be considered. Moreover, in addition to radiotherapy, concomitant androgen deprivation therapy may be needed. Finally, after radical prostatectomy and depending on pathological, biological and clinical factors, radiotherapy ± androgen deprivation therapy can be proposed as an adjuvant or salvage treatment. Key Messages: With radiotherapy and surgery being well-established treatment options for localized prostate cancer patients with equally good overall survival rates, priority must be given to patients' choice concerning the logistics and the toxicity profile of each option.

Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy-Related Clinical Trials in the Treatment of Peritoneal Metastases.

INTRODUCTION: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a treatment option for patients with peritoneal metastases. We evaluated the current status of ongoing prospective clinical trials investigating PIPAC to provide an overview and predict trends in this field. METHODS: All 367,494 records of clinical trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for trials dealing with PIPAC. Active or unpublished trials were further analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 22 clinical trials were identified and selected for further analyses. Most trials had a single-arm design and were phase I or II. No phase III trials were registered. Academic centers were recorded as primary sponsors in the majority of trials (63.6%). Every year, between 2 and 5 new trials were initiated. In 17 trials (81.8%), PIPAC was used in a palliative setting only, 2 trials performed PIPAC in a neoadjuvant setting, and 2 trials performed PIPAC in an adjuvant setting. Six different drugs (doxorubicin, cisplatin, oxaliplatin, nab-paclitaxel, 5-fluorouracil, and docetaxel) were used in these clinical trials. Most trials investigated the efficacy (n = 15) or safety (n = 7) of PIPAC therapies. CONCLUSIONS: The results of ongoing clinical trials will bring specific information on indications for PIPAC as well as the impact of PIPAC on quality of life and overall survival.

Creation of clinical algorithms for decision-making in oncology: an example with dose prescription in radiation oncology.

In oncology, decision-making in individual situations is often very complex. To deal with such complexity, people tend to reduce it by relying on their initial intuition. The downside of this intuitive, subjective way of decision-making is that it is prone to cognitive and emotional biases such as overestimating the quality of its judgements or being influenced by one's current mood. Hence, clinical predictions based on intuition often turn out to be wrong and to be outperformed by statistical predictions. Structuring and objectivizing oncological decision-making may thus overcome some of these issues and have advantages such as avoidance of unwarranted clinical practice variance or error-prevention. Even for uncertain situations with limited medical evidence available or controversies about the best treatment option, structured decision-making approaches like clinical algorithms could outperform intuitive decision-making. However, the idea of such algorithms is not to prescribe the clinician which decision to make nor to abolish medical judgement, but to support physicians in making decisions in a systematic and structured manner. An example for a use-case scenario where such an approach may be feasible is the selection of treatment dose in radiation oncology. In this paper, we will describe how a clinical algorithm for selection of a fractionation scheme for palliative irradiation of bone metastases can be created. We explain which steps in the creation process of a clinical algorithm for supporting decision-making need to be  performed and which challenges and limitations have to be considered.

ERS/ESTS/EACTS/ESTRO guidelines for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma.

The European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) task force brought together experts to update previous 2009 ERS/ESTS guidelines on management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a rare cancer with globally poor outcome, after a systematic review of the 2009-2018 literature. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by this multidisciplinary group of experts. Diagnosis: pleural biopsies remain the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis, usually obtained by thoracoscopy but occasionally via image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy in cases of pleural symphysis or poor performance status. Pathology: standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases, justifying the use of specific markers, including BAP-1 and CDKN2A (p16) for the separation of atypical mesothelial proliferation from MPM. Staging: in the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advise using the most recent 2016 8th TNM (tumour, node, metastasis) classification, with an algorithm for pre-therapeutic assessment. Monitoring: patient's performance status, histological subtype and tumour volume are the main prognostic factors of clinical importance in routine MPM management. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. Treatment: (chemo)therapy has limited efficacy in MPM patients and only selected patients are candidates for radical surgery. New promising targeted therapies, immunotherapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasise that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.

Emotions as Social Information in Shared Decision-Making in Oncology.

Emotions play an important role in decision-making and they can impact individual as well as shared decisions. With increasing complexity of the decision, the potential for emotions to influence the outcome increases. Emotions are thus an influential factor in oncological decision-making which is a complex and high-stakes situation. As the shared decision-making process is at the center of patient-centric decisions, we model emotions as social information that inform the shared decision-making process. We present and explain a range of emotional concepts, together with a specific clinical example, that can impact the shared decision-making process. Our process model shows that emotions are experienced in various combinations before, during, and after a shared decision is made and how patients' and physicians' emotions interact and spill over during a shared decision situation. Overall, our process model and specific example show how emotions can impact shared decision-making in oncology in a multitude of ways. With this paper, we want to raise awareness of the role of emotions in the shared decision-making process, as emotions are often not explicitly recognized as decision criteria. Increased awareness of emotions may help their optimal utilization and reduce their influence as a bias in shared decision-making.

Decision Making Criteria in Oncology.

Decision making is one of the most complex skills required of an oncologist and is affected by a broad range of parameters. For example, the wide variety of treatment options, with various outcomes, side-effects and costs present challenges in selecting the most appropriate treatment. Many treatment choices are affected by limited scientific evidence, availability of therapies or patient-specific factors. In the decision making process, standardized approaches can be useful, but a multitude of criteria are relevant to this process. Thus, the aim of this review is to summarize common types of decision criteria used in oncology by focusing on 3 main categories: criteria associated with the decision maker (both patient and doctor), decision specific criteria, and the often-overlooked contextual factors. Our review aims to highlight the broad range of decision criteria in use, as well as variations in their interpretation.

Oncology Informatics: Status Quo and Outlook.

Oncology has undergone rapid progress, with emerging developments in areas including cancer stem cells, molecularly targeted therapies, genomic analyses, and individually tailored immunotherapy. These advances have expanded the tools available in the fight against cancer. Some of these have seen broad media coverage resulting in justified public attention. However, these achievements have only been possible due to rapid developments in the expanding field of biomedical informatics and information technology (IT). Artificial intelligence, radiomics, electronic health records, and electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMS) are only a few of the developments enabling further progress in oncology. The promising impact of IT in oncology will only become reality through a multidisciplinary approach to the complex challenges ahead.

Insular Decision Criteria in Clinical Practice: Analysis of Decision-Making in Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Medical decision-making is complex and involves a variety of decision criteria, many of which are universally recognised. However, decision-making analyses have demonstrated that certain decision criteria are not used uniformly among clinicians. AIM: We describe decision criteria, which for various contexts are only used by a minority of decision makers. For these, we introduce and define the term "insular criteria". METHODS: 19 studies analysing clinical decision-making based on decision trees were included in our study. All studies were screened for decision-making criteria that were mentioned by less than three local decision makers in studies involving 8-26 participants. RESULTS: 14 out of the 19 included studies reported insular criteria. We identified 42 individual insular criteria. They could be intuitively allocated to seven major groups, these were: comorbidities, treatment, patients' characteristics/preferences, caretaker, scores, laboratory and tumour properties/staging. CONCLUSION: Insular criteria are commonly used in clinical decision-making, yet, the individual decision makers may not be aware of them. With this analysis, we demonstrate the existence of insular criteria and their variety. In daily practice and clinical studies, awareness of insular criteria is important.