Collaborating with cancer patients and informal caregivers in a European study on quality of life: protocol to embed patient and public involvement within the EUonQoL project.

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) has become an essential part of health research. There is a need for genuine involvement in order to ensure that research is relevant to patients. This can then improve the quality, relevance, and impact of health research, while at the same time reducing wasted research and in doing so bringing science and society closer together. Despite the increasing attention for this involvement, it is not yet common practice to report on proposed activities. An article reporting planned PPI could provide guidance and inspiration for the wider academic community in future activities. Therefore, this current article aims to describe the way in which PPI principles are incorporated in the research project called "Quality of Life in Oncology: measuring what matters for cancer patients and survivors in Europe (EUonQoL)." This project aims to develop a new set of questionnaires to enable cancer patients to assess their quality of life, entitled the EUonQoL-Kit. METHODS: The first step is to recruit cancer patients and their informal caregivers as co-researchers in order to train them to collaborate with the researchers. Based on their skills and preferences, they are then assigned to several of the project's work packages. Their individual roles, tasks, and responsibilities regarding the work packages, to which they have been assigned, are evaluated and adapted when necessary. The impact of their involvement is evaluated by both the researchers and co-researchers. DISCUSSION: PPI is a complex and dynamic process. As such, the overall structure of the research may be defined while at the same time leaving room for certain aspects to be filled in later. Our research is, we believe, relevant as co-researcher involvement in such a large European project as EUonQoL is a new development.

Use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in cancer multidisciplinary team meetings: an explorative study based on EU healthcare professionals.

OBJECTIVES: Multidisciplinary teams in cancer care are increasingly using information and communication technology (ICT), hospital health information system (HIS) functionalities and ICT-driven care components. We aimed to explore the use of these tools in multidisciplinary team meetings (MTMs) and to identify the critical challenges posed by their adoption based on the perspective of professionals representatives from European scientific societies. DESIGN: This qualitative study used discussion of cases and focus group technique to generate data. Thematic analysis was applied. SETTING: Healthcare professionals working in a multidisciplinary cancer care environment. PARTICIPANTS: Selection of informants was carried out by European scientific societies in accordance with professionals' degree of experience in adopting the implementation of ICT and from different health systems. RESULTS: Professionals representatives of 9 European scientific societies were involved. Up to 10 ICTs, HIS functionalities and care components are embedded in the informational and decision-making processes along three stages of MTMs. ICTs play a key role in opening MTMs to other institutions (eg, by means of molecular tumour boards) and information types (eg, patient-reported outcome measures), and in contributing to the internal efficiency of teams. While ICTs and care components have their own challenges, the information technology context is characterised by the massive generation of unstructured data, the lack of interoperability between systems from different hospitals and HIS that are conceived to store and classify information rather than to work with it. CONCLUSIONS: The emergence of an MTM model that is better integrated in the wider health system context and incorporates inputs from patients and support systems make traditional meetings more dynamic and interconnected. Although these changes signal a second transition in the development process of multidisciplinary teams, they occur in a context marked by clear gaps between the information and management needs of MTMs and the adequacy of current HIS.

Analysing the attributes of Comprehensive Cancer Centres and Cancer Centres across Europe to identify key hallmarks.

There is a persistent variation in cancer outcomes among and within European countries suggesting (among other causes) inequalities in access to or delivery of high-quality cancer care. European policy (EU Cancer Mission and Europe's Beating Cancer Plan) is currently moving towards a mission-oriented approach addressing these inequalities. In this study, we used the quantitative and qualitative data of the Organisation of European Cancer Institutes' Accreditation and Designation Programme, relating to 40 large European cancer centres, to describe their current compliance with quality standards, to identify the hallmarks common to all centres and to show the distinctive features of Comprehensive Cancer Centres. All Comprehensive Cancer Centres and Cancer Centres accredited by the Organisation of European Cancer Institutes show good compliance with quality standards related to care, multidisciplinarity and patient centredness. However, Comprehensive Cancer Centres on average showed significantly better scores on indicators related to the volume, quality and integration of translational research, such as high-impact publications, clinical trial activity (especially in phase I and phase IIa trials) and filing more patents as early indicators of innovation. However, irrespective of their size, centres show significant variability regarding effective governance when functioning as entities within larger hospitals.

What could be a cancer mission objective if we join our forces in the fight against cancer?

The European cancer burden is growing rapidly, with an estimated 2 million deaths a year according to the latest research. As almost half of cancers are diagnosed after the age of 65, and considering the aging European population, a tidal wave of cancer cases will sweep across Europe within the coming decades. Without major action, the additional number of annual cancer cases is expected to rise from 4.2 million to 5.2 million by 2040. If we are to reach plateauing numbers by 2040 (as a minimum goal), this would require 0.75% annual reduction in risk and 1% reduction in risk of death. These challenges call for attack from various angles, coordinated efforts, rational strategies, initiatives throughout the cancer trajectory, activities to reduce inequities, and implementation of evidence-based measures. In order to defeat the societal challenges of cancer through innovation, Europe will need to join forces and connect the European Commission and the member states, politicians and citizens, industries and patient associations. A cancer mission should thus unite the public and patient viewpoint to the perspective of cancer professionals. The authors describe a plan that has been agreed upon among some of the major European Cancer organizations and associations. This plan uses a cancer mission as a tool and must deliver robust medical evidence to patients and doctors through high-quality research delivering sustainable and affordable strategies for prevention, treatment, and follow-up.

Cancer precision medicine today: Towards omic information in healthcare systems.

INTRODUCTION:: This article focuses on the integration of omics data in electronic health records and on interoperability aspects relating to big data analysis for precision medicine. METHODS:: Omics data integration methods for electronic health record and for systems interoperability are considered, with special reference to the high number of specific software tools used to manage different aspects of patient treatment. This is an important barrier against the use of this integrated approach in daily clinical routine. RESULTS:: The correct use of all three levels of interoperability (technical, semantic, and process interoperability) plays a key role in order to achieve an easy access to a significant amount of data, all with correct contextualization, which is the only way to obtain a real value from data for precision medicine. CONCLUSIONS:: The proposed architecture could improve the potentialities of data routinely collected in many health information systems to form a real patient center information environment.

Genetic alterations in sporadic triple negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have aimed to identify gene mutation profiles to explain the cause of TNBC therapy limitations. METHODS: The purpose of our study was to use Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) of 46 genes with a well-defined role in cancer in a cohort of TNBC patients in order to identify novel markers that could lead to the development of strategic, adjuvant, gene-targeted therapies. RESULTS: A total of 118 gene mutations in 35 genes, 75 mutations in BRCA1 and 92 mutations in BRCA2 were identified. The clinical assessment of the identified mutations showed 27 to be possibly damaging and 59 to be damaging. TP53, KDR, PIK3CA (rs3729687), ATM, AKT1 and KIT were among the most frequently mutated genes in our TNBC cohort. The SNP AKT1 (rs3730358) was suggested to modify the risk of breast cancer. SNP PIK3CA (rs3729687) is a damaging mutation that we found to be correlated with the prognosis of TNBC. The survival curve analysis showed that the presence of AKT1, TP53, KDR, KIT, BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is correlated with a poor prognosis. CONCLUSION: We show a strong association between TNBC and mutations in BRCA1/2 genes and the poor outcome of these patients. Moreover, we identified several other unknown mutations putatively associated with the poor prognosis of TNBC tumors. We also discovered novel mutations never before associated with breast cancer that could putatively account for the poor prognosis of the TNBC tumors.

Piloting a generic cancer consumer quality index in six European countries.

BACKGROUND: Accounting for patients' perspective has become increasingly important. Based on the Consumer Quality Index method (founded on Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems) a questionnaire was recently developed for Dutch cancer patients. As a next step, this study aimed to adapt and pilot this questionnaire for international comparison of cancer patients experience and satisfaction with care in six European countries. METHOD: The Consumer Quality Index was translated into the local language at the participating pilot sites using cross-translation. A minimum of 100 patients per site were surveyed through convenience sampling. Data from seven pilot sites in six countries was collected through an online and paper-based survey. Internal consistency was tested by calculating Cronbach's alpha and validity by means of cognitive interviews. Demographic factors were compared as possible influencing factors. RESULTS: A total of 698 patients from six European countries filled the questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha was good or satisfactory in 8 out of 10 categories. Patient satisfaction significantly differed between the countries. We observed no difference in patient satisfaction for age, gender, education, and tumor type, but satisfaction was significantly higher in patients with a higher level of activation. CONCLUSION: This European Cancer Consumer Quality Index(ECCQI) showed promising scores on internal consistency (reliability) and a good internal validity. The ECCQI is to our knowledge the first to measure and compare experiences and satisfaction of cancer patients on an international level, it may enable healthcare providers to improve the quality of cancer care.

Nutritional Online Information for Cancer Patients: a Randomized Trial of an Internet Communication Plus Social Media Intervention.

We hypothesized that cancer patients using an Internet website would show an improvement in the knowledge about healthy eating habits, and this might be enhanced by social media interaction. A 6-month randomized intervention was set up. Eligible subjects were allocated in intervention (IG) and control groups (CG). IG had access to the website, and CG was provided with printed versions. All enrolled participants filled in Nutrition Questionnaire (NQ), Quality of Life Questionnaire (QoL) and Psychological Distress Inventory (PDI), at baseline and after 6 months. The difference between post- vs pre-questionnaires was calculated. Seventy-four subjects (CG 39; IG 35) completed the study. There was an increase in the score after the intervention in both groups for the NQ, even if not statistically significant. Dividing the IG into three categories, no (NI), low (LI) and high interactions (HI), we found a decreased score (improvement) in the CG (-0.2) and in the HI (-1.7), and an increased score (worsening) in the NI (+3.3) (p = NS) analysing the PDI. We found an increased score in the QoL both in CG and IG (adjusted LSMeans +3.5 and +2.8 points, respectively; p = NS). This study represents an example for support cancer patients. Despite the lack of significant effects, critical points and problems encountered may be of interest to researchers and organization working in the cancer setting. Intervention strategies to support patients during the care process are needed in order to attain the full potential of patient-centred care on cancer outcomes.

Participation of Italian Cancer Centres of the Alleanza Contro Il Cancro (ACC) in the Organisation of European Cancer Institutes (OECI) Accreditation and Designation program: a successful first national initiative.

The Organisation of European Cancer Institutes (OECI) launched a program for accreditation and designation (A&D) of cancer centers in Europe based on voluntary participation in 2008. In 2012, the Italian Ministry of Health decided to fund cancer centers in Italy, members of the Alleanza Contro il Cancro (ACC), to go through the OECI accreditation program. Ten centers participated in the program and 10 completed the full cycle of the OECI A&D process in consecutive series over a 2-year period. The process was successfully completed within the planned timeline and the overall findings were presented to the Italian Ministry of Health and representatives of all the participating centers in November 2015. The program had a considerable team-building effect, which will likely continue as the improvement plans are implemented. Centers fed back to OECI that the A&D program had led to better formal organization of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) and cancer care pathways, and had helped them to harmonize the integration of research into clinical practice. Centers also concluded that they benefited from recognition through an international accreditation system, and that it had led to them developing better patient information and involvement. The importance of the improvement plans that each center had to produce following the audit reviews cannot be underestimated. The OECI concludes that implementation of the A&D program at the national level is feasible despite national peculiarities related to health planning and organization in each member state. This is a good example of an EU project working well, with member states helping each other and learning from best practice, to improve the overall quality of cancer care and research and to establish consistency. The initial accreditation is the first part of an ongoing process of improving comprehensive cancer care, integrating bench to bedside.

Pioneering quality assessment in European cancer centers: a data analysis of the organization for European cancer institutes accreditation and designation program.

PURPOSE: In order to improve the quality of care in Cancer Centers (CC) and designate Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCCs), the Organization for European Cancer Institutes (OECI) launched an Accreditation and Designation (A&D) program. The program facilitates the collection of defined data and the assessment of cancer center quality. This study analyzes the results of the first 10 European centers that entered the program. METHODS: The assessment included 927 items divided across qualitative and quantitative questionnaires. Data collected during self-assessment and peer-review from the 10 first participating centers were combined in a database for comparative analysis using simple statistics. Quantitative and qualitative results were validated by auditors during the peer review visits. RESULTS: Volumes of various functions and activities dedicated to care, research, and education varied widely among centers. There were no significant differences in resources for radiology, radiotherapy, pathologic diagnostic, and surgery. Differences were observed in the use of clinical pathways but not for the practices of holding multidisciplinary team meetings and conforming to guidelines. Regarding human resources, main differences were in the composition and number of supportive care and research staff. All 10 centers applied as CCCs; five obtained the label, and five were designated as CCs. CONCLUSION: The OECI A&D program allows comparisons between centers with regard to management, research, care, education, and designation as CCs or CCCs. Through the peer review system, recommendations for improvements are given. Assessing the added value of the program, as well as research and patient treatment outcomes, is the next step.

A semi-automatic web based tool for the selection of research projects reviewers.

The correct evaluation of research proposals continues today to be problematic, and in many cases, grants and fellowships are subjected to this type of assessment. A web based semi-automatic tool to help in the selection of reviewers was developed. The core of the proposed system is the matching of the MeSH Descriptors of the publications submitted by the reviewers (for their accreditation) and the Descriptor linked to the research keywords, which were selected. Moreover, a citation related index was further calculated and adopted in order to discard not suitable reviewers. This tool was used as a support in a web site for the evaluation of candidates applying for a fellowship in the oncology field.

Policy statement on multidisciplinary cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Cancer care is undergoing an important paradigm shift from a disease-focused management to a patient-centred approach, in which increasingly more attention is paid to psychosocial aspects, quality of life, patients' rights and empowerment and survivorship. In this context, multidisciplinary teams emerge as a practical necessity for optimal coordination among health professionals and clear communication with patients. The European Partnership for Action Against Cancer (EPAAC), an initiative launched by the European Commission in 2009, addressed the multidisciplinary care from a policy perspective in order to define the core elements that all tumour-based multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) should include. To that effect, a working group conference was held in January 2013 within the EPAAC Work Package 7 (on Healthcare) framework. METHODS: The consensus group consisted of high-level representatives from the following European scientific societies, patient associations and stakeholders: European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European SocieTy for Radiology & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG), European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS), International Psycho-Oncology Society (IPOS),European Cancer Patient Coalition (ECPC), EuropaColon, Europa Donna - The European Breast Cancer Coalition, Association of European Cancer Leagues (ECL), Organisation of European Cancer Institutes (OECI), EUSOMA - European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists, European Hospital and Healthcare Federation (HOPE) and EPAAC Work Packages 5 (Health promotion and prevention), 7, 8 (Research), 9 (Information systems) and 10 (Cancer plans). A background document with a list of 26 core issues drawn from a systematic review of the literature was used to guide the discussion. Five areas related to MDTs were covered: care objectives, organisation, clinical assessment, patients' rights and empowerment and policy support. Preliminary drafts of the document were widely circulated for consultation and amendments by the working group before final approval. RESULTS: The working group unanimously formulated a Policy Statement on Multidisciplinary Cancer Care to define the core elements that should be implemented by all tumour-based MDTs. This document identifies MDTs as the core component in cancer care organisation and sets down the key elements to guide changes across all European health systems. CONCLUSION: MDTs are an essential instrument of effective cancer care policy, and their continued development crucial to providing patients the care they need and deserve. While implementation must remain in local hands, European health systems can still benefit from having a basis for an effective multidisciplinary model of cooperation. This policy statement is intended to serve as a reference for policymakers and healthcare providers who wish to improve the services currently provided to the cancer patients whose lives and well-being depend on their action.

Report from the OECI Oncology Days 2014.

The 2014 OECI Oncology Days was held at the 'Prof. Dr. Ion Chiricuta' Oncology Institute in Cluj, Romania, from 12 to 13 June. The focus of this year's gathering was on developments in personalised medicine and other treatment advances which have made the cost of cancer care too high for many regions throughout Europe.

Colorectal cancer survival in the USA and Europe: a CONCORD high-resolution study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the extent to which stage at diagnosis and adherence to treatment guidelines may explain the persistent differences in colorectal cancer survival between the USA and Europe. DESIGN: A high-resolution study using detailed clinical data on Dukes' stage, diagnostic procedures, treatment and follow-up, collected directly from medical records by trained abstractors under a single protocol, with standardised quality control and central statistical analysis. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 21 population-based registries in seven US states and nine European countries provided data for random samples comprising 12 523 adults (15-99 years) diagnosed with colorectal cancer during 1996-1998. OUTCOME MEASURES: Logistic regression models were used to compare adherence to 'standard care' in the USA and Europe. Net survival and excess risk of death were estimated with flexible parametric models. RESULTS: The proportion of Dukes' A and B tumours was similar in the USA and Europe, while that of Dukes' C was more frequent in the USA (38% vs 21%) and of Dukes' D more frequent in Europe (22% vs 10%). Resection with curative intent was more frequent in the USA (85% vs 75%). Elderly patients (75-99 years) were 70-90% less likely to receive radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Age-standardised 5-year net survival was similar in the USA (58%) and Northern and Western Europe (54-56%) and lowest in Eastern Europe (42%). The mean excess hazard up to 5 years after diagnosis was highest in Eastern Europe, especially among elderly patients and those with Dukes' D tumours. CONCLUSIONS: The wide differences in colorectal cancer survival between Europe and the USA in the late 1990s are probably attributable to earlier stage and more extensive use of surgery and adjuvant treatment in the USA. Elderly patients with colorectal cancer received surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy less often than younger patients, despite evidence that they could also have benefited.

Accreditation for excellence of cancer research institutes: recommendations from the Italian Network of Comprehensive Cancer Centers.

A panel of experts from Italian Comprehensive Cancer Centers defines the recommendations for external quality control programs aimed to accreditation to excellence of these institutes. After definition of the process as a systematic, periodic evaluation performed by an external agency to verify whether a health organization possesses certain prerequisites regarding structural, organizational and operational conditions that are thought to affect health care quality, the panel reviews models internationally available and makes final recommendations on aspects considered of main interest. This position paper has been produced within a special project of the Ministry of Health of the Italian Government aimed to accredit, according to OECI model, 11 Italian cancer centers in the period 2012-2014. The Project represents the effort undertaken by this network of Comprehensive Cancer Centers to find a common denominator for the experience of all Institutes in external quality control programs. Fourteen shared "statements" are put forth, designed to offer some indications on the main aspects of this subject, based on literature evidence or expert opinions. They deal with the need for "accountability" and involvement of the entire organization, the effectiveness of self-evaluation, the temporal continuity and the educational value of the experience, the use of indicators and measurement tools, additionally for intra- and inter-organization comparison, the system of evaluation models used, the provision for specific requisites for oncology, and the opportunity for mutual exchange of evaluation experiences.

CIGNOweb.it.

We introduce CIGNOweb.it, a database of oncology resources for patients, the general public and healthcare professionals. It builds on the previous Italian cancer resource Azaleaweb and offers quality-evaluated content. It meets international bibliographic and technical standards such as the Open Archives Initiative (OAI) for web content interoperability and the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) for bibliographic description with respect to the different media, applications, and user needs. Database content is supplied in collaboration with non-profit associations, libraries and the network of Cancer Information Points that is currently being established all over Italy. Expert and customer evaluation and feedback are provided for in the system. The graphic layout has been painstakingly designed to be user-friendly for a non-expert public. CIGNOweb.it is multicentric and will in time offer health information outside the field of oncology. It is designed to become a multilingual tool to organize, optimize and access patient information produced in the languages of the "newer" European countries. It is hoped that CIGNOweb.it will support other European nations in enhancing the structure and organization of their own-language patient health information and will contribute towards making a common health information portal of the European Union a reality.

TRAIN: Training through Research Application Italian iNitiative.

Training through Research Application Italian iNitiative (TRAIN) is a mobility program financed under the EU action called "Cofinancing of regional, national and international programs" (COFUND) of the European Commission Seventh Framework Program (FP7) - People, and has been designed to encourage the promotion and development of international programs of research through mobility at various stages of research careers. The aim of TRAIN is to improve translational skills in the field of cancer by promoting a three-year international mobility program assigning a total of 51 fellowships subdivided into incoming, outgoing and reintegration fellowships.?The TRAIN proposal has been submitted in February 2009 to the European Commission in reply to the 2008 FP7-PEOPLE-COFUND call and has been successfully evaluated. TRAIN is addressed to postdoctoral scientists or scientists who have at least four years' full-time equivalent research experience and who wish to improve their careers spending one year abroad. The mobility program is open also to non-Italian experienced scientists wishing to spend one year in an Italian research center or private company. Part of the scheme is targeted to experienced Italian scientists who have completed at least three years of research in a foreign country and are interested in returning to Italy.?TRAIN is part of an overall Italian strategy outlined by the International Program of the Italian Cancer Network "Alleanza Contro il Cancro" to promote Italian participation in the building of the European Area for translational cancer research and to enhance the interaction between academy and industry.

Cancer research performance in the European Union: a study of published output from 2000 to 2008.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Although several studies have assessed cancer research performance in individual European countries, comparisons of European Union (EU27) performance with countries of similar population size are not available. METHODS: We compared cancer research performance in 2000-2008 between EU27 and 11 countries with over 100 million inhabitants. Performance should not have been affected by the 2007-2009 recession. We examined 143 journals considered oncology journals by Journal Citation Reports, accessing them via Scopus. Publications were attributed to countries using a published counting procedure. RESULTS: For number of publications, the USA held a clear lead in 2006-2008 (yearly averages: 10,293 USA vs 9,962 EU27), whereas the EU27 held the lead previously. EU27 was also second to the USA for total impact factor. China markedly improved its cancer publications record over the period. Compared to the USA, EU27 and Japan, the other countries (all developing) had a poor publications record. CONCLUSIONS: Comparative cancer research spending data are not available. However from 2002 to 2007, gross domestic expenditure on research and development (UNESCO data) increased by 34% in North America, 161% in China and only 28% in EU27. Thus the European Union is lagging behind North America and may well be eclipsed by China in research and development spending in the near future. We suggest that these new findings should be considered by policymakers in Europe and other countries when developing policies for cancer control.