A Dutch paediatric palliative care guideline: a systematic review and evidence-based recommendations for symptom treatment.

BACKGROUND: Children with life-threatening and life-limiting conditions can experience high levels of suffering due to multiple distressing symptoms that result in poor quality of life and increase risk of long-term distress in their family members. High quality symptom treatment is needed for all these children and their families, even more so at the end-of-life. In this paper, we provide evidence-based recommendations for symptom treatment in paediatric palliative patients to optimize care. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of 56 experts in paediatric palliative care and nine (bereaved) parents was established to develop recommendations on symptom treatment in paediatric palliative care including anxiety and depression, delirium, dyspnoea, haematological symptoms, coughing, skin complaints, nausea and vomiting, neurological symptoms, pain, death rattle, fatigue, paediatric palliative sedation and forgoing hydration and nutrition. Recommendations were based on evidence from a systematic literature search, additional literature sources (such as guidelines), clinical expertise, and patient and family values. We used the GRADE methodology for appraisal of evidence. Parents were included in the guideline panel to ensure the representation of patient and family values. RESULTS: We included a total of 18 studies that reported on the effects of specific (non) pharmacological interventions to treat symptoms in paediatric palliative care. A few of these interventions showed significant improvement in symptom relief. This evidence could only (partly) answer eight out of 27 clinical questions. We included 29 guidelines and two textbooks as additional literature to deal with lack of evidence. In total, we formulated 221 recommendations on symptom treatment in paediatric palliative care based on evidence, additional literature, clinical expertise, and patient and family values. CONCLUSION: Even though available evidence on symptom-related paediatric palliative care interventions has increased, there still is a paucity of evidence in paediatric palliative care. We urge for international multidisciplinary multi-institutional collaboration to perform high-quality research and contribute to the optimization of symptom relief in palliative care for all children worldwide.

Recommendations for surveillance of pulmonary dysfunction among childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors: a report from the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group.

Childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors are at risk of pulmonary dysfunction. Current follow-up care guidelines are discordant. Therefore, the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group established and convened a panel of 33 experts to develop evidence-based surveillance guidelines. We critically reviewed available evidence regarding risk factors for pulmonary dysfunction, types of pulmonary function testing, and timings of surveillance, then we formulated our recommendations. We recommend that CAYA cancer survivors and healthcare providers are aware of reduced pulmonary function risks and pay vigilant attention to potential symptoms of pulmonary dysfunction, especially among survivors treated with allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation, thoracic radiotherapy, and thoracic surgery. Based on existing limited evidence and current lack of interventions, our panel recommends pulmonary function testing only for symptomatic survivors. Since scarce existing evidence informs our recommendation, we highlight the need for prospective collaborative studies to address pulmonary function knowledge gaps among CAYA cancer survivors.

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.

Palliative care for children: methodology for the development of a national clinical practice guideline.

BACKGROUND: Provision of paediatric palliative care for children with life-threatening or life-limiting conditions and their families is often complex. Guidelines can support professionals to deliver high quality care. Stakeholders expressed the need to update the first Dutch paediatric palliative care guideline with new scientific literature and new topics. This paper provides an overview of the methodology that is used for the revision of the Dutch paediatric palliative care guideline and a brief presentation of the identified evidence. METHODS: The revised paediatric palliative care guideline was developed with a multidisciplinary guideline panel of 72 experts in paediatric palliative care and nine (bereaved) parents of children with life-threatening or life-limiting conditions. The guideline covered multiple topics related to (refractory) symptom treatment, advance care planning and shared-decision making, organisation of care, psychosocial care, and loss and bereavement. We established six main working groups that formulated 38 clinical questions for which we identified evidence by updating two existing systematic literature searches. The GRADE (CERQual) methodology was used for appraisal of evidence. Furthermore, we searched for additional literature such as existing guidelines and textbooks to deal with lack of evidence. RESULTS: The two systematic literature searches yielded a total of 29 RCTs or systematic reviews of RCTs on paediatric palliative care interventions and 22 qualitative studies on barriers and facilitators of advance care planning and shared decision-making. We identified evidence for 14 out of 38 clinical questions. Furthermore, we were able to select additional literature (29 guidelines, two textbooks, and 10 systematic reviews) to deal with lack of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The revised Dutch paediatric palliative care guideline addresses many topics. However, there is limited evidence to base recommendations upon. Our methodology will combine the existing evidence in scientific literature, additional literature, expert knowledge, and perspectives of patients and their families to provide recommendations.

A joint international consensus statement for measuring quality of survival for patients with childhood cancer.

The aim of treating childhood cancer remains to cure all. As survival rates improve, long-term health outcomes increasingly define quality of care. The International Childhood Cancer Outcome Project developed a set of core outcomes for most types of childhood cancers involving relevant international stakeholders (survivors; pediatric oncologists; other medical, nursing or paramedical care providers; and psychosocial or neurocognitive care providers) to allow outcome-based evaluation of childhood cancer care. A survey among healthcare providers (n = 87) and online focus groups of survivors (n = 22) resulted in unique candidate outcome lists for 17 types of childhood cancer (five hematological malignancies, four central nervous system tumors and eight solid tumors). In a two-round Delphi survey, 435 healthcare providers from 68 institutions internationally (response rates for round 1, 70-97%; round 2, 65-92%) contributed to the selection of four to eight physical core outcomes (for example, heart failure, subfertility and subsequent neoplasms) and three aspects of quality of life (physical, psychosocial and neurocognitive) per pediatric cancer subtype. Measurement instruments for the core outcomes consist of medical record abstraction, questionnaires and linkage with existing registries. This International Childhood Cancer Core Outcome Set represents outcomes of value to patients, survivors and healthcare providers and can be used to measure institutional progress and benchmark against peers.

Systematic review and updated recommendations for cardiomyopathy surveillance for survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer from the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group.

Survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer, previously treated with anthracycline chemotherapy (including mitoxantrone) or radiotherapy in which the heart was exposed, are at increased risk of cardiomyopathy. Symptomatic cardiomyopathy is typically preceded by a series of gradually progressive, asymptomatic changes in structure and function of the heart that can be ameliorated with treatment, prompting specialist organisations to endorse guidelines on cardiac surveillance in at-risk survivors of cancer. In 2015, the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group compiled these guidelines into a uniform set of recommendations applicable to a broad spectrum of clinical environments with varying resource availabilities. Since then, additional studies have provided insight into dose thresholds associated with a risk of asymptomatic and symptomatic cardiomyopathy, have characterised risk over time, and have established the cost-effectiveness of different surveillance strategies. This systematic Review and guideline provides updated recommendations based on the evidence published up to September, 2020.

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).

Primary cardioprotection with dexrazoxane in patients with childhood cancer who are expected to receive anthracyclines: recommendations from the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group.

Survivors of childhood cancer are at risk of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity, which might be prevented by dexrazoxane. However, concerns exist about the safety of dexrazoxane, and little guidance is available on its use in children. To facilitate global consensus, a working group within the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group reviewed the existing literature and used evidence-based methodology to develop a guideline for dexrazoxane administration in children with cancer who are expected to receive anthracyclines. Recommendations were made in consideration of evidence supporting the balance of potential benefits and harms, and clinical judgement by the expert panel. Given the dose-dependent risk of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity, we concluded that the benefits of dexrazoxane probably outweigh the risk of subsequent neoplasms when the cumulative doxorubicin or equivalent dose is at least 250 mg/m2 (moderate recommendation). No recommendation could be formulated for cumulative doxorubicin or equivalent doses of lower than 250 mg/m2, due to insufficient evidence to determine whether the risk of cardiotoxicity outweighs the possible risk of subsequent neoplasms. Further research is encouraged to determine the long-term efficacy and safety of dexrazoxane in children with cancer.

Dexrazoxane for preventing or reducing cardiotoxicity in adults and children with cancer receiving anthracyclines.

BACKGROUND: This review is the third update of a previously published Cochrane Review. The original review, looking at all possible cardioprotective agents, was split and this part now focuses on dexrazoxane only. Anthracyclines are effective chemotherapeutic agents in the treatment of numerous malignancies. Unfortunately, their use is limited by a dose-dependent cardiotoxicity. In an effort to prevent or reduce this cardiotoxicity, different cardioprotective agents have been studied, including dexrazoxane. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of dexrazoxane to prevent or reduce cardiotoxicity and determine possible effects of dexrazoxane on antitumour efficacy, quality of life and toxicities other than cardiac damage in adults and children with cancer receiving anthracyclines when compared to placebo or no additional treatment. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to May 2021. We also handsearched reference lists, the proceedings of relevant conferences and ongoing trials registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which dexrazoxane was compared to no additional therapy or placebo in adults and children with cancer receiving anthracyclines. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and GRADE assessment of included studies. We analysed results in adults and children separately. We performed analyses according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. MAIN RESULTS: For this update, we identified 548 unique records. We included three additional RCTs: two paediatric and one adult. Therefore, we included a total of 13 eligible RCTs (five paediatric and eight adult). The studies enrolled 1252 children with leukaemia, lymphoma or a solid tumour and 1269 participants, who were mostly diagnosed with breast cancer. In adults, moderate-quality evidence showed that there was less clinical heart failure with the use of dexrazoxane (risk ratio (RR) 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 0.43; 7 studies, 1221 adults). In children, we identified no difference in clinical heart failure risk between treatment groups (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.19; 3 studies, 885 children; low-quality evidence). In three paediatric studies assessing cardiomyopathy/heart failure as the primary cause of death, none of the children had this outcome (1008 children, low-quality evidence). In the adult studies, different definitions for subclinical myocardial dysfunction and clinical heart failure combined were used, but pooled analyses were possible: there was a benefit in favour of the use of dexrazoxane (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.56; 3 studies, 417 adults and RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.66; 2 studies, 534 adults, respectively, moderate-quality evidence). In the paediatric studies, definitions of subclinical myocardial dysfunction and clinical heart failure combined were incomparable, making pooling impossible. One paediatric study showed a benefit in favour of dexrazoxane (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.85; 33 children; low-quality evidence), whereas another study showed no difference between treatment groups (Fischer exact P = 0.12; 537 children; very low-quality evidence). Overall survival (OS) was reported in adults and overall mortality in children. The meta-analyses of both outcomes showed no difference between treatment groups (hazard ratio (HR) 1.04, 95% 0.88 to 1.23; 4 studies; moderate-quality evidence; and HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 3 studies, 1008 children; low-quality evidence, respectively). Progression-free survival (PFS) was only reported in adults. We subdivided PFS into three analyses based on the comparability of definitions, and identified a longer PFS in favour of dexrazoxane in one study (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.90; 164 adults; low-quality evidence). There was no difference between treatment groups in the other two analyses (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.40; 1 study; low-quality evidence; and HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.43; 2 studies; moderate-quality evidence, respectively). In adults, there was no difference in tumour response rate between treatment groups (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.04; 6 studies, 956 adults; moderate-quality evidence). We subdivided tumour response rate in children into two analyses based on the comparability of definitions, and identified no difference between treatment groups (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.07; 1 study, 206 children; very low-quality evidence; and RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.01; 1 study, 200 children; low-quality evidence, respectively). The occurrence of secondary malignant neoplasms (SMN) was only assessed in children. The available and worst-case analyses were identical and showed a difference in favour of the control group (RR 3.08, 95% CI 1.13 to 8.38; 3 studies, 1015 children; low-quality evidence). In the best-case analysis, the direction of effect was the same, but there was no difference between treatment groups (RR 2.51, 95% CI 0.96 to 6.53; 4 studies, 1220 children; low-quality evidence). For other adverse effects, results also varied. None of the studies evaluated quality of life. If not reported, the number of participants for an analysis was unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analyses showed the efficacy of dexrazoxane in preventing or reducing cardiotoxicity in adults treated with anthracyclines. In children, there was a difference between treatment groups for one cardiac outcome (i.e. for one of the definitions used for clinical heart failure and subclinical myocardial dysfunction combined) in favour of dexrazoxane. In adults, no evidence of a negative effect on tumour response rate, OS and PFS was identified; and in children, no evidence of a negative effect on tumour response rate and overall mortality was identified. The results for adverse effects varied. In children, dexrazoxane may be associated with a higher risk of SMN; in adults this was not addressed. In adults, the quality of the evidence ranged between moderate and low; in children, it ranged between low and very low. Before definitive conclusions on the use of dexrazoxane can be made, especially in children, more high-quality research is needed. We conclude that if the risk of cardiac damage is expected to be high, it might be justified to use dexrazoxane in children and adults with cancer who are treated with anthracyclines. However, clinicians and patients should weigh the cardioprotective effect of dexrazoxane against the possible risk of adverse effects, including SMN, for each individual. For children, the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group has developed a clinical practice guideline.

Recommendations for the surveillance of education and employment outcomes in survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer: A report from the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group.

Educational achievement and employment outcomes are critical indicators of quality of life in survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer. This review is aimed at providing an evidence-based clinical practice guideline (CPG) with internationally harmonized recommendations for the surveillance of education and employment outcomes in survivors of CAYA cancer diagnosed before the age of 30 years. The CPG was developed by a multidisciplinary panel under the umbrella of the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group. After evaluating concordances and discordances of 4 existing CPGs, the authors performed a systematic literature search through February 2021. They screened articles for eligibility, assessed quality, and extracted and summarized the data from included articles. The authors formulated recommendations based on the evidence and clinical judgment. There were 3930 articles identified, and 83 of them, originating from 17 countries, were included. On a group level, survivors were more likely to have lower educational achievement and more likely to be unemployed than comparisons. Key risk factors for poor outcomes included receiving a primary diagnosis of a central nervous system tumor and experiencing late effects. The authors recommend that health care providers be aware of the risk of educational and employment problems, implement regular surveillance, and refer survivors to specialists if problems are identified. In conclusion, this review presents a harmonized CPG that aims to facilitate evidence-based care, positively influence education and employment outcomes, and ultimately minimize the burden of disease and treatment-related late adverse effects for survivors of CAYA cancers. LAY SUMMARY: A multidisciplinary panel has developed guidelines for the surveillance of education and employment outcomes among survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer. On the basis of evidence showing that survivors are at risk for lower educational achievement and unemployment, it is recommended that all survivors receive regular screening for educational and employment outcomes.

Recommendations for the surveillance of mental health problems in childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors: a report from the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group.

Survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult (diagnosed when <25 years of age) cancer are at risk of mental health problems. The aim of this clinical practice guideline is to harmonise international recommendations for mental health surveillance in survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer. This guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary panel of experts under the sponsorship of the International Guideline Harmonization Group. We evaluated concordance among existing survivorship clinical practice guidelines and conducted a systematic review following evidence-based methods. Of 7249 studies identified, 76 articles from 12 countries met the inclusion criteria. Recommendations were formulated on the basis of identified evidence in combination with clinical considerations. This international clinical practice guideline strongly recommends mental health surveillance for all survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancers at every follow-up visit and prompt referral to mental health specialists when problems are identified. Overall, the recommendations reflect the necessity of mental health surveillance as part of comprehensive survivor-focused health care.

Childhood cancer survivorship care during the COVID-19 pandemic: an international report of practice implications and provider concerns.

PURPOSE: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care is essential to optimise health outcomes in childhood cancer survivors (CCS). We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on LTFU services and providers. METHODS: A COVID-19 working group within the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group (IGHG) distributed a questionnaire to LTFU service providers in 37 countries across Europe, Asia, North America, Central/South America, and Australia. The questionnaire assessed how care delivery methods changed during the pandemic and respondents' level of worry about the pandemic's impact on LTFU care delivery, their finances, their health, and that of their family and friends. RESULTS: Among 226 institutions, providers from 178 (79%) responded. Shortly after the initial outbreak, 42% of LTFU clinics closed. Restrictions during the pandemic resulted in fewer in-person consultations and an increased use of telemedicine, telephone, and email consultations. The use of a risk assessment to prioritise the method of LTFU consultation for individual CCS increased from 12 to 47%. While respondents anticipated in-person consultations to remain the primary method for LTFU service delivery, they expected significantly increased use of telemedicine and telephone consultations after the pandemic. On average, respondents reported highest levels of worry about psychosocial well-being of survivors. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic necessitated changes in LTFU service delivery, including greater use of virtual LTFU care and risk-stratification to identify CCS that need in-person evaluations. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Increased utilisation of virtual LTFU care and risk stratification is likely to persist post-pandemic.

Hypothalamic-Pituitary and Other Endocrine Surveillance Among Childhood Cancer Survivors.

Endocrine disorders in survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancers are associated with substantial adverse physical and psychosocial effects. To improve appropriate and timely endocrine screening and referral to a specialist, the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group (IGHG) aims to develop evidence and expert consensus-based guidelines for healthcare providers that harmonize recommendations for surveillance of endocrine disorders in CAYA cancer survivors. Existing IGHG surveillance recommendations for premature ovarian insufficiency, gonadotoxicity in males, fertility preservation, and thyroid cancer are summarized. For hypothalamic-pituitary (HP) dysfunction, new surveillance recommendations were formulated by a guideline panel consisting of 42 interdisciplinary international experts. A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE (through PubMed) for clinically relevant questions concerning HP dysfunction. Literature was screened for eligibility. Recommendations were formulated by drawing conclusions from quality assessment of all evidence, considering the potential benefits of early detection and appropriate management. Healthcare providers should be aware that CAYA cancer survivors have an increased risk for endocrine disorders, including HP dysfunction. Regular surveillance with clinical history, anthropomorphic measures, physical examination, and laboratory measurements is recommended in at-risk survivors. When endocrine disorders are suspected, healthcare providers should proceed with timely referrals to specialized services. These international evidence-based recommendations for surveillance of endocrine disorders in CAYA cancer survivors inform healthcare providers and highlight the need for long-term endocrine follow-up care in subgroups of survivors and elucidate opportunities for further research.

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.

Late hepatic toxicity surveillance for survivors of childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer: Recommendations from the international late effects of childhood cancer guideline harmonization group.

BACKGROUND: Survivors of childhood, adolescent and young adult (CAYA) cancer may develop treatment-induced chronic liver disease. Surveillance guidelines can improve survivors' health outcomes. However, current recommendations vary, leading to uncertainty about optimal screening. The International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group has developed recommendations for the surveillance of late hepatotoxicity after CAYA cancer. METHODS: Evidence-based methods based on the GRADE framework were used in guideline development. A multidisciplinary guideline panel performed systematic literature reviews, developed evidence summaries, appraised the evidence, and formulated recommendations on the basis of evidence, clinical judgement, and consideration of benefits versus the harms of the surveillance while allowing for flexibility in implementation across different health care systems. RESULTS: The guideline strongly recommends a physical examination and measurement of serum liver enzyme concentrations (ALT, AST, gGT, ALP) once at entry into long-term follow-up for survivors treated with radiotherapy potentially exposing the liver (moderate- to high-quality evidence). For survivors treated with busulfan, thioguanine, mercaptopurine, methotrexate, dactinomycin, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), or hepatic surgery, or with a history of chronic viral hepatitis or sinusoidal obstruction syndrome, similar surveillance for late hepatotoxicity once at entry into LTFU is reasonable (low-quality evidence/expert opinion, moderate recommendation). For survivors who have undergone HSCT and/or received multiple red blood cell transfusions, surveillance for iron overload with serum ferritin is strongly recommended once at long-term follow-up entry. CONCLUSIONS: These evidence-based, internationally-harmonized recommendations for the surveillance of late hepatic toxicity in cancer survivors can inform clinical care and guide future research of health outcomes for CAYA cancer survivors.

Coronary artery disease surveillance among childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer survivors: A systematic review and recommendations from the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a concerning late outcome for cancer survivors. However, uniform surveillance guidelines are lacking. AIM: To harmonise international recommendations for CAD surveillance for survivors of childhood, adolescent and young adult (CAYA) cancers. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed and evidence graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. Eligibility included English language studies, a minimum of 20 off-therapy cancer survivors assessed for CAD, and 75% diagnosed prior to age 35 years. All study designs were included, and a multidisciplinary guideline panel formulated and graded recommendations. RESULTS: 32 of 522 identified articles met eligibility criteria. The prevalence of CAD ranged from 0 to 72% and was significantly increased compared to control populations. The risk of CAD was increased among survivors who received radiotherapy exposing the heart, especially at doses ≥15 Gy (moderate-quality evidence). The guideline panel agreed that healthcare providers and CAYA cancer survivors treated with radiotherapy exposing the heart should be counselled about the increased risk for premature CAD. While the evidence is insufficient to support primary screening, monitoring and early management of modifiable cardiovascular risk factors are recommended. Initiation and frequency of surveillance should be based on the intensity of treatment exposures, family history, and presence of co-morbidities but at least by age 40 years and at a minimum of every 5 years. All were strong recommendations. CONCLUSION: These systematically assessed and harmonised recommendations for CAD surveillance will inform care and guide research concerning this critical outcome for CAYA cancer survivors.

Bone mineral density surveillance for childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors: evidence-based recommendations from the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group.

Childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors are at increased risk of reduced bone mineral density. Clinical practice surveillance guidelines are important for timely diagnosis and treatment of these survivors, which could improve bone mineral density parameters and prevent fragility fractures. Discordances across current late effects guidelines necessitated international harmonisation of recommendations for bone mineral density surveillance. The International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group therefore established a panel of 36 experts from ten countries, representing a range of relevant medical specialties. The evidence of risk factors for very low and low bone mineral density and fractures, surveillance modality, timing of bone mineral density surveillance, and treatment of very low and low bone mineral density were evaluated and critically appraised, and harmonised recommendations for childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors were formulated. We graded the recommendations based on the quality of evidence and balance between potential benefits and harms. Bone mineral density surveillance is recommended for survivors treated with cranial or craniospinal radiotherapy and is reasonable for survivors treated with total body irradiation. Due to insufficient evidence, no recommendation can be formulated for or against bone mineral density surveillance for survivors treated with corticosteroids. This surveillance decision should be made by the survivor and health-care provider together, after careful consideration of the potential harms and benefits and additional risk factors. We recommend to carry out bone mineral density surveillance using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at entry into long-term follow-up, and if normal (Z-score > -1), repeat when the survivor is aged 25 years. Between these measurements and thereafter, surveillance should be done as clinically indicated. These recommendations facilitate evidence-based care for childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors internationally.