European Groundshot-addressing Europe's cancer research challenges: a Lancet Oncology Commission.

Cancer research is a crucial pillar for countries to deliver more affordable, higher quality, and more equitable cancer care. Patients treated in research-active hospitals have better outcomes than patients who are not treated in these settings. However, cancer in Europe is at a crossroads. Cancer was already a leading cause of premature death before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the disastrous effects of the pandemic on early diagnosis and treatment will probably set back cancer outcomes in Europe by almost a decade. Recognising the pivotal importance of research not just to mitigate the pandemic today, but to build better European cancer services and systems for patients tomorrow, the Lancet Oncology European Groundshot Commission on cancer research brings together a wide range of experts, together with detailed new data on cancer research activity across Europe during the past 12 years. We have deployed this knowledge to help inform Europe's Beating Cancer Plan and the EU Cancer Mission, and to set out an evidence-driven, patient-centred cancer research roadmap for Europe. The high-resolution cancer research data we have generated show current activities, captured through different metrics, including by region, disease burden, research domain, and effect on outcomes. We have also included granular data on research collaboration, gender of researchers, and research funding. The inclusion of granular data has facilitated the identification of areas that are perhaps overemphasised in current cancer research in Europe, while also highlighting domains that are underserved. Our detailed data emphasise the need for more information-driven and data-driven cancer research strategies and planning going forward. A particular focus must be on central and eastern Europe, because our findings emphasise the widening gap in cancer research activity, and capacity and outcomes, compared with the rest of Europe. Citizens and patients, no matter where they are, must benefit from advances in cancer research. This Commission also highlights that the narrow focus on discovery science and biopharmaceutical research in Europe needs to be widened to include such areas as prevention and early diagnosis; treatment modalities such as radiotherapy and surgery; and a larger concentration on developing a research and innovation strategy for the 20 million Europeans living beyond a cancer diagnosis. Our data highlight the important role of comprehensive cancer centres in driving the European cancer research agenda. Crucial to a functioning cancer research strategy and its translation into patient benefit is the need for a greater emphasis on health policy and systems research, including implementation science, so that the innovative technological outputs from cancer research have a clear pathway to delivery. This European cancer research Commission has identified 12 key recommendations within a call to action to reimagine cancer research and its implementation in Europe. We hope this call to action will help to achieve our ambitious 70:35 target: 70% average 10-year survival for all European cancer patients by 2035.

ECCO Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care: Prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: ECCO Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) are written by experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care in Europe. They give oncology teams, patients, policymakers and managers an overview of essential care throughout the patient journey. PROSTATE CANCER: Prostate cancer is the second most common male cancer and has a wide variation in outcomes in Europe. It has complex diagnosis and treatment challenges, and is a major healthcare burden. Care must only be a carried out in prostate/urology cancer units or centres that have a core multidisciplinary team (MDT) and an extended team of health professionals. Such units are far from universal in European countries. To meet European aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations must consider the requirements in this paper, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship.

The requirements of a specialist breast centre.

This article is an update of the requirements of a specialist breast centre, produced by EUSOMA and endorsed by ECCO as part of Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) programme, and ESMO. To meet aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations must consider the requirements in this article, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship.

Isolated limb perfusion with melphalan activates interferon-stimulated genes to induce tumor regression in patients with melanoma in-transit metastasis.

Hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion (ILP) with high-dose melphalan is a treatment option for melanoma patients with metastasis confined to limbs (in-transit metastasis). The therapy entails a complete response (CR) rate of 50-70%. Cellular immunity is proposed to impact on the clinical efficacy of ILP, but the detailed aspects of ILP-induced immune activation remain to be explored. For this study, we explored the potential role of interferon-stimulated gene (ISG) products, including CXCL10, CCL2, PD-L2 and IFN-γ along with expression of their cognate receptors CXCR3, CCR4, CCR5 and PD-1 on lymphocytes, for the clinical efficacy of ILP. Patients with high serum levels of CXCL10, CCL2, PD-L2 and IFN-γ were more likely to achieve CR after ILP. Additionally, the expression of CXCR3, CCR4 and CCR5 on T cells and/or natural killer (NK) cells was enhanced by ILP. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) secreted high levels of CXCL10, CCL2 and IFN-γ in response to co-culture with melphalan-exposed melanoma cells in vitro. Activated T cells migrated toward supernatants from these co-cultures. Furthermore, melphalan-exposed melanoma cells triggered upregulation of CXCR3, CCR4, CCR5 and PD-1 on co-cultured T cells and/or NK cells. Our results suggest that constituents released from melphalan-exposed melanoma cells stimulate the ISG axis with ensuing formation of chemokines and upregulation of chemokine receptor expression on anti-neoplastic immune cells, which may contribute in ILP-induced tumor regression.

A prospective clinical trial on sorafenib treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma waiting for liver transplantation are commonly treated with locoregional treatments, such as TACE and ablation, to prevent tumor progression and dropout and to improve long-term outcome after transplantation. We wanted to prospectively assess feasibility of systemic antitumor treatment with sorafenib as neoadjuvant treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma while waiting for liver transplantation, evaluating tolerability, toxicity and posttransplant morbidity. We also wanted to evaluate perfusion CT parameters to assess tumor properties and response early after start of sorafenib treatment in patients with early hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: Twelve patients assigned for liver transplantation due to hepatocellular carcinoma, within the UCSF and who fulfilled other criteria, were included January 2012-August 2014. After baseline evaluation, sorafenib treatment was started. Treatment was evaluated by perfusion CT at 1, 4 and 12 weeks and thereafter every 8 weeks. Toxicity and quality of life was assessed at 1 and 4 weeks and every 4 weeks thereafter during treatment. Treatment was stopped when patients were prioritized on the transplantation waiting list or when intolerable side effects or tumor progress warranted other treatments. Posttransplant morbidity after 90 days was registered according to Clavien-Dindo. RESULTS: Baseline perfusion CT parameters in the tumors predicted the outcome according to RECIST/mRECIST at three months, but no change in CTp parameters was detected as a result of sorafenib. Sorafenib as neoadjuvant treatment was associated with intolerability and dose reductions. Therefore the prerequisites for evaluation of the sorafenib effect on both CT parameters and tumor response were impaired. CONCLUSIONS: This study failed to show changes in CTp parameters during sorafenib treatment. Despite the curative treatment intention, tolerability of neoadjuvant sorafenib treatment before liver transplantation was inadequate in this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2010-024306-36 (date 2011-04-07).

ECCO Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care: Soft Tissue Sarcoma in Adults and Bone Sarcoma. A critical review.

BACKGROUND: ECCO essential requirements for quality cancer care (ERQCC) are checklists and explanations of organisation and actions that are necessary to give high-quality care to patients who have a specific tumour type. They are written by European experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care. ERQCC papers give oncology teams, patients, policymakers and managers an overview of the elements needed in any healthcare system to provide high quality of care throughout the patient journey. References are made to clinical guidelines and other resources where appropriate, and the focus is on care in Europe. Sarcoma: essential requirements for quality care • Sarcomas - which can be classified into soft tissue and bone sarcomas - are rare, but all rare cancers make up more than 20% of cancers in Europe, and there are substantial inequalities in access to high-quality care. Sarcomas, of which there are many subtypes, comprise a particularly complex and demanding challenge for healthcare systems and providers. This paper presents essential requirements for quality cancer care of soft tissue sarcomas in adults and bone sarcomas. • High-quality care must only be carried out in specialised sarcoma centres (including paediatric cancer centres) which have both a core multidisciplinary team and an extended team of allied professionals, and which are subject to quality and audit procedures. Access to such units is far from universal in all European countries. • It is essential that, to meet European aspirations for high-quality comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations implement the requirements in this paper, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis and follow-up, to treatment, to improve survival and quality of life for patients. CONCLUSION: Taken together, the information presented in this paper provides a comprehensive description of the essential requirements for establishing a high-quality service for soft tissue sarcomas in adults and bone sarcomas. The ECCO expert group is aware that it is not possible to propose a 'one size fits all' system for all countries, but urges that access to multidisciplinary teams is guaranteed to all patients with sarcoma.

NIR and skin impedance spectroscopic measurements for studying the effect of coffee and alcohol on skin, and dysplastic naevi.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Near infrared and impedance spectroscopy can be used for clinical skin measurements and need to be evaluated for possible confounding factors; (i) are skin conditions of the patient and the subsequent skin measurements influenced by alcohol and/or coffee consumption and (ii) are measurements of dysplastic naevi (DN) reproducible over time and significantly different compared to reference skin. METHODS: Near infrared and skin impedance spectroscopic data were analysed multivariately. In the first study, the skin characteristics of 15 healthy individuals were examined related to body location, gender, individual differences, and consumption of coffee or alcohol. The second study included five patients diagnosed with dysplastic naevi syndrome. Measurements were taken on DN and reference skin over time. RESULTS: In the first study, body location and gender had a major influence on measurement scores. Inter-individual skin characteristics and coffee or alcohol effects on skin characteristics were of minor importance. In the second study, it was shown that DN can be differentiated from reference skin and the measurements are stable over time. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate consumption of alcohol and coffee did not influence the results of the measurements. It is possible to follow, stable or changed, characteristics of DN over time.

Delivering affordable cancer care in high-income countries.

The burden of cancer is growing, and the disease is becoming a major economic expenditure for all developed countries. In 2008, the worldwide cost of cancer due to premature death and disability (not including direct medical costs) was estimated to be US$895 billion. This is not simply due to an increase in absolute numbers, but also the rate of increase of expenditure on cancer. What are the drivers and solutions to the so-called cancer-cost curve in developed countries? How are we going to afford to deliver high quality and equitable care? Here, expert opinion from health-care professionals, policy makers, and cancer survivors has been gathered to address the barriers and solutions to delivering affordable cancer care. Although many of the drivers and themes are specific to a particular field-eg, the huge development costs for cancer medicines-there is strong concordance running through each contribution. Several drivers of cost, such as over-use, rapid expansion, and shortening life cycles of cancer technologies (such as medicines and imaging modalities), and the lack of suitable clinical research and integrated health economic studies, have converged with more defensive medical practice, a less informed regulatory system, a lack of evidence-based sociopolitical debate, and a declining degree of fairness for all patients with cancer. Urgent solutions range from re-engineering of the macroeconomic basis of cancer costs (eg, value-based approaches to bend the cost curve and allow cost-saving technologies), greater education of policy makers, and an informed and transparent regulatory system. A radical shift in cancer policy is also required. Political toleration of unfairness in access to affordable cancer treatment is unacceptable. The cancer profession and industry should take responsibility and not accept a substandard evidence base and an ethos of very small benefit at whatever cost; rather, we need delivery of fair prices and real value from new technologies.