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.

Conformal arc radiotherapy for prostate cancer: increased biochemical failure in patients with distended rectum on the planning computed tomogram despite image guidance by implanted markers.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of rectal distention on the planning computed tomogram on freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF) of prostate cancer patients treated with image-guided conformal arc radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The outcomes of 238 patients with T1-T3N0M0 tumors were analyzed, with a median follow-up of 53 months (range, 24-93 months). In 213 patients, daily co-registration of X-rays and digitally reconstructed radiographs was used for positioning, whereas in 25 patients positioning was done using direct prostate visualization with implanted markers. The rectal average cross-sectional area was determined on the planning computed tomogram. RESULTS: The 5-year freedom from Grade 3 to 4 late gastrointestinal and urinary side effect, according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria, was 100% and 99.4% respectively. The 5-year FFBF was 88.4%. On multivariate analysis the following variables were significantly related to worse FFBF: risk group according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (high- to very high risk vs. intermediate- to low-risk), dose (70 vs. 78 Gy), average cross-sectional area (> or =16 vs. <16 cm(2)) and, unexpectedly, the use of implanted markers as opposed to bony structures for patient positioning. In retrospect, the margins around the clinical target volume appeared to be inadequate in the cases in which markers were used. CONCLUSION: Overall, the outcome of patients treated with image-guided conformal arc radiotherapy is excellent. We were able to confirm the negative prognostic impact of a distended rectum on the planning computed tomogram described by others. The study illustrates the potential danger of image guidance techniques as to margin reduction around the clinical target volume.

Improvement of European translational cancer research. Collaboration between comprehensive cancer centers.

Even though the increasing incidence of cancer is mainly a consequence of a population with a longer life span, part of this augmentation is related to the increasing prevalence of patients living with a chronic cancer disease. To fight the problem, improved preventive strategies are mandatory in combination with an innovative health care provision that is driven by research. To overcome the weakness of translational research the OECI is proposing a practical approach as part of a strategy foreseen by the EUROCAN+PLUS feasibility study, which was launched by the EC in order to identify mechanisms for the coordination of cancer research in Europe.

Managing cancer in the EU: the Organisation of European Cancer Institutes (OECI).

Organization of European Cancer Institutes (OECI) has the mission to facilitate the development of European comprehensive cancer centres by integrating care and prevention with research and education. Core issues are to deliver a complete multidisciplinary care of high quality and stimulate translational cancer research. The goal is to innovate the cancer care. The increasing problem of critical mass will be solved by networking comprehensive cancer centres containing quality assured harmonized infrastructures. This will give Europe a new potential to extend the cancer research to areas not possible to cover by single centres.