Profile of the multicenter cohort of the German Cancer Consortium's Clinical Communication Platform.

Treatment concepts in oncology are becoming increasingly personalized and diverse. Successively, changes in standards of care mandate continuous monitoring of patient pathways and clinical outcomes based on large, representative real-world data. The German Cancer Consortium's (DKTK) Clinical Communication Platform (CCP) provides such opportunity. Connecting fourteen university hospital-based cancer centers, the CCP relies on a federated IT-infrastructure sourcing data from facility-based cancer registry units and biobanks. Federated analyses resulted in a cohort of 600,915 patients, out of which 232,991 were incident since 2013 and for which a comprehensive documentation is available. Next to demographic data (i.e., age at diagnosis: 2.0% 0-20 years, 8.3% 21-40 years, 30.9% 41-60 years, 50.1% 61-80 years, 8.8% 81+ years; and gender: 45.2% female, 54.7% male, 0.1% other) and diagnoses (five most frequent tumor origins: 22,523 prostate, 18,409 breast, 15,575 lung, 13,964 skin/malignant melanoma, 9005 brain), the cohort dataset contains information about therapeutic interventions and response assessments and is connected to 287,883 liquid and tissue biosamples. Focusing on diagnoses and therapy-sequences, showcase analyses of diagnosis-specific sub-cohorts (pancreas, larynx, kidney, thyroid gland) demonstrate the analytical opportunities offered by the cohort's data. Due to its data granularity and size, the cohort is a potential catalyst for translational cancer research. It provides rapid access to comprehensive patient groups and may improve the understanding of the clinical course of various (even rare) malignancies. Therefore, the cohort may serve as a decisions-making tool for clinical trial design and contributes to the evaluation of scientific findings under real-world conditions.

Consistent responses to moisture stress despite diverse growth forms within mountain fynbos communities.

Understanding climate change impacts on the Cape Floristic Region requires improved knowledge of plant physiological responses to the environment. Studies examining physiological responses of mountain fynbos have consisted of campaign-based measurements, capturing snapshots of plant water relations and photosynthesis. We examine conclusions drawn from prior studies by tracking in situ physiological responses of three species, representing dominant growth forms (proteoid, ericoid, restioid), over 2 years using miniature continuous sap flow technology, long-term observations of leaf/culm water potential and gas exchange, and xylem vulnerability to embolism. We observed considerable inter-specific variation in the timing and extent of seasonal declines in productivity. Shallow-rooted Erica monsoniana exhibited steep within-season declines in sap flow and water potentials, and pronounced inter-annual variability in total daily sap flux (Js). Protea repens showed steady reductions in Js across both years, despite deeper roots and less negative water potentials. Cannomois congesta-a shallow-rooted restioid-was least negatively impacted. Following rehydrating rain at the end of summer, gas exchange recovery was lower in the drier year compared with the normal year, but did not differ between species. Loss of function in the drier year was partially accounted for by loss of xylem transport capacity in Erica and Cannomois, but not Protea. Hitherto unseen water use patterns, including inter-annual variability of gas exchange associated with contrasting water uptake properties, reveal that species use different mechanisms to cope with summer dry periods. Revealing physiological responses of key growth forms enhances predictions of plant function within mountain fynbos under future conditions.

[Approval procedures for clinical trials in the field of radiation oncology]. / Genehmigungsverfahren klinischer Studien im Bereich der Radioonkologie.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Application of ionizing radiation for the purpose of medical research in Germany needs to be approved by the national authority for radiation protection (Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz, BfS). For studies in the field of radiation oncology, differentiation between use of radiation for "medical care (Heilkunde)" versus "medical research" frequently leads to contradictions. The aim of this article is to provide principle investigators, individuals, and institutions involved in the process, as well as institutional review or ethics committees, with the necessary information for this assessment. Information on the legal frame and the approval procedures are also provided. METHODS: A workshop was co-organized by the German Society for Radiation Oncology (DEGRO), the Working Party for Radiation Oncology (ARO) of the German Cancer Society (DKG), the German Society for Medical Physics (DGMP), and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) in October 2013. This paper summarizes the results of the workshop and the follow-up discussions between the organizers and the BfS. RESULTS: Differentiating between "Heilkunde" which does not need to be approved by the BfS and "medical research" is whether the specific application of radiation (beam quality, dose, schedule, target volume, etc.) is a clinically established and recognized procedure. This must be answered by the qualified physician(s) ("fachkundiger Arzt" according to German radiation protection law) in charge of the study and the treatments of the patients within the study, taking into consideration of the best available evidence from clinical studies, guidelines and consensus papers. Among the important parameters for assessment are indication, total dose, and fractionation. Radiation treatments applied outside clinical trials do not require approval by the BfS, even if they are applied within a randomized or nonrandomized clinical trial. The decision-making by the "fachkundigem Arzt" may be supported on request by an opinion given by the DEGRO Expert Committee for clinical trials. CONCLUSION: An important aim for promoting clinical research and patient care in radiation oncology is to further professionalize planning and implementation of clinical trials in this field. Correct assessment, at an early stage, whether a trial needs to be approved by the BfS may reduce unnecessary costs and reduce the time needed for the approval procedure for those trials which need to be assessed by the BfS.

Creating a data exchange strategy for radiotherapy research: towards federated databases and anonymised public datasets.

Disconnected cancer research data management and lack of information exchange about planned and ongoing research are complicating the utilisation of internationally collected medical information for improving cancer patient care. Rapidly collecting/pooling data can accelerate translational research in radiation therapy and oncology. The exchange of study data is one of the fundamental principles behind data aggregation and data mining. The possibilities of reproducing the original study results, performing further analyses on existing research data to generate new hypotheses or developing computational models to support medical decisions (e.g. risk/benefit analysis of treatment options) represent just a fraction of the potential benefits of medical data-pooling. Distributed machine learning and knowledge exchange from federated databases can be considered as one beyond other attractive approaches for knowledge generation within "Big Data". Data interoperability between research institutions should be the major concern behind a wider collaboration. Information captured in electronic patient records (EPRs) and study case report forms (eCRFs), linked together with medical imaging and treatment planning data, are deemed to be fundamental elements for large multi-centre studies in the field of radiation therapy and oncology. To fully utilise the captured medical information, the study data have to be more than just an electronic version of a traditional (un-modifiable) paper CRF. Challenges that have to be addressed are data interoperability, utilisation of standards, data quality and privacy concerns, data ownership, rights to publish, data pooling architecture and storage. This paper discusses a framework for conceptual packages of ideas focused on a strategic development for international research data exchange in the field of radiation therapy and oncology.