Study protocol comparing the ethical, psychological and socio-economic impact of personalised breast cancer screening to that of standard screening in the "My Personal Breast Screening" (MyPeBS) randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The MyPeBS study is an ongoing randomised controlled trial testing whether a risk-stratified breast cancer screening strategy is non-inferior, or eventually superior, to standard age-based screening at reducing incidence of stage 2 or more cancers. This large European Commission-funded initiative aims to include 85,000 women aged 40 to 70 years, without prior breast cancer and not previously identified at high risk in six countries (Belgium, France, Italy, Israel, Spain, UK). A specific work package within MyPeBS examines psychological, socio-economic and ethical aspects of this new screening strategy. It compares women's reported data and outcomes in both trial arms on the following issues: general anxiety, cancer-related worry, understanding of breast cancer screening strategy and information-seeking behaviour, socio-demographic and economic characteristics, quality of life, risk perception, intention to change health-related behaviours, satisfaction with the trial. METHODS: At inclusion, 3-months, 1-year and 4-years, each woman participating in MyPeBS is asked to fill online questionnaires. Descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses, subgroup comparisons and analysis of variations over time will be performed with appropriate tests to assess differences between arms. Multivariate regression models will allow modelling of different patient reported data and outcomes such as comprehension of the information provided, general anxiety or cancer worry, and information seeking behaviour. In addition, a qualitative study (48 semi-structured interviews conducted in France and in the UK with women randomised in the risk-stratified arm), will help further understand participants' acceptability and comprehension of the trial, and their experience of risk assessment. DISCUSSION: Beyond the scientific and medical objectives of this clinical study, it is critical to acknowledge the consequences of such a paradigm shift for women. Indeed, introducing a risk-based screening relying on individual biological differences also implies addressing non-biological differences (e.g. social status or health literacy) from an ethical perspective, to ensure equal access to healthcare. The results of the present study will facilitate making recommendations on implementation at the end of the trial to accompany any potential change in screening strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study sponsor: UNICANCER. My personalised breast screening (MyPeBS). CLINICALTRIALS: gov (2018) available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03672331 Contact: Cécile VISSAC SABATIER, PhD, + 33 (0)1 73 79 77 58 ext + 330,142,114,293, contact@mypebs.eu.

Effective delivery of Complex Innovative Design (CID) cancer trials-A consensus statement.

The traditional cancer drug development pathway is increasingly being superseded by trials that address multiple clinical questions. These are collectively termed Complex Innovative Design (CID) trials. CID trials not only assess the safety and toxicity of novel anticancer medicines but also their efficacy in biomarker-selected patients, specific cancer cohorts or in combination with other agents. They can be adapted to include new cohorts and test additional agents within a single protocol. Whilst CID trials can speed up the traditional route to drug licencing, they can be challenging to design, conduct and interpret. The Experimental Cancer Medicine Centres (ECMC) network, funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the Health Boards of Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland, formed a working group with relevant stakeholders from clinical trials units, the pharmaceutical industry, funding bodies, regulators and patients to identify the main challenges of CID trials. The working group generated ten consensus recommendations. These aim to improve the conduct, quality and acceptability of oncology CID trials in clinical research and, importantly, to expedite the process by which effective treatments can reach cancer patients.

Health diplomacy in action: The cancer legacy of the Good Friday Agreement.

2023 marks the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement, which led peace in Northern Ireland. As well as its impact on peace and reconciliation, the Good Friday Agreement has also had a lasting positive impact on cancer research and cancer care across the island of Ireland. Pursuant to the Good Friday Agreement, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed between the respective Departments of Health in Ireland, Northern Ireland and the US National Cancer Institute (NCI), giving rise to the Ireland - Northern Ireland - National Cancer Institute Cancer Consortium, an unparalleled tripartite agreement designed to nurture and develop linkages between cancer researchers, physicians and allied healthcare professionals across Ireland, Northern Ireland and the US, delivering world class research and better care for cancer patients on the island of Ireland and driving research and innovation in the US.

Utilization of volumetric magnetic resonance imaging for baseline and surveillance imaging in Neuro-oncology.

The acquisition of volumetric post-contrast MRI has clear advantages in the interpretation of neuro-oncology studies but has yet to find its way into routine clinical practice beyond planning scans for surgery and radiotherapy. This commentary briefly highlights the benefits of these techniques whilst dispelling some of the perceived disadvantages.

Brain tumor research in the United Kingdom: current perspective and future challenges. A strategy document from the NCRI Brain Tumor CSG.

The National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) is a partnership of charity and government research funders whose purpose is to improve health and quality of life by accelerating progress in cancer-related research through collaboration. Under this umbrella, the NCRI Brain Tumor Clinical Studies Group is focused on improving clinical outcomes for adult patients with brain and central nervous system tumors, including those with brain metastasis from other primary sites. This document discusses the current state of clinical brain tumor research in the United Kingdom and the challenges to increasing study and trial opportunities for patients. The clinical research priorities are defined along with a strategy to strengthen the existing brain tumor research network, improve access to tissue and imaging and to develop the future leadership for brain tumor research in the United Kingdom. This strategy document may serve as a framework for other organizations and countries.