E. Meldolesi

EURECCA colorectal: Multidisciplinary management: European consensus conference colon & rectum

BACKGROUND Care for patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in the last 20years; however considerable variation still exists in cancer management and outcome between European countries. Large variation is also apparent between national guidelines and patterns of cancer care in Europe. Therefore, EURECCA, which is the acronym of European Registration of Cancer Care, is aiming at defining core treatment strategies and developing a European audit structure in order to improve the quality of care for all patients with colon and rectal cancer. In December 2012, the first multidisciplinary consensus conference about cancer of the colon and rectum was held. The expert panel consisted of representatives of European scientific organisations involved in cancer care of patients with colon and rectal cancer and representatives of national colorectal registries. METHODS The expert panel had delegates of the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society of Pathology (ESP), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS) and the European Colorectal Cancer Patient Organisation (EuropaColon), as well as delegates from national registries or audits. Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. For the Delphi process, multidisciplinary experts were invited to comment and vote three web-based online voting rounds and to lecture on the subjects during the meeting (13th-15th December 2012). The sentences in the consensus document were available during the meeting and a televoting round during the conference by all participants was performed. This manuscript covers all sentences of the consensus document with the result of the voting. The consensus document represents sections on diagnostics, pathology, surgery, medical oncology, radiotherapy, and follow-up where applicable for treatment of colon cancer, rectal cancer and metastatic colorectal disease separately. Moreover, evidence based algorithms for diagnostics and treatment were composed which were also submitted to the Delphi process. RESULTS The total number of the voted sentences was 465. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the experts. Of the 465 sentences, 84% achieved large consensus, 6% achieved moderate consensus, and 7% resulted in minimum consensus. Only 3% was disagreed by more than 50% of the members. CONCLUSIONS Multidisciplinary consensus on key diagnostic and treatment issues for colon and rectal cancer management using the Delphi method was successful. This consensus document embodies the expertise of professionals from all disciplines involved in the care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. Diagnostic and treatment algorithms were developed to implement the current evidence and to define core treatment guidance for multidisciplinary team management of colon and rectal cancer throughout Europe.

EURECCA colorectal: Multidisciplinary Mission statement on better care for patients with colon and rectal cancer in Europe

BACKGROUND Care for patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in the last twenty years however still considerable variation exists in cancer management and outcome between European countries. Therefore, EURECCA, which is the acronym of European Registration of cancer care, is aiming at defining core treatment strategies and developing a European audit structure in order to improve the quality of care for all patients with colon and rectal cancer. In December 2012 the first multidisciplinary consensus conference about colon and rectum was held looking for multidisciplinary consensus. The expert panel consisted of representatives of European scientific organisations involved in cancer care of patients with colon and rectal cancer and representatives of national colorectal registries. METHODS The expert panel had delegates of the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society of Pathology (ESP), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS) and the European Colorectal Cancer Patient Organisation (EuropaColon), as well as delegates from national registries or audits. Experts commented and voted on the two web-based online voting rounds before the meeting (between 4th and 25th October and between the 20th November and 3rd December 2012) as well as one online round after the meeting (4th-20th March 2013) and were invited to lecture on the subjects during the meeting (13th-15th December 2012). The sentences in the consensus document were available during the meeting and a televoting round during the conference by all participants was performed. All sentences that were voted on are available on the EURECCA website www.canceraudit.eu. The consensus document was divided in sections describing evidence based algorithms of diagnostics, pathology, surgery, medical oncology, radiotherapy, and follow-up where applicable for treatment of colon cancer, rectal cancer and stage IV separately. Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. RESULTS The total number of the voted sentences was 465. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the experts. Of the 465 sentences, 84% achieved large consensus, 6% achieved moderate consensus, and 7% resulted in minimum consensus. Only 3% was disagreed by more than 50% of the members. CONCLUSIONS It is feasible to achieve European Consensus on key diagnostic and treatment issues using the Delphi method. This consensus embodies the expertise of professionals from all disciplines involved in the care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. Diagnostic and treatment algorithms were developed to implement the current evidence and to define core treatment guidance for multidisciplinary team management of colon and rectal cancer throughout Europe.

International data-sharing for radiotherapy research: an open-source based infrastructure for multicentric clinical data mining.

Extensive, multifactorial data sharing is a crucial prerequisite for current and future (radiotherapy) research. However, the cost, time and effort to achieve this are often a roadblock. We present an open-source based data-sharing infrastructure between two radiotherapy departments, allowing seamless exchange of de-identified, automatically translated clinical and biomedical treatment data.

An umbrella protocol for standardized data collection (SDC) in rectal cancer: A prospective uniform naming and procedure convention to support personalized medicine

Predictive models allow treating physicians to deliver tailored treatment moving from prescription by consensus to prescription by numbers. The main features of an umbrella protocol for standardizing data and procedures to create a consistent dataset useful to obtain a trustful analysis for a Decision Support System for rectal cancer are reported.

Squamous cell carcinoma of the rectum: The treatment paradigm

PURPOSE This study was planned to clarify the optimal treatment for squamous cell carcinoma of the rectum, an histological entity extremely rare. METHODS Ten patients with histologically proven squamous cell carcinoma of the rectum were treated with concomitant radiochemotherapy. Radiation therapy was delivered with a 3Dconformational multiple field technique to a dose ranging from 45 to 76.5 Gy, with 6-15 MV energy photons. Chemotherapy consisted of an antimetabolite drug in association with mitomycin C or oxaliplatin. Overall survival and disease free survival were considered in months from the end of the concomitant treatment. RESULTS All patients completed programmed radiochemotherapy treatment but two patients were excluded to the analysis. Six patients (75%) presented negative biopsy 6 months after the end of radiochemotherapy. Seven patients (87.5%) showed a tumour regression after initial treatment. Only 1 patient underwent salvage surgery. Considering a mean follow-up of 41.75 months, 7 patients are still disease free survivors. Only 1 patient developed local recurrence at 6 months and he died 14 months after abdomino-perineal resection. CONCLUSION Primary radio chemotherapy, with a curative intent, could be considered the treatment modality of choice for squamous carcinoma of the rectum.

Prospective validation of pathologic complete response models in rectal cancer: transferability and reproducibility

Purpose Multiple models have been developed to predict pathologic complete response (pCR) in locally advanced rectal cancer patients. Unfortunately, validation of these models normally omit the implications of cohort differences on prediction model performance. In this work, we will perform a prospective validation of three pCR models, including information whether this validation will target transferability or reproducibility (cohort differences) of the given models. Methods We applied a novel methodology, the cohort differences model, to predict whether a patient belongs to the training or to the validation cohort. If the cohort differences model performs well, it would suggest a large difference in cohort characteristics meaning we would validate the transferability of the model rather than reproducibility. We tested our method in a prospective validation of three existing models for pCR prediction in 154 patients. Results Our results showed a large difference between training and validation cohort for one of the three tested models [Area under the Receiver Operating Curve (AUC) cohort differences model: 0.85], signaling the validation leans towards transferability. Two out of three models had a lower AUC for validation (0.66 and 0.58), one model showed a higher AUC in the validation cohort (0.70). Discussion We have successfully applied a new methodology in the validation of three prediction models, which allows us to indicate if a validation targeted transferability (large differences between training/validation cohort) or reproducibility (small cohort differences).

EURECCA colorectal : Multidisciplinary management: European consensus conference colon a rectum

BACKGROUND Care for patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in the last 20years; however considerable variation still exists in cancer management and outcome between European countries. Large variation is also apparent between national guidelines and patterns of cancer care in Europe. Therefore, EURECCA, which is the acronym of European Registration of Cancer Care, is aiming at defining core treatment strategies and developing a European audit structure in order to improve the quality of care for all patients with colon and rectal cancer. In December 2012, the first multidisciplinary consensus conference about cancer of the colon and rectum was held. The expert panel consisted of representatives of European scientific organisations involved in cancer care of patients with colon and rectal cancer and representatives of national colorectal registries. METHODS The expert panel had delegates of the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society of Pathology (ESP), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS) and the European Colorectal Cancer Patient Organisation (EuropaColon), as well as delegates from national registries or audits. Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. For the Delphi process, multidisciplinary experts were invited to comment and vote three web-based online voting rounds and to lecture on the subjects during the meeting (13th-15th December 2012). The sentences in the consensus document were available during the meeting and a televoting round during the conference by all participants was performed. This manuscript covers all sentences of the consensus document with the result of the voting. The consensus document represents sections on diagnostics, pathology, surgery, medical oncology, radiotherapy, and follow-up where applicable for treatment of colon cancer, rectal cancer and metastatic colorectal disease separately. Moreover, evidence based algorithms for diagnostics and treatment were composed which were also submitted to the Delphi process. RESULTS The total number of the voted sentences was 465. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the experts. Of the 465 sentences, 84% achieved large consensus, 6% achieved moderate consensus, and 7% resulted in minimum consensus. Only 3% was disagreed by more than 50% of the members. CONCLUSIONS Multidisciplinary consensus on key diagnostic and treatment issues for colon and rectal cancer management using the Delphi method was successful. This consensus document embodies the expertise of professionals from all disciplines involved in the care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. Diagnostic and treatment algorithms were developed to implement the current evidence and to define core treatment guidance for multidisciplinary team management of colon and rectal cancer throughout Europe.

How Can Radiomics Improve Clinical Choices

Over the past decade, we have witnessed a great expansion of the use and the role of medical imaging technologies in clinical oncology from a primarily diagnostic, qualitative tool to include a central role in the context of individualized medicine, with a dominant quantitative value [1].

How Do We Collect Data in the Perspective of New Personalize Medicine Tools in Rectal Cancer

During the last two decades, we have witnessed a remarkable transformation of the internal medicine concept with the establishment of the new idea of the personalized medicine. Starting from an inflexible “one size fits all similar group” approach, where the same treatment is used for the same kind of tumor, clinical practice is moving toward a personalized medicine with an essential role of decision support systems (DSS). Besides the widely accepted and daily used clinical guidelines, results of thousands of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, or meta-analyses conducted in the last 15 years, population-based observational studies are progressively emerging as a complementary form of research, often named “Rapid Learning Health Care” (RLHC) [1–3]. The long time requested to evaluate new drugs or treatment strategies in a RCT, the possibility to enroll only selective subgroups of general population, and the high heterogeneity (in terms of outcomes, methodology, patient’s characteristics, data storing systems, etc.) between different studies justify the key role of observational studies in ensuring not only if the practice has changed appropriately during the time but also if the result of clinical trials translates into tangible benefits in the general population [1].

PRODIGE: PRediction models in prOstate cancer for personalized meDIcine challenGE

AIM Identifying the best care for a patient can be extremely challenging. To support the creation of multifactorial Decision Support Systems (DSSs), we propose an Umbrella Protocol, focusing on prostate cancer. MATERIALS & METHODS The PRODIGE project consisted of a workflow for standardizing data, and procedures, to create a consistent dataset useful to elaborate DSSs. Techniques from classical statistics and machine learning will be adopted. The general protocol accepted by our Ethical Committee can be downloaded from cancerdata.org . RESULTS A standardized knowledge sharing process has been implemented by using a semi-formal ontology for the representation of relevant clinical variables. CONCLUSION The development of DSSs, based on standardized knowledge, could be a tool to achieve a personalized decision-making.