Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where P. J. Tanis is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by P. J. Tanis.


European Journal of Cancer | 2014

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

Cornelis J. H. van de Velde; P.G. Boelens; Josep M. Borràs; Jan Willem Coebergh; A. Cervantes; Lennart Blomqvist; Regina G. H. Beets-Tan; Colette B.M. van den Broek; Gina Brown; Eric Van Cutsem; Eloy Espín; Karin Haustermans; Bengt Glimelius; Lene Hjerrild Iversen; J. Han van Krieken; Corrie A.M. Marijnen; Geoffrey Henning; Jola Gore-Booth; E. Meldolesi; Pawel Mroczkowski; Iris D. Nagtegaal; Peter Naredi; Hector Ortiz; Lars Påhlman; P. Quirke; Claus Rödel; Arnaud Roth; Harm Rutten; Hans J. Schmoll; J. J. Smith

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.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2014

Self-expandable metal stents for obstructing colonic and extracolonic cancer: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline

Jeanin E. van Hooft; Emo E. van Halsema; Geoffroy Vanbiervliet; Regina G. H. Beets-Tan; John M. DeWitt; Fergal Donnellan; Jean-Marc Dumonceau; Rob Glynne-Jones; Cesare Hassan; Javier Jiménez-Pérez; Søren Meisner; V. Raman Muthusamy; Michael C. Parker; Jean Marc Regimbeau; Charles Sabbagh; Jayesh Sagar; P. J. Tanis; Jo Vandervoort; George Webster; G. Manes; Marc Barthet; Alessandro Repici

This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). This Guideline was also reviewed and endorsed by the Governing Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. ESGE guidelines represent a consensus of best practice based on the available evidence at the time of preparation. They may not apply in all situations and should be interpreted in the light of specific clinical situations and resource availability. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of these statements, and revision may be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance to these recommendations. ESGE guidelines are intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. They are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment


British Journal of Surgery | 2013

Optimal time interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for rectal cancer

D. A. M. Sloothaak; D. E. Geijsen; N.J. van Leersum; Cornelis J. A. Punt; Christianne J. Buskens; Willem A. Bemelman; P. J. Tanis

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has been proven to increase local control in rectal cancer, but the optimal interval between CRT and surgery is still unclear. The purpose of this study was to analyse the influence of variations in clinical practice regarding timing of surgery on pathological response at a population level.


British Journal of Surgery | 2009

Systematic review of pancreatic surgery for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

P. J. Tanis; N. A. van der Gaag; O.R.C. Busch; T.M. van Gulik; D. J. Gouma

This study examined the clinical outcome of patients with pancreatic metastases from renal cell carcinoma (RCC).


British Journal of Surgery | 2014

Oncological outcome of malignant colonic obstruction in the Dutch Stent-In 2 trial

D. A. M. Sloothaak; M. W. van den Berg; Marcel G. W. Dijkgraaf; P. Fockens; P. J. Tanis; J. E. van Hooft; W. A. Bemelman

The Stent‐In 2 trial randomized patients with malignant colonic obstruction to emergency surgery or stent placement as a bridge to elective surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the oncological outcomes.


BMC Surgery | 2011

The CARTS study: Chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer in the distal rectum followed by organ-sparing transanal endoscopic microsurgery

G.M.J. Bökkerink; Eelco J. R. de Graaf; Cornelis J. A. Punt; Iris D. Nagtegaal; H.J.T. Rutten; Joost J. Nuyttens; Esther van Meerten; Pascal G. Doornebosch; P. J. Tanis; Eric J. Derksen; Roy S. Dwarkasing; Corrie A.M. Marijnen; Annemieke Cats; Rob A. E. M. Tollenaar; Ignace H. de Hingh; Harm Rutten; George P. van der Schelling; Albert J. ten Tije; Jeroen W. A. Leijtens; Guido Lammering; Geerard L. Beets; Theo J. Aufenacker; Apollo Pronk; Eric R. Manusama; Christiaan Hoff; A.J.A. Bremers; Cornelelis Verhoef; Johannes H. W. de Wilt

BackgroundThe CARTS study is a multicenter feasibility study, investigating the role of rectum saving surgery for distal rectal cancer.Methods/DesignPatients with a clinical T1-3 N0 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma below 10 cm from the anal verge will receive neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (25 fractions of 2 Gy with concurrent capecitabine). Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) will be performed 8 - 10 weeks after the end of the preoperative treatment depending on the clinical response.Primary objective is to determine the number of patients with a (near) complete pathological response after chemoradiation therapy and TEM. Secondary objectives are the local recurrence rate and quality of life after this combined therapeutic modality. A three-step analysis will be performed after 20, 33 and 55 patients to ensure the feasibility of this treatment protocol.DiscussionThe CARTS-study is one of the first prospective multicentre trials to investigate the role of a rectum saving treatment modality using chemoradiation therapy and local excision. The CARTS study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01273051)


European Journal of Cancer | 2013

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

Cornelis J. H. van de Velde; Cynthia Aristei; P.G. Boelens; Regina G. H. Beets-Tan; Lennart Blomqvist; Josep M. Borràs; Colette B.M. van den Broek; Gina Brown; Jan Willem Coebergh; Eric Van Cutsem; Eloy Espín; Jola Gore-Booth; Bengt Glimelius; Karin Haustermans; Geoffrey Henning; Lene Hjerrild Iversen; J. Han van Krieken; Corrie A.M. Marijnen; Pawel Mroczkowski; Iris D. Nagtegaal; Peter Naredi; Hector Ortiz; Lars Påhlman; P. Quirke; Claus Rödel; Arnaud Roth; Harm Rutten; Hans J. Schmoll; J. J. Smith; P. J. Tanis

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.


British Journal of Surgery | 2013

Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open colectomy with end ileostomy for non-toxic colitis.

Sanne A. L. Bartels; T. J. Gardenbroek; D. T. Ubbink; Christianne J. Buskens; P. J. Tanis; W. A. Bemelman

This review compared short‐term outcomes after laparoscopic versus open subtotal colectomy for acute, colitis medically refractory.


Ejso | 2014

Experts reviews of the multidisciplinary consensus conference colon and rectal cancer 2012: Science, opinions and experiences from the experts of surgery

C.J.H. van de Velde; P.G. Boelens; P. J. Tanis; Eloy Espín; Pawel Mroczkowski; Peter Naredi; Lars Påhlman; Hector Ortiz; H.J.T. Rutten; A.J. Breugom; J. J. Smith; A. Wibe; T. Wiggers; Vincenzo Valentini

The first multidisciplinary consensus conference on colon and rectal cancer was held in December 2012, achieving a majority of consensus for diagnostic and treatment decisions using the Delphi Method. This article will give a critical appraisal of the topics discussed during the meeting and in the consensus document by well-known leaders in surgery that were involved in this multidisciplinary consensus process. Scientific evidence, experience and opinions are collected to support multidisciplinary teams (MDT) with arguments for medical decision-making in diagnosis, staging and treatment strategies for patients with colon or rectal cancer. Surgery is the cornerstone of curative treatment for colon and rectal cancer. Standardizing treatment is an effective instrument to improve outcome of multidisciplinary cancer care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. In this article, a review of the following focuses; Perioperative care, age and colorectal surgery, obstructive colorectal cancer, stenting, surgical anatomical considerations, total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery and training, surgical considerations for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and local recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), surgery in stage IV colorectal cancer, definitions of quality of surgery, transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), laparoscopic colon and rectal surgery, preoperative radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy, and how about functional outcome after surgery?


British Journal of Surgery | 2014

Bridge-to-surgery stent placement versus emergency surgery for acute malignant colonic obstruction

M. W. van den Berg; D. A. M. Sloothaak; Marcel G. W. Dijkgraaf; E.S. van der Zaag; W. A. Bemelman; P. J. Tanis; Robbert J. I. Bosker; P. Fockens; F. ter Borg; J. E. van Hooft

Endoscopic self‐expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to surgery is an option for acute malignant colonic obstruction. There is ongoing debate regarding the superiority and oncological safety of SEMS placement compared with emergency surgery. This retrospective study aimed to compare outcomes of these treatment approaches.

Collaboration


Dive into the P. J. Tanis's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Corrie A.M. Marijnen

Leiden University Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Iris D. Nagtegaal

Radboud University Nijmegen

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jacobus W. A. Burger

Erasmus University Rotterdam

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge