Analysing the attributes of Comprehensive Cancer Centres and Cancer Centres across Europe to identify key hallmarks

Kehrloesser, Sebastian; Oberst, Simon; Westerhuis, Willien; Wendler, Astrid; Wind, Anke; Blaauwgeers, Harriet; Burrion, Jean Benoit; Sæter, Gunnar; Gustafsson, Eva; Paoli, Paolo De; Lövey, József; Lombardo, Claudio; Philip, Thierry; Valeriola, Dominique de; Docter, Marjet M.; Boomsma, Femke; Saghatchian, Mahasti; Svoboda, Marek; Philip, I; Monetti, Francesco; Hummel, Henk; McVie, Gordon; Otter, Renée; Harten, Wim H. van

doi:10.1002/1878-0261.12950

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This results in high rates of intra/inter-observer variability ( 26–28 ). Comparing the diagnostic concordance in soft tissue and bone sarcoma, assessed at two comprehensive cancer centers, complete diagnostic consistency, partial agreement, and significant disagreement were achieved in 62.5, 26.1, and 11.4% of cases, respectively ( 29 , 30 ). More recently, a European multicenter study ( 26 ) addressing the diagnostic consistency between initial and second opinions echoed the above-mentioned findings, showing that full diagnostic concordance only slightly exceeding 55% of the cases considered (824/1463), while 35 and 8% of the cases were the object of only partial agreement or complete discordance, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indicators of clinical performance in monitoring soft tissue sarcoma management: a population-based perspective

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSoft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare malignancies which prognosis varies significantly by primary site, histological subtype, and tumor stage. Their low incidence, and the complexity of their clinico-pathological characteristics demand standardized, cancer-tailored diagnostics and therapies managed at high-volume, multidisciplinary care centers. This study evaluates the quality of STS management in north-east Italy (Veneto Region) through a list of ad hoc defined clinical indicators.MethodsThis population-based study concerns all incident cases of STS in 2018 (214 cases) recorded in the adult population censored by the Veneto’s regional Cancer Registry. Based on the international literature, a multidisciplinary working group of experts identified a set of indicators for monitoring the quality of diagnostic, therapeutic, and end-of-life clinical interventions. The quality of care was assessed by comparing the reference thresholds with the indicators’ values achieved in clinical practice.ResultsDiagnostic procedures showed poor adherence to the thresholds, with a low percentage of histological diagnoses validated by a second opinion. The indicators relating to the surgical treatment of superficial, small, low-grade STS, or of medium, high-grade STS of the head–neck, trunk, or limbs were consistent with the thresholds, while for intermediate, high-grade (large-sized, deep) and retroperitoneal STS they fell significantly below the thresholds.ConclusionA critical evaluation of the clinical indicators allowed to uncover the procedures needing corrective action. Monitoring clinical care indicators improves cancer care, confirms the importance of managing rare cancers at highly specialized, high-volume centers, and promotes the ethical sustainability of the healthcare system.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indicators of clinical performance in monitoring soft tissue sarcoma management: a population-based perspective

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is now increasing evidence in the literature of better patient outcomes for patients treated in CCCs (especially in the US [ 22 , 23 ]), although establishing precise cause and effect is clearly very complex. The OECI, through having 65 of the largest cancer research centers in its accreditation program (aside from those in Germany who have their own accreditation system) is finding that while clinical multidisciplinarity is well embedded, governance structures are often not optimal to guarantee the best integration of research and care [ 24 ]. As a neutral finding, based on numbers and impact of peer‐reviewed publications and numbers of clinical trials open, cancer research is concentrated in around 50 CCCs in Europe.…”

Section: Session 2: Current Situation and Examples Of National Struct...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…CCCs play a key role in cancer care and we recently concluded that patients treated in more research‐active centers have better outcomes [ 24 ]. While numerous accredited CCCs are present across Western Europe, in the CEE region currently only Hungary has a CCC, the National Institute of Oncology.…”

Section: Session 3: How To Exploit Innovation As the Driver To Reduce...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies to decrease inequalities in cancer therapeutics, care and prevention

Ringborg,

von Braun,

Celis

et al. 2024

Molecular Oncology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analyses of inequalities related to prevention and cancer therapeutics/care show disparities between countries with different economic standing, and within countries with high Gross Domestic Product. The development of basic, technological and biological research provides clinical and prevention opportunities that make their implementation into healthcare systems more complex, mainly due to the growth of Personalized/Precision Cancer Medicine (PCM). Initiatives like the US‐Cancer Moonshot and the EU‐Mission on Cancer and Europe´s Beating Cancer Plan are initiated to boost cancer prevention and therapeutics/care innovation and to mitigate present inequalities. The conference organised by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in collaboration with the European Academy of Cancer Sciences discussed the inequality problem, dependent on the economic status of a country, the increasing demands for infrastructure supportive of innovative research and its implementation in healthcare and prevention programs. Establishing translational research and a coherent cancer research continuum is still a challenge. Research has to cover the entire continuum from basic to outcomes research for clinical and prevention components. Comprehensive Cancer Centres (CCCs) are of critical importance for integrating research innovations to preclinical and early clinical research, as for ensuring state‐of‐the‐art patient care within healthcare systems. International collaborative networks between CCCs are necessary to reach the critical mass of infrastructures and patients for PCM research, and for introducing prevention modalities and new treatments effectively. Outcomes and health economics research are required to assess the cost‐effectiveness of new interventions, currently a missing element in the research portfolio. Data sharing and critical mass are essential for innovative research to develop PCM. Despite advances in cancer research, cancer incidence and prevalence is growing. Making cancer research infrastructures accessible for all patients, considering the increasing inequalities, requires science policy actions incentivising research aimed at prevention and cancer therapeutics/care with an increased focus on patients´ needs and cost‐effective healthcare.

show abstract

“…Recently published data from OECI [ 15 ] show that the median research output of CCCs is 4–5 times higher than other cancer centres; CCCs have four times as many clinical trials and eight times the number of Phase I studies. Though perhaps not surprising, these data show that CCCs are key to networks for translational research, clinical studies and outcomes research.…”

Section: Infrastructure For Translational Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Porto European Cancer Research Summit 2021

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key stakeholders from the cancer research continuum met in May 2021 at the European Cancer Research Summit in Porto to discuss priorities and specific action points required for the successful implementation of the European Cancer Mission and Europe's Beating Cancer Plan (EBCP). Speakers presented a unified view about the need to establish high‐quality, networked infrastructures to decrease cancer incidence, increase the cure rate, improve patient's survival and quality of life, and deal with research and care inequalities across the European Union (EU). These infrastructures, featuring Comprehensive Cancer Centres (CCCs) as key components, will integrate care, prevention and research across the entire cancer continuum to support the development of personalized/precision cancer medicine in Europe. The three pillars of the recommended European infrastructures – namely translational research, clinical/prevention trials and outcomes research – were pondered at length. Speakers addressing the future needs of translational research focused on the prospects of multiomics assisted preclinical research, progress in Molecular and Digital Pathology, immunotherapy, liquid biopsy and science data. The clinical/prevention trial session presented the requirements for next‐generation, multicentric trials entailing unified strategies for patient stratification, imaging, and biospecimen acquisition and storage. The third session highlighted the need for establishing outcomes research infrastructures to cover primary prevention, early detection, clinical effectiveness of innovations, health‐related quality‐of‐life assessment, survivorship research and health economics. An important outcome of the Summit was the presentation of the Porto Declaration, which called for a collective and committed action throughout Europe to develop the cancer research infrastructures indispensable for fostering innovation and decreasing inequalities within and between member states. Moreover, the Summit guidelines will assist decision making in the context of a unique EU‐wide cancer initiative that, if expertly implemented, will decrease the cancer death toll and improve the quality of life of those confronted with cancer, and this is carried out at an affordable cost.

show abstract

Analysing the attributes of Comprehensive Cancer Centres and Cancer Centres across Europe to identify key hallmarks

Cited by 10 publications

References 25 publications

Indicators of clinical performance in monitoring soft tissue sarcoma management: a population-based perspective

Indicators of clinical performance in monitoring soft tissue sarcoma management: a population-based perspective

Strategies to decrease inequalities in cancer therapeutics, care and prevention

The Porto European Cancer Research Summit 2021

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About