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.

A new multidisciplinary home care telemedicine system to monitor stable chronic human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients: a randomized study.

Background: Antiretroviral therapy has changed the natural history of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in developed countries, where it has become a chronic disease. This clinical scenario requires a new approach to simplify follow-up appointments and facilitate access to healthcare professionals. Methodology: We developed a new internet-based home care model covering the entire management of chronic HIV-infected patients. This was called Virtual Hospital. We report the results of a prospective randomised study performed over two years, comparing standard care received by HIV-infected patients with Virtual Hospital care. HIV-infected patients with access to a computer and broadband were randomised to be monitored either through Virtual Hospital (Arm I) or through standard care at the day hospital (Arm II). After one year of follow up, patients switched their care to the other arm. Virtual Hospital offered four main services: Virtual Consultations, Telepharmacy, Virtual Library and Virtual Community. A technical and clinical evaluation of Virtual Hospital was carried out. Findings: Of the 83 randomised patients, 42 were monitored during the first year through Virtual Hospital (Arm I) and 41 through standard care (Arm II). Baseline characteristics of patients were similar in the two arms. The level of technical satisfaction with the virtual system was high: 85% of patients considered that Virtual Hospital improved their access to clinical data and they felt comfortable with the videoconference system. Neither clinical parameters [level of CD4 + T lymphocytes, proportion of patients with an undetectable level of viral load (p = 0.21) and compliance levels 90% (p = 0.58)] nor the evaluation of quality of life or psychological questionnaires changed significantly between the two types of care. Conclusions: Virtual Hospital is a feasible and safe tool for the multidisciplinary home care of chronic HIV patients. Telemedicine should be considered as an appropriate support service for the management of chronic HIV infection.

Estimation of age- and stage-specific Catalan breast cancer survival functions using US and Catalan survival data

During the last part of the 1990s the chance of surviving breast cancer increased. Changes in survival functions reflect a mixture of effects. Both, the introduction of adjuvant treatments and early screening with mammography played a role in the decline in mortality. Evaluating the contribution of these interventions using mathematical models requires survival functions before and after their introduction. Furthermore, required survival functions may be different by age groups and are related to disease stage at diagnosis. Sometimes detailed information is not available, as was the case for the region of Catalonia (Spain). Then one may derive the functions using information from other geographical areas. This work presents the methodology used to estimate age- and stage-specific Catalan breast cancer survival functions from scarce Catalan survival data by adapting the age- and stage-specific US functions. Methods: Cubic splines were used to smooth data and obtain continuous hazard rate functions. After, we fitted a Poisson model to derive hazard ratios. The model included time as a covariate. Then the hazard ratios were applied to US survival functions detailed by age and stage to obtain Catalan estimations. Results: We started estimating the hazard ratios for Catalonia versus the USA before and after the introduction of screening. The hazard ratios were then multiplied by the age- and stage-specific breast cancer hazard rates from the USA to obtain the Catalan hazard rates. We also compared breast cancer survival in Catalonia and the USA in two time periods, before cancer control interventions (USA 1975–79, Catalonia 1980–89) and after (USA and Catalonia 1990–2001). Survival in Catalonia in the 1980–89 period was worse than in the USA during 1975–79, but the differences disappeared in 1990–2001. Conclusion: Our results suggest that access to better treatments and quality of care contributed to large improvements in survival in Catalonia. On the other hand, we obtained detailed breast cancer survival functions that will be used for modeling the effect of screening and adjuvant treatments in Catalonia

The Child Protection System from the Perspective of Young People: Messages from 3 Studies

This article reports findings and reflections based on the results of three different research projects conducted between 2008 and 2013 and focusing on the perspective of young care leavers in Spain. The overall aim was to examine these young people’s perceptions and evaluations of how they were treated while in the public care system, mainly residential care. Reviewing these qualitative studies, the most common and relevant issues highlighted by young people were related to the following themes: (a) entering care; (b) stability and emotional bonds in care; (c) education; (d) friends; (e) labelling, stigmatization, rights and opportunities; (f) autonomy and responsibility versus overprotection; (g) contact with parents, siblings and extended family; (h) maltreatment in care; and (i) leaving care. One of the main elements used in their assessments was comparison (i) between their previous situation within their birth family and the quality of care experienced in the residential home; and (ii) between what these young people commonly refer to as “normal children” and children in care. Recommendations deriving from their advice and opinions are also debated