The European Board of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine : the past, the present and the future [Europejska Rada Medycyny Fizykalnej i Rehabilitacji: przeszłość, teraźniejszość i perspektywy]

Right from the beginning of the development of the medical specialty of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) the harmonization of the fields of competence and the specialist training across Europe was always an important issue. The initially informal European collaboration was formalized in 1963 under the umbrella of the European Federation of PRM. The European Academy of PRM and the UEMS section of PRM started to contribute in 1969 and 1974 respectively. In 1991 the European Board of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EBPRM) was founded with the specific task of harmonizing education and training in PRM in Europe. The EBPRM has progressively defined curricula for the teaching of medical students and for the postgraduate education and training of PRM specialists. It also created a harmonized European certification system for medical PRM specialists, PRM trainers and PRM training sites. European teaching initiatives for PRM trainees (European PRM Schools) were promoted and learning material for PRM trainees and PRM specialists (e-learning, books and e-books, etc.) was created. For the future the Board will have to ensure that a minimal specific undergraduate curriculum on PRM based on a detailed European catalogue of learning objectives will be taught in all medical schools in Europe as a basis for the general medical practice. To stimulate the harmonization of national curricula, the existing postgraduate curriculum will be expanded by a syllabus of competencies related to PRM and a catalogue of learning objectives to be reached by all European PRM trainees. The integration of the certifying examination of the PRM Board into the national assessment procedures for PRM specialists will also have to be promoted.

American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of prostate cancer: update 2010.

In 2009, the American Cancer Society (ACS) Prostate Cancer Advisory Committee began the process of a complete update of recommendations for early prostate cancer detection. A series of systematic evidence reviews was conducted focusing on evidence related to the early detection of prostate cancer, test performance, harms of therapy for localized prostate cancer, and shared and informed decision making in prostate cancer screening. The results of the systematic reviews were evaluated by the ACS Prostate Cancer Advisory Committee, and deliberations about the evidence occurred at committee meetings and during conference calls. On the basis of the evidence and a consensus process, the Prostate Cancer Advisory Committee developed the guideline, and a writing committee drafted a guideline document that was circulated to the entire committee for review and revision. The document was then circulated to peer reviewers for feedback, and finally to the ACS Mission Outcomes Committee and the ACS Board of Directors for approval. The ACS recommends that asymptomatic men who have at least a 10-year life expectancy have an opportunity to make an informed decision with their health care provider about screening for prostate cancer after they receive information about the uncertainties, risks, and potential benefits associated with prostate cancer screening. Prostate cancer screening should not occur without an informed decision-making process. Men at average risk should receive this information beginning at age 50 years. Men in higher risk groups should receive this information before age 50 years. Men should either receive this information directly from their health care providers or be referred to reliable and culturally appropriate sources. Patient decision aids are helpful in preparing men to make a decision whether to be tested.

Randomised, multicentre, phase III, open-label study of alectinib vs crizotinib in treatment-naïve anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced NSCLC (ALEX study).

Background: In ∼5% of advanced NSCLC tumours, ALK tyrosine kinase is constitutively activated after translocation of ALK. ALK+ NSCLC was shown to be highly sensitive to the first approved ALK inhibitor, crizotinib. However, all pts eventually relapse on crizotinib mainly due to secondary ALK mutations/amplification or CNS metastases. Alectinib is a highly selective, potent, oral next-generation ALK inhibitor. Clinical phase II alectinib data in 46 crizotinib-naïve pts with ALK+ NSCLC reported an objective response rate (ORR) of 93.5% and a 1-year progression-free rate of 83% (95% CI: 68-92) (Inoue et al. J Thorac Oncol 2013). CNS activity was seen: of 14 pts with baseline brain metastasis, 11 had prior CNS radiation, 9 of these experienced CNS and systemic PFS of >12 months; of the 3 pts without prior CNS radiation, 2 were >15 months progression free. Trial design: Randomised, multicentre, phase III, open-label study in pts with treatment-naïve ALK+ advanced, recurrent, or metastatic NSCLC. All pts must provide pretreatment tumour tissue to confirm ALK rearrangement (by IHC). Pts (∼286 from ∼180 centres, ∼30 countries worldwide) will be randomised to alectinib (600mg oral bid, with food) or crizotinib (250mg oral bid, with/without food) until disease progression (PD), unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death. Stratification factors are: ECOG PS (0/1 vs 2), race (Asian vs non-Asian), baseline CNS metastases (yes vs no). Primary endpoint: PFS by investigators (RECIST v1.1). Secondary endpoints: PFS by Independent Review Committee (IRC); ORR; duration of response; OS; safety; pharmacokinetics; quality of life. Additionally, time to CNS progression will be evaluated (MRI) for the first time in a prospective randomised NSCLC trial as a secondary endpoint. Pts with isolated asymptomatic CNS progression will be allowed to continue treatment beyond documented progression until systemic PD and/or symptomatic CNS progression, according to investigator opinion. Time to CNS progression will be retrospectively assessed by the IRC using two separate criteria, RECIST and RANO. Further details: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02075840). Disclosure: T.S.K. Mok: Advisory boards: AZ, Roche, Eli Lilly, Merck Serono, Eisai, BMS, AVEO, Pfizer, Taiho, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, GSK Biologicals, Clovis Oncology, Amgen, Janssen, BioMarin; board of directors: IASLC; corporate sponsored research: AZ; M. Perol: Advisory boards: Roche; S.I. Ou: Consulting: Pfizer, Chugai, Genentech Speaker Bureau: Pfizer, Genentech, Boehringer Ingelheim; I. Bara: Employee: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd; V. Henschel: Employee and stock: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.; D.R. Camidge: Honoraria: Roche/Genentech. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Harmonization of training and assessment of medical specialists in physical and rehabilitation medicine across Europe - The contribution of the UEMS Board of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine

Background.- The main goals of the European Board of Physical and Rehabili-tation Medicine (EBPRM), founded in 1991 as the third speciality board of theUnion of European Medical Specialists (UEMS), are to harmonize pre-graduate,post-graduate and continuous medical education in physical and rehabilitationmedicine (PRM) all over Europe. The harmonization of curricula of the medi-cal specialities and the assessment of medical specialists has become one of thepriorities of the UEMS and its working groups to which the EBPRM contributes.Action.- The EBPRM will continue to promote a specific minimal undergraduatecurriculum on PRM including issues like disability, participation and handicapto be taught all over Europe as a basis for general medical practice. The EBPRMwill also expand the existing EBPRM postgraduate curriculum into a detailedcatalogue of learning objectives. This catalogue will serve as a tool to boostharmonization of the national curricula across Europe as well as to structurethe content of the MCQ examination. It would be a big step forward towardsharmonization of European PRM specialist training if an important number ofcountries would use the certifying MCQ examination of the Board as a part ofthe national assessments for PRM specialists.

Educational resources offered by the European Board of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EBPRM)

Background .- Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) is a very demanding medical speciality. To ensure high standard of research and care in PRM all across Europe, it is crucial to attract gifted trainees and offer them high quality education. At undergraduate level, many medical schools in Europe omit to offer teaching on disabled persons and on basic PRM knowledge. Thus PRM is hardly known to medical students. For postgraduate trainees access to evidence-based knowledge as well as teaching of research methodology specific to PRM, rehabilitation methodology, disability management and team building also need to be strengthened to increase the visibility of PRM. Action .- To address these issues the EBPRM proposes presently a specific undergraduate curriculum in PRM including the issues of disability, participation and handicap as a basis for general medical practice and postgraduate rehabilitation training. For PRM trainees many educational documents are now available on the EBPRM website. A growing number of educational sessions for PRM trainees take place during international and national PRM Congresses which can be accessed at low cost. Educational papers published regularly in European rehabilitation journals and European PRM Schools are offered free or at very low cost to trainees.