Into EurAsia: Monitoring the EU’s Central Asia Strategy - Executive Summary and Recommendations. EUCAM Policy Brief No. 13, February 2010

The EU’s Central Asia Strategy was introduced in 2007 in order to upgrade the EU’s cooperation with the five states of the region. One of the objectives of EUCAM was to assess and monitor the implementation of the EU’s Central Asia Strategy. This policy brief serves as a summary of the EUCAM Report Into EurAsia - Monitoring the EU's Central Asia Strategy, by Michael Emerson, Jos Boonstra, Nafisa Hasanova, Marlene Laruelle and Sebastien Peyrouse.

Spotlight-Europe - March 2015: The EU neighbourhood in shambles. Some recommendations for a new European neighbourhood strategy

Executive Summary. An “arc of instability” stretching from the European Union’s (EU) eastern borders down to the Mediterranean basin has undermined its flagship European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP). This policy was designed to deliver prosperity, stability and democracy to countries surrounding the EU. It has manifestly failed and needs to be radically rethought. Starting with a tabula rasa, the EU should abandon the very concept of a heterogeneous “neighbourhood” in the face of glaring differences among the 16 countries affected, not least because some are uninterested in reform; others may even be failed states. EU member states are themselves pursuing divergent interests and goals. A fundamental review of the ENP should lead to more differentiated, targeted measures to promote “transformational change” within neighbouring states ready to accept it. The EU should offer revised incentives such as participation within the proposed “energy union” or freer trade designed to aid local economic development. It should embrace a wider range of actors, including civil society, promote entrepreneurship and help reform countries’ police and military forces. The review should reassert common EU institutions in negotiating and working with neighbours and give them a central role in preventing and resolving conflicts as well as promoting democratic reform and economic stability. This revised ENP should help underpin the EU’s efforts to forge a genuine Common Foreign and Security Policy.

Ensuring the EU’s future as a security provider Five recommendations for the June European Council’s session on CSDP. EPC Commentary, 23 June 2015

On 25 and 26 June 2015, the Heads of State or Government of the European Union (EU) will convene to discuss the implementation of their Conclusions on the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) from December 2013. A substantial and frank debate among EU leaders is urgently needed in order to forge a lasting and credible vision for CSDP.

Second St. Gallen European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Gastrointestinal Cancer Conference: consensus recommendations on controversial issues in the primary treatment of rectal cancer

Primary treatment of rectal cancer was the focus of the second St. Gallen European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Gastrointestinal Cancer Conference. In the context of the conference, a multidisciplinary international expert panel discussed and voted on controversial issues which could not be easily answered using published evidence. Main topics included optimal pretherapeutic imaging, indication and type of neoadjuvant treatment, and the treatment strategies in advanced tumours. Here we report the key recommendations and summarise the related evidence. The treatment strategy for localised rectal cancer varies from local excision in early tumours to neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) in combination with extended surgery in locally advanced disease. Optimal pretherapeutic staging is a key to any treatment decision. The panel recommended magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or MRI + endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) as mandatory staging modalities, except for early T1 cancers with an option for local excision, where EUS in addition to MRI was considered to be most important because of its superior near-field resolution. Primary surgery with total mesorectal excision was recommended by most panellists for some early tumours with limited risk of recurrence (i.e. cT1-2 or cT3a N0 with clear mesorectal fascia on MRI and clearly above the levator muscles), whereas all other stages were considered for multimodal treatment. The consensus panel recommended long-course RCT over short-course radiotherapy for most clinical situations where neoadjuvant treatment is indicated, with the exception of T3a/b N0 tumours where short-course radiotherapy or even no neoadjuvant therapy were regarded to be an option. In patients with potentially resectable tumours and synchronous liver metastases, most panel members did not see an indication to start with classical fluoropyrimidine-based RCT but rather favoured preoperative short-course radiotherapy with systemic combination chemotherapy or alternatively a liver-first resection approach in resectable metastases, which both allow optimal systemic therapy for the metastatic disease. In general, proper patient selection and discussion in an experienced multidisciplinary team was considered as crucial component of care.

Recommendations for Genetic Testing to Reduce the Incidence of Anthracycline-induced Cardiotoxicity

AIM Anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity (ACT) occurs in 57% of treated patients and remains an important limitation of anthracycline-based chemotherapy. In various genetic association studies, potential genetic risk markers for ACT have been identified. Therefore, we developed evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for pharmacogenomic testing to further individualize therapy based on ACT risk. METHODS We followed a standard guideline development process; including a systematic literature search, evidence synthesis and critical appraisal, and the development of clinical practice recommendations with an international expert group. RESULTS RARG rs2229774, SLC28A3 rs7853758 and UGT1A6 rs17863783 variants currently have the strongest and the most consistent evidence for association with ACT. Genetic variants in ABCC1, ABCC2, ABCC5, ABCB1, ABCB4, CBR3, RAC2, NCF4, CYBA, GSTP1, CAT, SULT2B1, POR, HAS3, SLC22A7, SCL22A17, HFE and NOS3 have also been associated with ACT, but require additional validation. We recommend pharmacogenomic testing for the RARG rs2229774 (S427L), SLC28A3 rs7853758 (L461L) and UGT1A6*4 rs17863783 (V209V) variants in childhood cancer patients with an indication for doxorubicin or daunorubicin therapy (Level B - moderate). Based on an overall risk stratification, taking into account genetic and clinical risk factors, we recommend a number of management options including increased frequency of echocardiogram monitoring, follow-up, as well as therapeutic options within the current standard of clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS Existing evidence demonstrates that genetic factors have the potential to improve the discrimination between individuals at higher and lower risk of ACT. Genetic testing may therefore support both patient care decisions and evidence development for an improved prevention of ACT.

Efficacy of an Internet-based, individually tailored smoking cessation program: A randomized trial

Introduction: Self-help computer-based programs are easily accessible and cost-effective interventions with a great recruitment potential. However, each program is different and results of meta-analyses may not apply to each new program; therefore, evaluations of new programs are warranted. The aim of this study was to assess the marginal efficacy of a computer-based, individually tailored program (the Coach) over and above the use of a comprehensive Internet smoking cessation website. Methods: A two-group randomized controlled trial was conducted. The control group only accessed the website, whereas the intervention group received the Coach in addition. Follow-up was conducted by e-mail after three and six months (self-administrated questionnaires). Of 1120 participants, 579 (51.7%) responded after three months and 436 (38.9%) after six months. The primary outcome was self-reported smoking abstinence over four weeks. Results: Counting dropouts as smokers, there were no statistically significant differences between intervention and control groups in smoking cessation rates after three months (20.2% vs. 17.5%, p¼0.25, odds ratio (OR)¼1.20) and six months (17% vs. 15.5%, p¼0.52, OR¼1.12). Excluding dropouts from the analysis, there were statistically significant differences after three months (42% vs. 31.6%, p¼0.01, OR¼1.57), but not after six months (46.1% vs. 37.8%, p¼0.081, OR¼1.41). The program also significantly increased motivation to quit after three months and self-efficacy after three and six months. Discussion: An individually tailored program delivered via the Internet and by e-mail in addition to a smoking cessation website did not significantly increase smoking cessation rates, but it increased motivation to quit and self-efficacy.