| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Beyer, J., et al.
(författare)
-
Maintaining success, reducing treatment burden, focusing on survivorship: highlights from the third European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1569-8041 .- 0923-7534. ; 24:4, s. 878-888
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In November 2011, the Third European Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Germ-Cell Cancer (GCC) was held in Berlin, Germany. This third conference followed similar meetings in 2003 (Essen, Germany) and 2006 (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) [Schmoll H-J, Souchon R, Krege S et al. European consensus on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG). Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1377-1399; Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R et al. European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part I. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 478-496; Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R et al. European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part II. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 497-513]. A panel of 56 of 60 invited GCC experts from all across Europe discussed all aspects on diagnosis and treatment of GCC, with a particular focus on acute and late toxic effects as well as on survivorship issues. The panel consisted of oncologists, urologic surgeons, radiooncologists, pathologists and basic scientists, who are all actively involved in care of GCC patients. Panelists were chosen based on the publication activity in recent years. Before the meeting, panelists were asked to review the literature published since 2006 in 20 major areas concerning all aspects of diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of GCC patients, and to prepare an updated version of the previous recommendations to be discussed at the conference. In addition, similar to 50 E-vote questions were drafted and presented at the conference to address the most controversial areas for a poll of expert opinions. Here, we present the main recommendations and controversies of this meeting. The votes of the panelists are added as online supplements.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Daugaard, C. L., et al.
(författare)
-
The effects of weight loss on imaging outcomes in osteoarthritis of the hip or knee in people who are overweight or obese : a systematic review
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. - : Elsevier BV. - 1063-4584. ; 28:1, s. 10-21
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To evaluate the structural effects of weight loss on hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to summarize which structural joint pathologies have been examined and the evidence for the outcome measurement instruments applied. Design: Based on a pre-specified protocol (available: PROSPERO CRD42017065263), we conducted a systematic search of the bibliographic databases, Medline, Embase and Web of Science identifying longitudinal articles reporting the effects of weight loss on structural imaging outcomes in OA of the hip or knee in people who are overweight or obese. Results: From 1625 potentially eligible records, 14 articles (from 6 cohorts) were included. 2 cohorts were derived from RCTs. Evaluated pathologies were: articular cartilage (n = 7), joint space width (n = 3), bone marrow lesions (n = 5), synovitis (n = 2), effusion (n = 1), meniscus (n = 3), bone marrow density (n = 1) and infrapatellar fat pad (IPFP; n = 2). Cartilage showed conflicting results when evaluating cartilage thickness by direct thickness measurements. Compositional dGEMRIC and T2 mapping measures in early knee OA showed trends towards reduced cartilage degeneration. Joint space width on conventional radiographs showed no change. Weight loss reduced the size of the IPFP. Synovitis and effusion were not affected. Following weight loss DXA showed bone loss at the hip. Conclusion: We did not find consistent evidence of the effects of weight loss on OA structural pathology in people who are overweight or obese. There is a need to achieve consensus on which structural pathologies and measurements to apply in weight loss and OA research.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
