| 1. |
- Stacchiotti, S., et al.
(författare)
-
Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma, an ultra-rare cancer : a consensus paper from the community of experts
- 2021
-
Ingår i: ESMO Open. - : Elsevier BV. - 2059-7029. ; 6:3
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is an ultra-rare, translocated, vascular sarcoma. EHE clinical behavior is variable, ranging from that of a low-grade malignancy to that of a high-grade sarcoma and it is marked by a high propensity for systemic involvement. No active systemic agents are currently approved specifically for EHE, which is typically refractory to the antitumor drugs used in sarcomas. The degree of uncertainty in selecting the most appropriate therapy for EHE patients and the lack of guidelines on the clinical management of the disease make the adoption of new treatments inconsistent across the world, resulting in suboptimal outcomes for many EHE patients. To address the shortcoming, a global consensus meeting was organized in December 2020 under the umbrella of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) involving >80 experts from several disciplines from Europe, North America and Asia, together with a patient representative from the EHE Group, a global, disease-specific patient advocacy group, and Sarcoma Patient EuroNet (SPAEN). The meeting was aimed at defining, by consensus, evidence-based best practices for the optimal approach to primary and metastatic EHE. The consensus achieved during that meeting is the subject of the present publication.
|
|
| 2. |
- Andritsch, E., et al.
(författare)
-
ECCO Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care: Soft Tissue Sarcoma in Adults and Bone Sarcoma. A critical review
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Critical Reviews in Oncology Hematology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1040-8428. ; 110, s. 94-105
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: ECCO essential requirements for quality cancer care (ERQCC) are checklists and explanations of organisation and actions that are necessary to give high-quality care to patients who have a specific tumour type. They are written by European experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care. ERQCC papers give oncology teams, patients, policymakers and managers an overview of the elements needed in any healthcare system to provide high quality of care throughout the patient journey. References are made to clinical guidelines and other resources where appropriate, and the focus is on care in Europe. Sarcomas - which can be classified into soft tissue and bone sarcomas - are rare, but all rare cancers make up more than 20% of cancers in Europe, and there are substantial inequalities in access to high-quality care. Sarcomas, of which there are many subtypes, comprise a particularly complex and demanding challenge for healthcare systems and providers. This paper presents essential requirements for quality cancer care of soft tissue sarcomas in adults and bone sarcomas. High-quality care must only be carried out in specialised sarcoma centres (including paediatric cancer centres) which have both a core multidisciplinary team and an extended team of allied professionals, and which are subject to quality and audit procedures. Access to such units is far from universal in all European countries. It is essential that, to meet European aspirations for high-quality comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations implement the requirements in this paper, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis and follow-up, to treatment, to improve survival and quality of life for patients. Conclusion: Taken together, the information presented in this paper provides a comprehensive description of the essential requirements for establishing a high-quality service for soft tissue sarcomas in adults and bone sarcomas. The ECCO expert group is aware that it is not possible to propose a 'one size fits all' system for all countries, but urges that access to multidisciplinary teams is guaranteed to all patients with sarcoma. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Vallo Hult, Helena, 1976-, et al.
(författare)
-
Egenmonitorering : evidenskartläggning genom sammanställning av systematiska översikter för utvalda diagnosgrupper
- 2023
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- BackgroundIn Region Västra Götaland (VGR), the development of remote patient monitoring is given high priority, aiming for improvements for patients and reduction of healthcare costs. In this report we defined remote patient monitoring as continuous follow-up of relevant health-related parameters of patients located outside healthcare facilities (e.g. at home). Measurements taken by analogue or digital devices, objective and/or subjective assessments, are delivered digitally to the patient and to a healthcare professional. The healthcare professional provides the patient with feedback on the reported data (feedback may be automatically generated if data are within a predefined range). The plan in VGR is to introduce remote monitoring in selected diagnosis groups – some of which already started using remote monitoring.AimThe aim of this report was to provide an overview of systematic reviews regarding remote monitoring(as add on or replacement of visits in current standard of care) compared to standard of care in 25 selected diagnosis groups.MethodIn order to clarify how remote monitoring is intended to be used in the 25 diagnosis groups, representatives from the respective clinical areas were interviewed. As the scope of this project covered many diagnosis groups, the search was limited to systematic reviews (SRs) of randomised (RCTs) or non-randomised clinical trials. The relevance of each identified SR for our PICO(Population, Intervention, Comparator and Outcomes) was assessed by at least two project members (one clinical representative and one from HTA-centrum). Relevant SRs were assessed by at least two project members using SNABBSTAR, a tool developed by The Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services (SBU) for assessment of risk of bias/systematic errors in SRs. The tool consists of six steps and assessment of an SR is stopped as soon as the criteria for a specific level are not met.The steps are: 1. Definition of PICO and literature search; 2. Inclusion/exclusion according to PICO, listing of included studies; 3. Risk of bias assessments; 4. Evidence synthesis/meta-analyses; 5. Certainty of evidence consideration; 6. Documentation of excluded studies, conflicts of interest, and an a priori published SR protocol.SNABBSTAR evaluates how useful an SR is by assessing the methodology used in the SR. In the current project, SRs reaching at least SNABBSTAR level 4 were considered to provide relevant data synthesis. As reaching SNABBSTAR level 5 or 6 is considered necessary for reliable conclusions, we cited key conclusions only from SRs reaching these levels. We did not extract any data from the included SRs.ResultsThe literature search resulted in 3,332 hits. Of these, 279 were read in full text to assess their relevance for the PICO. Seventy-five SRs were considered relevant and were included; these were assessed by SNABBSTAR.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
