1. |
|
|
2. |
|
|
3. |
- Horwich, A, et al.
(author)
-
EAU–ESMO consensus statements on the management of advanced and variant bladder cancer - an international collaborative multi-stakeholder effort : under the auspices of the EAU and ESMO Guidelines Committees
- 2019
-
In: Annals of Oncology. - : Oxford University Press. - 0923-7534 .- 1569-8041. ; 30:11, s. 1697-1727
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.OBJECTIVE: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management.DESIGN: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference.SETTING: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference.PARTICIPANTS: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus).RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease.CONCLUSIONS: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach.
|
|
4. |
|
|
5. |
- Witjes, J. Alfred, et al.
(author)
-
EAU-ESMO Consensus Statements on the Management of Advanced and Variant Bladder Cancer – An International Collaborative Multistakeholder Effort : Under the Auspices of the EAU-ESMO Guidelines Committees
- 2020
-
In: European Urology. - : Elsevier. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 77:2, s. 223-250
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.OBJECTIVE: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management.DESIGN: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference.SETTING: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference.PARTICIPANTS: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), and 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus).RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease.CONCLUSIONS: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach.PATIENT SUMMARY: This report summarises findings from an international, multistakeholder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available.
|
|
6. |
- Bruinsma, Sophie M, et al.
(author)
-
Expert consensus document : Semantics in active surveillance for men with localized prostate cancer - results of a modified Delphi consensus procedure
- 2017
-
In: Nature Reviews Urology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1759-4820 .- 1759-4812. ; 14:5, s. 312-322
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Active surveillance (AS) is broadly described as a management option for men with low-risk prostate cancer, but semantic heterogeneity exists in both the literature and in guidelines. To address this issue, a panel of leading prostate cancer specialists in the field of AS participated in a consensus-forming project using a modified Delphi method to reach international consensus on definitions of terms related to this management option. An iterative three-round sequence of online questionnaires designed to address 61 individual items was completed by each panel member. Consensus was considered to be reached if ≥70% of the experts agreed on a definition. To facilitate a common understanding among all experts involved and resolve potential ambiguities, a face-to-face consensus meeting was held between Delphi survey rounds two and three. Convenience sampling was used to construct the panel of experts. In total, 12 experts from Australia, France, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Japan, the UK, Canada and the USA participated. By the end of the Delphi process, formal consensus was achieved for 100% (n = 61) of the terms and a glossary was then developed. Agreement between international experts has been reached on relevant terms and subsequent definitions regarding AS for patients with localized prostate cancer. This standard terminology could support multidisciplinary communication, reduce the extent of variations in clinical practice and optimize clinical decision making.
|
|
7. |
|
|
8. |
- Timm, S., et al.
(author)
-
Does parental farm upbringing influence the risk of asthma in offspring? A three-generation study
- 2020
-
In: International journal of epidemiology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0300-5771 .- 1464-3685. ; 49:6, s. 1874-1882
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: A farm upbringing has been associated with lower risk of asthma and methylation of asthma-related genes. As such, a farm upbringing has the potential to transfer asthma risk across generations, but this has never been investigated. We aimed to study the generational effects from a parental farm upbringing on offspring asthma. Methods: Our study involved three generations: 5759 participants from the European Community Respiratory Health Survey (ECRHS) study (born 1945-1971, denoted G1), their 9991 parents (GO) and their 8260 offspring (G2) participating in RHINESSA (Respiratory Health In Northern Europe, Spain and Australia). Questionnaire data were collected on GO and G1 from G1 in 2010 and on G2 from themselves in 2013. The parental/grandparental place of upbringing was categorized: (i) both parents from farm; (ii) mother from farm, father from village/city; (iii) father from farm, mother from village/city; (iv) both parents from village or one parent from village and one from city; (v) both parents from city (reference group). Grandparental upbringing was equivalently categorized. Offspring asthma was self-reported and data were analysed using Cox-regression models with G2 age as the time scale. Results: A parental farm upbringing was not associated with offspring asthma when compared with city upbringing [hazard ratio (HR) 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74-1.69]. Findings remained similar when stratified by offspring upbringing and asthma phenotypes. Quantitative bias analyses showed similar estimates for alternative data sources. A grandparental farm upbringing was not associated with offspring asthma in either the maternal (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.67-1.65) or paternal line (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.62-1.68). Conclusions: This multigenerational analysis suggests no evidence of an association between parental/grandparental farm upbringing and offspring asthma.
|
|
9. |
- Van Hemelrijck, Mieke, et al.
(author)
-
Reasons for Discontinuing Active Surveillance : Assessment of 21 Centres in 12 Countries in the Movember GAP3 Consortium
- 2019
-
In: European Urology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0302-2838. ; 75:3, s. 523-531
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Careful assessment of the reasons for discontinuation of active surveillance (AS) is required for men with prostate cancer (PCa). Objective: Using Movember's Global Action Plan Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance initiative (GAP3) database, we report on reasons for AS discontinuation. Design, setting, and participants: We compared data from 10 296 men on AS from 21 centres across 12 countries. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Cumulative incidence methods were used to estimate the cumulative incidence rates of AS discontinuation. Results and limitations: During 5-yr follow-up, 27.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 26.4–28.6%) men showed signs of disease progression, 12.8% (95% CI: 12.0–13.6%) converted to active treatment without evidence of progression, 1.7% (95% CI: 1.5–2.0%) continued to watchful waiting, and 1.7% (95% CI: 1.4–2.1%) died from other causes. Of the 7049 men who remained on AS, 2339 had follow-up for >5 yr, 4561 had follow-up for <5 yr, and 149 were lost to follow-up. Cumulative incidence of progression was 27.5% (95% CI: 26.4–28.6%) at 5 yr and 38.2% (95% CI: 36.7–39.9%) at 10 yr. A limitation is that not all centres were included due to limited information on the reason for discontinuation and limited follow-up. Conclusions: Our descriptive analyses of current AS practices worldwide showed that 43.6% of men drop out of AS during 5-yr follow-up, mainly due to signs of disease progression. Improvements in selection tools for AS are thus needed to correctly allocate men with PCa to AS, which will also reduce discontinuation due to conversion to active treatment without evidence of disease progression. Patient summary: Our assessment of a worldwide database of men with prostate cancer (PCa) on active surveillance (AS) shows that 43.6% drop out of AS within 5 yr, mainly due to signs of disease progression. Better tools are needed to select and monitor men with PCa as part of AS.
|
|
10. |
|
|
11. |
|
|
12. |
- Martin, Neil E, et al.
(author)
-
Defining a Standard Set of Patient-centered Outcomes for Men with Localized Prostate Cancer
- 2015
-
In: European Urology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 67:3, s. 460-467
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Value-based health care has been proposed as a unifying force to drive improved outcomes and cost containment.OBJECTIVE: To develop a standard set of multidimensional patient-centered health outcomes for tracking, comparing, and improving localized prostate cancer (PCa) treatment value.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We convened an international working group of patients, registry experts, urologists, and radiation oncologists to review existing data and practices.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The group defined a recommended standard set representing who should be tracked, what should be measured and at what time points, and what data are necessary to make meaningful comparisons. Using a modified Delphi method over a series of teleconferences, the group reached consensus for the Standard Set.RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We recommend that the Standard Set apply to men with newly diagnosed localized PCa treated with active surveillance, surgery, radiation, or other methods. The Standard Set includes acute toxicities occurring within 6 mo of treatment as well as patient-reported outcomes tracked regularly out to 10 yr. Patient-reported domains of urinary incontinence and irritation, bowel symptoms, sexual symptoms, and hormonal symptoms are included, and the recommended measurement tool is the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Short Form. Disease control outcomes include overall, cause-specific, metastasis-free, and biochemical relapse-free survival. Baseline clinical, pathologic, and comorbidity information is included to improve the interpretability of comparisons.CONCLUSIONS: We have defined a simple, easily implemented set of outcomes that we believe should be measured in all men with localized PCa as a crucial first step in improving the value of care.PATIENT SUMMARY: Measuring, reporting, and comparing identical outcomes across treatments and treatment centers will provide patients and providers with information to make informed treatment decisions. We defined a set of outcomes that we recommend being tracked for every man being treated for localized prostate cancer.
|
|
13. |
|
|