4 research outputs found

    Privacy Enhancing Technologies Whitepaper:Developed by Centre of Excellence – Data Sharing and Cloud

    No full text
    This whitepaper provides decision-makers with insights on the benefits of Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs) for data collaborations. With recent growth and development of data sharing, public and private organisations can realise new economic and societal value potential. However, data collaboration participants often face barriers for data sharing in form of privacy, commercial and reputational risks. PETs can play a role for reducing these barriers and increasing trust in data collaborations where data cannot be shared directly, since PETs allow to generate insights without disclosing the underlying data. The paper focuses on the most important PETs and their benefits for respective use cases. It also covers challenges that need to be overcome for large-scale adoption of PETs and lastly, shows tangible steps for fostering implementation of these technologies in organisations

    Distress in suspected lung cancer patients following rapid and standard diagnostic programs: a prospective observational study

    No full text
    ObjectiveTimeliness may influence emotional distress during the diagnostic phase of suspected lung cancer patients. We performed a prospective observational study to compare distress and quality of life (QoL) in two medical centres with a Rapid Outpatient Diagnostic Program (RODP) and two using conventional Stepwise Diagnostic Approach (SDA) on the basis of trained nurse-led care. MethodsOutpatients with radiological suspicion of lung cancer completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and its 13-item Lung Cancer specific module (QLQ-LC13) upon first visit, 2days later, thereafter weekly for 5weeks and after 3months. ResultsThe 72 SDA patients and 121 RODP patients had a mean pre-diagnostic HADS-total score of 13.5 (SD 7.6); 63.4% had a score 10. Baseline QLQ-C30 global QoL was 61.6 (SD 22.7) exceeding reference values for lung cancer patients. Generalized least square models showed a significant centre by time interaction effect: during the first 6weeks, HADS-total scores decreased in RODP patients (13.8-11.9) but sustained in SDA patients (13.1-13.6), whereas QoL showed no relevant changes. Times to diagnosis and discussion of therapy plan for RODP patients were 7 and 11days shorter, respectively. ConclusionsSuspected lung cancer patients had high baseline distress levels. A decrease over time was found in RODP compared with SDA patients. QoL did not change relevantly. Albeit observational, these data indicate that patients experience less distress in rapid diagnostic programs than in stepwise diagnostic evaluation. Copyright (c) 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

    Randomized phase III study of docetaxel versus docetaxel plus intercalated erlotinib in patients with relapsed non-squamous non-small cell lung carcinoma

    No full text
    Background: Earlier preclinical and phase II research showed enhanced effect of docetaxel plus intercalated erlotinib. The NVALT-18 phase III study was designed to compare docetaxel with docetaxel plus intercalated erlotinib in relapsed metastasized non-squamous (NSQ) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Patients with relapsed Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) wild type (WT) NSQ-NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 every 21 days (control), or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 plus erlotinib 150 mg/day orally on day 2–16 every 21 days (experimental arm). Progression free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint, secondary objectives were duration of response, overall survival (OS) and toxicity. Results: Between October 2016 and April 2018 a total of 45 patients were randomized and received treatment in the control (N = 23) or experimental arm (N = 22), the study was stopped due to slow accrual. Median PFS was 4.0 months (95% CI: 1.5–7.1) versus 1.9 months (95% CI 1.4–3.5), p = 0.01 respectively; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.51 (95% CI: 1.16–5.43). Corresponding median OS was 10.6 months (95% CI: 7.0–8.6) versus 4.7 months (95% CI: 3.2–8.6), p = 0.004, with an adjusted HR of 3.67 (95% CI: 1.46–9.27). Toxicity was higher with combination therapy, with toxicity β‰₯ CTCAE grade 3 in N = 6 (26%) in the control arm and N = 17 (77%) in the experimental arm (p < 0.001), mainly consisting of gastrointestinal symptoms and leukopenia. Conclusions: Our study shows detrimental effects of docetaxel plus intercalated erlotinib, and strongly discourages further exploration of this combination in clinical practice

    Randomized phase III study of docetaxel versus docetaxel plus intercalated erlotinib in patients with relapsed non-squamous non-small cell lung carcinoma

    Get PDF
    Background: Earlier preclinical and phase II research showed enhanced effect of docetaxel plus intercalated erlotinib. The NVALT-18 phase III study was designed to compare docetaxel with docetaxel plus intercalated erlotinib in relapsed metastasized non-squamous (NSQ) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Patients with relapsed Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) wild type (WT) NSQ-NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 every 21 days (control), or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 plus erlotinib 150 mg/day orally on day 2–16 every 21 days (experimental arm). Progression free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint, secondary objectives were duration of response, overall survival (OS) and toxicity. Results: Between October 2016 and April 2018 a total of 45 patients were randomized and received treatment in the control (N = 23) or experimental arm (N = 22), the study was stopped due to slow accrual. Median PFS was 4.0 months (95% CI: 1.5–7.1) versus 1.9 months (95% CI 1.4–3.5), p = 0.01 respectively; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.51 (95% CI: 1.16–5.43). Corresponding median OS was 10.6 months (95% CI: 7.0–8.6) versus 4.7 months (95% CI: 3.2–8.6), p = 0.004, with an adjusted HR of 3.67 (95% CI: 1.46–9.27). Toxicity was higher with combination therapy, with toxicity β‰₯ CTCAE grade 3 in N = 6 (26%) in the control arm and N = 17 (77%) in the experimental arm (p &lt; 0.001), mainly consisting of gastrointestinal symptoms and leukopenia. Conclusions: Our study shows detrimental effects of docetaxel plus intercalated erlotinib, and strongly discourages further exploration of this combination in clinical practice.</p
    corecore