Treatment challenges in and outside a specialist network setting: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours

Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms comprise a group of rare tumours with special biology, an often indolent behaviour and particular diagnostic and therapeutic requirements. The specialized biochemical tests and radiological investigations, the complexity of surgical options and the variety of medical treatments that require individual tailoring, mandate a multidisciplinary approach that can be optimally achieved through an organized network. The present study describes currents concepts in the management of these tumours as well as an insight into the challenges of delivering the pathway in and outside a Network

Treatment challenges in and outside a network setting: Head and neck cancers

Head and neck cancer (HNC) is a rare disease that can affect different sites and is characterized by variable incidence and 5-year survival rates across Europe. Multiple factors need to be considered when choosing the most appropriate treatment for HNC patients, such as age, comorbidities, social issues, and especially whether to prefer surgery or radiation-based protocols. Given the complexity of this scenario, the creation of a highly specialized multidisciplinary team is recommended to guarantee the best oncological outcome and prevent or adequately treat any adverse effect. Data from literature suggest that the multidisciplinary team-based approach is beneficial for HNC patients and lead to improved survival rates. This result is likely due to improved diagnostic and staging accuracy, a more efficacious therapeutic approach and enhanced communication across disciplines. Despite the benefit of MTD, it must be noted that this approach requires considerable time, effort and financial resources and is usually more frequent in highly organized and high-volume centers. Literature data on clinical research suggest that patients treated in high-accrual centers report better treatment outcomes compared to patients treated in low-volume centers, where a lower radiotherapy-compliance and worst overall survival have been reported. There is general agreement that treatment of rare cancers such as HNC should be concentrated in high volume, specialized and multidisciplinary centers. In order to achieve this goal, the creation of international collaboration network is fundamental. The European Reference Networks for example aim to create an international virtual advisory board, whose objectives are the exchange of expertise, training, clinical collaboration and the reduction of disparities and enhancement of rationalize migration across Europe. The purpose of our work is to review all aspects and challenges in and outside this network setting planned for the management of HNC patients

Testicular germ-cell tumours and penile squamous cell carcinoma: Appropriate management makes the difference

Germ-cell tumours (GCT) of the testis and penile squamous cell carcinoma (PeSCC) are a rare and a very rare uro-genital cancers, respectively. Both tumours are well defined entities in terms of management, where specific recommendations - in the form of continuously up-to-dated guide lines-are provided. Impact of these tumour is relevant. Testicular GCT affects young, healthy men at the beginning of their adult life. PeSCC affects older men, but a proportion of these patients are young and the personal consequences of the disease may be devastating. Deviation from recommended management may be a reason of a significant prognostic worsening, as proper treatment favourably impacts on these tumours, dramatically on GCT and significantly on PeSCC. RARECAREnet data may permit to analyse how survivals may vary according to geographical areas, histology and age, leading to assume that non-homogeneous health-care resources may impact the cure and definitive outcomes. In support of this hypothesis, some epidemiologic datasets and clinical findings would indicate that survival may improve when appropriate treatments are delivered, linked to a different accessibility to the best health institutions, as a consequence of geographical, cultural and economic barriers. Finally, strong clues based on epidemiological and clinical data support the hypothesis that treatment delivered at reference centres or under the aegis of a qualified multi-institutional network is associated with a better prognosis of patients with these malignancies. The ERN EURACAN represents the best current European effort to answer this clinical need

Worldwide comparison of survival from childhood leukaemia for 1995–2009, by subtype, age, and sex (CONCORD-2): a population-based study of individual data for 89 828 children from 198 registries in 53 countries

Background Global inequalities in access to health care are reflected in differences in cancer survival. The CONCORD programme was designed to assess worldwide differences and trends in population-based cancer survival. In this population-based study, we aimed to estimate survival inequalities globally for several subtypes of childhood leukaemia. Methods Cancer registries participating in CONCORD were asked to submit tumour registrations for all children aged 0-14 years who were diagnosed with leukaemia between Jan 1, 1995, and Dec 31, 2009, and followed up until Dec 31, 2009. Haematological malignancies were defined by morphology codes in the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, third revision. We excluded data from registries from which the data were judged to be less reliable, or included only lymphomas, and data from countries in which data for fewer than ten children were available for analysis. We also excluded records because of a missing date of birth, diagnosis, or last known vital status. We estimated 5-year net survival (ie, the probability of surviving at least 5 years after diagnosis, after controlling for deaths from other causes [background mortality]) for children by calendar period of diagnosis (1995-99, 2000-04, and 2005-09), sex, and age at diagnosis (< 1, 1-4, 5-9, and 10-14 years, inclusive) using appropriate life tables. We estimated age-standardised net survival for international comparison of survival trends for precursor-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). Findings We analysed data from 89 828 children from 198 registries in 53 countries. During 1995-99, 5-year agestandardised net survival for all lymphoid leukaemias combined ranged from 10.6% (95% CI 3.1-18.2) in the Chinese registries to 86.8% (81.6-92.0) in Austria. International differences in 5-year survival for childhood leukaemia were still large as recently as 2005-09, when age-standardised survival for lymphoid leukaemias ranged from 52.4% (95% CI 42.8-61.9) in Cali, Colombia, to 91.6% (89.5-93.6) in the German registries, and for AML ranged from 33.3% (18.9-47.7) in Bulgaria to 78.2% (72.0-84.3) in German registries. Survival from precursor-cell ALL was very close to that of all lymphoid leukaemias combined, with similar variation. In most countries, survival from AML improved more than survival from ALL between 2000-04 and 2005-09. Survival for each type of leukaemia varied markedly with age: survival was highest for children aged 1-4 and 5-9 years, and lowest for infants (younger than 1 year). There was no systematic difference in survival between boys and girls. Interpretation Global inequalities in survival from childhood leukaemia have narrowed with time but remain very wide for both ALL and AML. These results provide useful information for health policy makers on the effectiveness of health-care systems and for cancer policy makers to reduce inequalities in childhood survival

Changing geographical patterns and trends in cancer incidence in children and adolescents in Europe, 1991–2010 (Automated Childhood Cancer Information System): a population-based study

Background: A deceleration in the increase in cancer incidence in children and adolescents has been reported in several national and regional studies in Europe. Based on a large database representing 1·3 billion person-years over the period 1991–2010, we provide a consolidated report on cancer incidence trends at ages 0–19 years. Methods: We invited all population-based cancer registries operating in European countries to participate in this population-based registry study. We requested a listing of individual records of cancer cases, including sex, age, date of birth, date of cancer diagnosis, tumour sequence number, primary site, morphology, behaviour, and the most valid basis of diagnosis. We also requested population counts in each calendar year by sex and age for the registration area, from official national sources, and specific information about the covered area and registration practices. An eligible registry could become a contributor if it provided quality data for all complete calendar years in the period 1991–2010. Incidence rates and the average annual percentage change with 95% CIs were reported for all cancers and major diagnostic groups, by region and overall, separately for children (age 0–14 years) and adolescents (age 15–19 years). We examined and quantified the stability of the trends with joinpoint analyses. Findings: For the years 1991–2010, 53 registries in 19 countries contributed a total of 180 335 unique cases. We excluded 15 162 (8·4%) of 180 335 cases due to differing practices of registration, and considered the quality indicators for the 165 173 cases included to be satisfactory. The average annual age-standardised incidence was 137·5 (95% CI 136·7–138·3) per million person-years and incidence increased significantly by 0·54% (0·44–0·65) per year in children (age 0–14 years) with no change in trend. In adolescents, the combined European incidence was 176·2 (174·4–178·0) per million person-years based on all 35 138 eligible cases and increased significantly by 0·96% (0·73–1·19) per year, although recent changes in rates among adolescents suggest a deceleration in this increasing trend. We observed temporal variations in trends by age group, geographical region, and diagnostic group. The combined age-standardised incidence of leukaemia based on 48 458 cases in children was 46·9 (46·5–47·3) per million person-years and increased significantly by 0·66% (0·48–0·84) per year. The average overall incidence of leukaemia in adolescents was 23·6 (22·9–24·3) per million person-years, based on 4702 cases, and the average annual change was 0·93% (0·49–1·37). We also observed increasing incidence of lymphoma in adolescents (average annual change 1·04% [0·65–1·44], malignant CNS tumours in children (average annual change 0·49% [0·20–0·77]), and other tumours in both children (average annual change 0·56 [0·40–0·72]) and adolescents (average annual change 1·17 [0·82–1·53]). Interpretation: Improvements in the diagnosis and registration of cancers over time could partly explain the observed increase in incidence, although some changes in underlying putative risk factors cannot be excluded. Cancer incidence trends in this young population require continued monitoring at an international level. Funding: Federal Ministry of Health of the Federal German Government, the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme, and International Agency for Research on Cancer

Managing chronic pain in elderly patients requires a CHANGE of approach

many countries, the number of elderly people has increased rapidly in recent years and this is expected to continue; it has been predicted that almost a quarter of the population in the European Union will be over 65 years of age in 2035. Many elderly people suffer from chronic pain but it is regularly under-treated, partly because managing these patients is often complex. This paper outlines the extent of untreated pain in this population and the consequent reduction in quality of life, before articulating the reasons why it is poorly or inaccurately diagnosed. These include the patient's unwillingness to complain, atypical pain presentations, multiple morbidities and cognitive decline. Successful pain management depends upon accurate diagnosis, which is based upon a complete history and thorough physical examination, as well as an assessment of psychosocial functioning. Poor physician/patient communication can be improved by using standardized instruments to establish individual treatment targets and measure progress towards them. User-friendly observational instruments may be valuable for patients with dementia. In line with the widely accepted biopsychosocial model of pain, a multidisciplinary approach to pain management is recommended, with pharmacotherapy, psychological support, physical rehabilitation and interventional procedures available if required. Declining organ function and other physiological changes require lower initial doses of analgesics and less frequent dosing intervals, and the physician must be aware of all medications that the patient is taking, in order to avoid drug/drug interactions. Non-adherence to treatment is common, and various strategies can be employed to improve it; involving the elderly patient's caregivers and family, using medication systems such as pill-boxes, or even sending text messages. In the long term, the teaching of pain medicine needs to be improved - particularly in the use of opioids -both at undergraduate level and after qualification

Global surveillance of cancer survival 1995–2009: analysis of individual data for 25 676 887 patients from 279 population-based registries in 67 countries (CONCORD-2)

Background: Worldwide data for cancer survival are scarce. We aimed to initiate worldwide surveillance of cancer survival by central analysis of population-based registry data, as a metric of the effectiveness of health systems, and to inform global policy on cancer control. Methods: Individual tumour records were submitted by 279 population-based cancer registries in 67 countries for 25·7 million adults (age 15–99 years) and 75 000 children (age 0–14 years) diagnosed with cancer during 1995–2009 and followed up to Dec 31, 2009, or later. We looked at cancers of the stomach, colon, rectum, liver, lung, breast (women), cervix, ovary, and prostate in adults, and adult and childhood leukaemia. Standardised quality control procedures were applied; errors were corrected by the registry concerned. We estimated 5-year net survival, adjusted for background mortality in every country or region by age (single year), sex, and calendar year, and by race or ethnic origin in some countries. Estimates were age-standardised with the International Cancer Survival Standard weights. Findings: 5-year survival from colon, rectal, and breast cancers has increased steadily in most developed countries. For patients diagnosed during 2005–09, survival for colon and rectal cancer reached 60% or more in 22 countries around the world; for breast cancer, 5-year survival rose to 85% or higher in 17 countries worldwide. Liver and lung cancer remain lethal in all nations: for both cancers, 5-year survival is below 20% everywhere in Europe, in the range 15–19% in North America, and as low as 7–9% in Mongolia and Thailand. Striking rises in 5-year survival from prostate cancer have occurred in many countries: survival rose by 10–20% between 1995–99 and 2005–09 in 22 countries in South America, Asia, and Europe, but survival still varies widely around the world, from less than 60% in Bulgaria and Thailand to 95% or more in Brazil, Puerto Rico, and the USA. For cervical cancer, national estimates of 5-year survival range from less than 50% to more than 70%; regional variations are much wider, and improvements between 1995–99 and 2005–09 have generally been slight. For women diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2005–09, 5-year survival was 40% or higher only in Ecuador, the USA, and 17 countries in Asia and Europe. 5-year survival for stomach cancer in 2005–09 was high (54–58%) in Japan and South Korea, compared with less than 40% in other countries. By contrast, 5-year survival from adult leukaemia in Japan and South Korea (18–23%) is lower than in most other countries. 5-year survival from childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia is less than 60% in several countries, but as high as 90% in Canada and four European countries, which suggests major deficiencies in the management of a largely curable disease. Interpretation: International comparison of survival trends reveals very wide differences that are likely to be attributable to differences in access to early diagnosis and optimum treatment. Continuous worldwide surveillance of cancer survival should become an indispensable source of information for cancer patients and researchers and a stimulus for politicians to improve health policy and health-care systems

Burden and centralised treatment in Europe of rare tumours: results of RARECAREnet - a population-based study

Background Rare cancers pose challenges for diagnosis, treatments, and clinical decision making. Information about rare cancers is scant. The RARECARE project defined rare cancers as those with an annual incidence of less than six per 100 000 people in European Union (EU). We updated the estimates of the burden of rare cancers in Europe, their time trends in incidence and survival, and provide information about centralisation of treatments in seven European countries. Methods We analysed data from 94 cancer registries for more than 2 million rare cancer diagnoses, to estimate European incidence and survival in 2000–07 and the corresponding time trends during 1995–2007. Incidence was calculated as the number of new cases divided by the corresponding total person-years in the population. 5-year relative survival was calculated by the Ederer-2 method. Seven registries (Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and the Navarra region in Spain) provided additional data for hospitals treating about 220 000 cases diagnosed in 2000–07. We also calculated hospital volume admission as the number of treatments provided by each hospital rare cancer group sharing the same referral pattern. Findings Rare cancers accounted for 24% of all cancers diagnosed in the EU during 2000–07. The overall incidence rose annually by 0.5% (99·8% CI 0·3–0·8). 5-year relative survival for all rare cancers was 48·5% (95% CI 48·4 to 48·6), compared with 63·4% (95% CI 63·3 to 63·4) for all common cancers. 5-year relative survival increased (overall 2·9%, 95% CI 2·7 to 3·2), from 1999–2001 to 2007–09, and for most rare cancers, with the largest increases for haematological tumours and sarcomas. The amount of centralisation of rare cancer treatment varied widely between cancers and between countries. The Netherlands and Slovenia had the highest treatment volumes. Interpretation Our study benefits from the largest pool of population-based registries to estimate incidence and survival of about 200 rare cancers. Incidence trends can be explained by changes in known risk factors, improved diagnosis, and registration problems. Survival could be improved by early diagnosis, new treatments, and improved case management. The centralisation of treatment could be improved in the seven European countries we studied. Funding The European Commission (Chafea)

Burden and centralised treatment in Europe of rare tumours: results of RARECAREnet—a population-based study

Background Rare cancers pose challenges for diagnosis, treatments, and clinical decision making. Information about rare cancers is scant. The RARECARE project defined rare cancers as those with an annual incidence of less than six per 100 000 people in European Union (EU). We updated the estimates of the burden of rare cancers in Europe, their time trends in incidence and survival, and provide information about centralisation of treatments in seven European countries. Methods We analysed data from 94 cancer registries for more than 2 million rare cancer diagnoses, to estimate European incidence and survival in 2000–07 and the corresponding time trends during 1995–2007. Incidence was calculated as the number of new cases divided by the corresponding total person-years in the population. 5-year relative survival was calculated by the Ederer-2 method. Seven registries (Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and the Navarra region in Spain) provided additional data for hospitals treating about 220 000 cases diagnosed in 2000–07. We also calculated hospital volume admission as the number of treatments provided by each hospital rare cancer group sharing the same referral pattern. Findings Rare cancers accounted for 24% of all cancers diagnosed in the EU during 2000–07. The overall incidence rose annually by 0.5% (99·8% CI 0·3–0·8). 5-year relative survival for all rare cancers was 48·5% (95% CI 48·4 to 48·6), compared with 63·4% (95% CI 63·3 to 63·4) for all common cancers. 5-year relative survival increased (overall 2·9%, 95% CI 2·7 to 3·2), from 1999–2001 to 2007–09, and for most rare cancers, with the largest increases for haematological tumours and sarcomas. The amount of centralisation of rare cancer treatment varied widely between cancers and between countries. The Netherlands and Slovenia had the highest treatment volumes. Interpretation Our study benefits from the largest pool of population-based registries to estimate incidence and survival of about 200 rare cancers. Incidence trends can be explained by changes in known risk factors, improved diagnosis, and registration problems. Survival could be improved by early diagnosis, new treatments, and improved case management. The centralisation of treatment could be improved in the seven European countries we studied. Funding The European Commission (Chafea)