Ten years of integrated care: backwards and forwards. The case of the province of Québec, Canada

<strong>Introduction: </strong>Québec's rapidly growing elderly and chronically ill population represents a major challenge to its healthcare delivery system, attributable in part to the system's focus on acute care and fragmented delivery. <strong></strong><p><strong>Description of policy practice: </strong>Over the past few years, reforms have been implemented at the provincial policy level to integrate hospital-based, nursing home, homecare and social services in 95 catchment areas. Recent organizational changes in primary care have also resulted in the implementation of family medicine groups and network clinics. Several localized initiatives were also developed to improve integration of care for older persons or persons with chronic diseases.<strong></strong></p><p><strong>Conclusion and discussion</strong>: Québec has a history of integration of health and social services at the structural level. Recent evaluations of the current reform show that the care provided by various institutions in the healthcare system is becoming better integrated. The Québec health care system nevertheless continues to face three important challenges in its management of chronic diseases: implementing the reorganization of primary care, successfully integrating primary and secondary care at the clinical level, and developing effective governance and change management.</p><p>Efforts should focus on strengthening primary care by implementing nurse practitioners, developing a shared information system, and achieving better collaboration between primary and secondary care.</p

Participation of older newly-diagnosed cancer patients in an observational prospective pilot study: an example of recruitment and retention

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There have been few prospective observational studies which recruited older newly-diagnosed cancer patients, and of these only some have reported information on the number needed to screen to recruit their study sample, and the number and reasons for refusal and drop-out. This paper reports on strategies to recruit older newly-diagnosed cancer patients prior to treatment into an observational prospective pilot study and to retain them during a six-month period.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Medical charts of all patients in the Segal Cancer Centre aged 65 and over were screened and evaluated for inclusion. Several strategies to facilitate recruitment and retention were implemented. Reasons for exclusion, refusal and loss to follow-up were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to report the reasons for refusal and loss to follow-up. A non-response analysis using chi-square tests and t-tests was conducted to compare respondents to those who refused to participate and to compare those who completed the study to those who were lost to follow-up. A feedback form with open-ended questions was administered following the last interview to obtain patient's opinions on the length of the interviews and conduct of this pilot study.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>3060 medical charts were screened and 156 eligible patients were identified. Of these 112 patients participated for a response rate of 72%. Reasons for refusal were: feeling too anxious (40%), not interested (25%), no time (12.5%), too sick (5%) or too healthy (5%) or other reasons (5%). Ninety-one patients participated in the six-month follow-up (retention 81.3%), seven patients refused follow-up (6.2%) and fourteen patients died (12.5%) during the course of the study. The median time to conduct the baseline interview was 45 minutes and 57% of baseline interviews were conducted at home. Most patients enjoyed participation and only five felt that the interviews were too long.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>It was feasible to recruit newly-diagnosed cancer patients prior to treatment although it required considerable time and effort. Once patients were included, the retention rate was high despite the fact that most were undergoing active cancer treatment.</p

Toward a comprehensive view of cancer immune responsiveness: a synopsis from the SITC workshop.

Tumor immunology has changed the landscape of cancer treatment. Yet, not all patients benefit as cancer immune responsiveness (CIR) remains a limitation in a considerable proportion of cases. The multifactorial determinants of CIR include the genetic makeup of the patient, the genomic instability central to cancer development, the evolutionary emergence of cancer phenotypes under the influence of immune editing, and external modifiers such as demographics, environment, treatment potency, co-morbidities and cancer-independent alterations including immune homeostasis and polymorphisms in the major and minor histocompatibility molecules, cytokines, and chemokines. Based on the premise that cancer is fundamentally a disorder of the genes arising within a cell biologic process, whose deviations from normality determine the rules of engagement with the host\u27s response, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a task force of experts from various disciplines including, immunology, oncology, biophysics, structural biology, molecular and cellular biology, genetics, and bioinformatics to address the complexity of CIR from a holistic view. The task force was launched by a workshop held in San Francisco on May 14-15, 2018 aimed at two preeminent goals: 1) to identify the fundamental questions related to CIR and 2) to create an interactive community of experts that could guide scientific and research priorities by forming a logical progression supported by multiple perspectives to uncover mechanisms of CIR. This workshop was a first step toward a second meeting where the focus would be to address the actionability of some of the questions identified by working groups. In this event, five working groups aimed at defining a path to test hypotheses according to their relevance to human cancer and identifying experimental models closest to human biology, which include: 1) Germline-Genetic, 2) Somatic-Genetic and 3) Genomic-Transcriptional contributions to CIR, 4) Determinant(s) of Immunogenic Cell Death that modulate CIR, and 5) Experimental Models that best represent CIR and its conversion to an immune responsive state. This manuscript summarizes the contributions from each group and should be considered as a first milestone in the path toward a more contemporary understanding of CIR. We appreciate that this effort is far from comprehensive and that other relevant aspects related to CIR such as the microbiome, the individual\u27s recombined T cell and B cell receptors, and the metabolic status of cancer and immune cells were not fully included. These and other important factors will be included in future activities of the taskforce. The taskforce will focus on prioritization and specific actionable approach to answer the identified questions and implementing the collaborations in the follow-up workshop, which will be held in Houston on September 4-5, 2019

Correction to: Toward a comprehensive view of cancer immune responsiveness: a synopsis from the SITC workshop.

Following publication of the original article [1], the author reported that an author name, Roberta Zappasodi, was missed in the authorship list

Molecular characteristics of mantle cell lymphoma presenting with clonal plasma cell component

The normal counterparts of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) are naive, quiescent B cells that have not been processed through the germinal center (GC). For this reason, although lymphomas arising from GC or post-GC B cells often exhibit plasmacytic differentiation, MCL rarely presents with plasmacytic features. Seven cases of MCL with a monotypic plasma cell (PC) population were collected from 6 centers and were studied by immunohistochemistry, fluorescence immunophenotyping and interphase cytogenetics as a tool for the investigation of neoplasms analysis, capillary gel electrophoresis, and restriction fragment length polymorphism of immunoglobulin heavy chain analysis of microdissections of each of the MCL and PC populations to assess their clonal relationship. The clinical presentation was rather unusual compared with typical MCL, with 2 cases arising from the extranodal soft tissues of the head. All MCL cases were morphologically and immunohistochemically typical, bearing the t(11;14)(q13;q32). In all cases, the PC population was clonal. In 5 of the 7 cases, the MCL and PC clones showed identical restriction fragments, indicating a common clonal origin of the neoplastic population. The 2 cases with clonal diversity denoted the coexistence of 2 different tumors in a composite lymphoma/PC neoplasm. Our findings suggest that MCL can present with a PC component that is often clonally related to the lymphoma, representing a rare but unique biological variant of this tumor

Correction to: Toward a comprehensive view of cancer immune responsiveness: a synopsis from the SITC workshop

Following publication of the original article [1], the author reported that an author name, Roberta Zappasodi, was missed in the authorship list