Der "Paradigmenwechsel" zur Einführung des Elterngeldes und seine Fehlkonstruktionen

"Der Beitrag analysiert den Politikprozess zur Einführung des Elterngeldes. Dargelegt wird, welche Akteure, Parteien und Wissenschaftler die Einführung des Elterngeldes vorantrieben. Von einem wirklichen Paradigmenwechsel kann jedoch nicht die Rede sein: nicht nur, dass das einkommensabhängige Elterngeld in Westdeutschland verspätet eingeführt wurde; auch der Ausbau der öffentlichen Kinderbetreuung für unter 3-Jährige stockt. Das neu eingeführte Betreuungsgeld stellt aufgrund seiner geringen Höhe keinen Ausgleich der Opportunitätskosten. Der Beitrag diskutiert anschließend die Elterngeldstatistik und die Geburtenstatistik. Ein angemessenes Elterngeld beziehen vorrangig über 30-jährige Mütter sowie Frauen, die ihr erstes Kind bekommen. Die Geburtenrate stagniert bei 1,4 Kindern pro Frau, der Anteil der Spätgebärenden steigt." (Autorenreferat)"The article analyses the political process concerning the implementation of the parental allowance ("Elterngeld") and its currently measurable successes. It shows which players, political parties and scientists brought the income-based parental allowance on its way. A clear paradigm shift towards supporting working mothers cannot be observed due to the rather slight expansion of public child care and the implementation of care money ('Betreuungsgeld') in 2013. Subsequently statistical records on the enlargement of public child care arrangements, the parental allowance, and the birth register are discussed. The period birth rate is stagnating at 1.4 children per woman, further postponement of births takes place and the number of late mothers increases." (author's abstract

Nachhaltige Familienpolitik

"Nachhaltige Familienpolitik kann nur erfolgreich sein, wenn sie die unterschiedlichen Präferenzen von Frauen und Männern widerspiegelt. Eine integrative Konzeption aus Zeitoptionen, Infrastrukturangeboten und Geldtransfers kann diesen unterschiedlichen Lebensentwürfen gerecht werden." (Autorenreferat

Introducing innovative cellular therapies into the clinic: a 2-year retrospective experience of a chimeric antigen receptor T-cell programme at a single centre in Switzerland

AIM OF THE STUDY Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cells are a powerful form of immune-cell therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphoma and acute B lymphoblastic leukaemia. CAR-T cells have been commercially available in Switzerland since 2018. Because of the complexity and costs of this treatment it is critical to review patient outcomes in real-world settings, to examine whether the promising results from pivotal trials can be reproduced and to identify clinical parameters that determine their efficacy. METHODS Here we present results of a retrospective study analysing outcomes of patients treated with CAR-T cells in a single academic centre in Switzerland during the first two years after commercial approval (BASEC-No. 2020-02271). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS), immune-cell associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), responses to treatment, ancillary laboratory studies and administrative specifics of CAR-T treatment were examined and are discussed. RESULTS From October 2018 to August 2020 CAR-T cell therapy was evaluated in 34 patients, mostly with relapsed/refractory aggressive B-cell lymphoma (87% had refractory disease). Thirty-one patients underwent leukapheresis. Three of 31 patients (9.6%) died of rapid disease progression before the CAR-T cell product was delivered, two patients were enrolled into a clinical trial, three patients were not given CAR-T cells for other reasons. Ultimately, 23 patients were infused with a commercial CAR-T cell product and included in this analysis. Fourteen (61%) patients received bridging therapy while waiting for a median of 41 days (range 31-62) for delivery of the CAR-T cell product. Toxicity and severe side effects were rare (CRS >3 in 13%, ICANS > grade 3 in 10% of patients), manageable and resolved completely thereafter. The best overall response rate was 65%, with complete responses in 38% of lymphoma patients. At 12 months postinfusion, 61% of patients were alive and 35% progression free. With a median follow-up of 14 months, 13/23 (56%) patients were alive at the time of writing. CONCLUSION CAR-T cell therapy proved to be safe and manageable under adequate hospital conditions. Outcomes resemble results from pivotal trials. The majority of patients was heavily pretreated and refractory at the time of CAR-T cell infusion. Patient selection, time point of leukapheresis, bridging strategies and timing of CAR-T cell infusion may be critical to further improve outcomes

BRAF inhibitor treatment of classical hairy cell leukemia allows successful vaccination against SARS-CoV-2

In classical hairy cell leukemia (HCL), standard treatments including purine analogs achieve a durable response (up to 90%), but lead to severe immunosuppression and long-lasting depletion of CD4 + T lymphocytes. The BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib is effective in HCL, but its use in first-line treatment is restricted to select clinical situations (e.g. active infection). Its impact on immune function or response to vaccines in HCL is unclear. We treated four HCL patients with vemurafenib during the COVID-19 pandemic and monitored immune reconstitution and response to SARS-CoV-2 immunization. All patients responded to HCL treatment with normalization of peripheral blood counts. No severe infections occurred. As an indication of limited immunosuppression by vemurafenib, stable CD4 + and CD8 + T lymphocyte counts and immunoglobulin levels were observed. Three out of four patients received SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech) during treatment with vemurafenib. IgG antibody levels against the spike-protein of SARS-CoV-2 were detected (40-818 AE/ml). Our data suggest that vemurafenib has limited effects on cellular and humoral immune function in HCL, which allows for successful SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. These data support the use of BRAF inhibitors during the current pandemic where continued immune response is necessary for minimizing the COVID-19-related risk of non-vaccinated patients

Complication rates of peripherally inserted central catheters vs implanted ports in patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy: A retrospective cohort study

While implanted port catheters ("PORTs") have historically been the standard device for intravenous systemic anticancer therapy, the use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) has increased continuously and reliable catheter selection guidelines are lacking. We compare complication rates of PORTs and PICCs in cancer treatment in a retrospective study of 3365 patients with both solid organ (n = 2612) and hematologic (n = 753) malignancies, between 2001 and 2021. 26.4% (n = 890) of all patients were treated via PICCs and 73.6% (2475) via PORTs. 20.7% (578) experienced a major catheter-related complication with a higher rate in PICCs than in PORTs (23.5% vs 14.9%, P < .001). Among major complications, infections and mechanical complications were more common in PICCs than in PORTs (11.9% vs 6.4%, P = .001, 7.3% vs 4.2%, P = .002), whereas the rate of thrombosis was similar (3.4% vs 3.0%, P = .9). While PORTs had a higher rate of periprocedural complications (2.7% vs 1.1%, P < .05), PICCs overall complication rate exceeded PORTs within 3 days from implantation. Median follow-up was 49 (PICC) and 60 weeks (PORT). PORTs are safer and therefore should be preferred in this setting regardless of catheter dwell time

An overview and a roadmap for artificial intelligence in hematology and oncology

BACKGROUND Artificial intelligence (AI) is influencing our society on many levels and has broad implications for the future practice of hematology and oncology. However, for many medical professionals and researchers, it often remains unclear what AI can and cannot do, and what are promising areas for a sensible application of AI in hematology and oncology. Finally, the limits and perils of using AI in oncology are not obvious to many healthcare professionals. METHODS In this article, we provide an expert-based consensus statement by the joint Working Group on "Artificial Intelligence in Hematology and Oncology" by the German Society of Hematology and Oncology (DGHO), the German Association for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology (GMDS), and the Special Interest Group Digital Health of the German Informatics Society (GI). We provide a conceptual framework for AI in hematology and oncology. RESULTS First, we propose a technological definition, which we deliberately set in a narrow frame to mainly include the technical developments of the last ten years. Second, we present a taxonomy of clinically relevant AI systems, structured according to the type of clinical data they are used to analyze. Third, we show an overview of potential applications, including clinical, research, and educational environments with a focus on hematology and oncology. CONCLUSION Thus, this article provides a point of reference for hematologists and oncologists, and at the same time sets forth a framework for the further development and clinical deployment of AI in hematology and oncology in the future

Global consultation on cancer staging: promoting consistent understanding and use

Disease burden is the most important determinant of survival in patients with cancer. This domain, reflected by the cancer stage and codified using the tumour-node-metastasis (TNM) classification, is a fundamental determinant of prognosis. Accurate and consistent tumour classification is required for the development and use of treatment guidelines and to enable clinical research (including clinical trials), cancer surveillance and control. Furthermore, knowledge of the extent and stage of disease is frequently important in the context of translational studies. Attempts to include additional prognostic factors in staging classifications, in order to facilitate a more accurate determination of prognosis, are often made with a lack of knowledge and understanding and are one of the main causes of the inconsistent use of terms and definitions. This effect has resulted in uncertainty and confusion, thus limiting the utility of the TNM classification. In this Position paper, we provide a consensus on the optimal use and terminology for cancer staging that emerged from a consultation process involving representatives of several major international organizations involved in cancer classification. The consultation involved several steps: a focused literature review; a stakeholder survey; and a consultation meeting. This aim of this Position paper is to provide a consensus that should guide the use of staging terminology and secure the classification of anatomical disease extent as a distinct aspect of cancer classification

Global consultation on cancer staging: promoting consistent understanding and use

Disease burden is the most important determinant of survival in patients with cancer. This domain, reflected by the cancer stage and codified using the tumour-node-metastasis (TNM) classification, is a fundamental determinant of prognosis. Accurate and consistent tumour classification is required for the development and use of treatment guidelines and to enable clinical research (including clinical trials), cancer surveillance and control. Furthermore, knowledge of the extent and stage of disease is frequently important in the context of translational studies. Attempts to include additional prognostic factors in staging classifications, in order to facilitate a more accurate determination of prognosis, are often made with a lack of knowledge and understanding and are one of the main causes of the inconsistent use of terms and definitions. This effect has resulted in uncertainty and confusion, thus limiting the utility of the TNM classification. In this Position paper, we provide a consensus on the optimal use and terminology for cancer staging that emerged from a consultation process involving representatives of several major international organizations involved in cancer classification. The consultation involved several steps: a focused literature review; a stakeholder survey; and a consultation meeting. This aim of this Position paper is to provide a consensus that should guide the use of staging terminology and secure the classification of anatomical disease extent as a distinct aspect of cancer classification