International consensus recommendations on key outcome measures for organ preservation after (chemo)radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer

Multimodal treatment strategies for patients with rectal cancer are increasingly including the possibility of organ preservation, through nonoperative management or local excision. Organ preservation strategies can enable patients with a complete response or near-complete clinical responses after radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy to safely avoid the morbidities associated with radical surgery, and thus to maintain anorectal function and quality of life. However, standardization of the key outcome measures of organ preservation strategies is currently lacking; this includes a lack of consensus of the optimal definitions and selection of primary end points according to the trial phase and design; the optimal time points for response assessment; response-based decision-making; follow-up schedules; use of specific anorectal function tests; and quality of life and patient-reported outcomes. Thus, a consensus statement on outcome measures is necessary to ensure consistency and facilitate more accurate comparisons of data from ongoing and future trials. Here, we have convened an international group of experts with extensive experience in the management of patients with rectal cancer, including organ preservation approaches, and used a Delphi process to establish the first international consensus recommendations for key outcome measures of organ preservation, in an attempt to standardize the reporting of data from both trials and routine practice in this emerging area.Patients with early-stage rectal cancer might potentially benefit from treatment with an organ-sparing approach, which preserves quality of life owing to avoidance of the need for permanent colostomy. Trials conducted to investigate this have so far been hampered by considerable inter-trial heterogeneity in several key features. In this Consensus Statement, the authors provide guidance on the optimal end points, response assessment time points, follow-up procedures and quality of life measures in an attempt to improve the comparability of clinical research in this area

Liposomes in Biology and Medicine

Drug delivery systems (DDS) have become important tools for the specific delivery of a large number of drug molecules. Since their discovery in the 1960s liposomes were recognized as models to study biological membranes and as versatile DDS of both hydrophilic and lipophilic molecules. Liposomes--nanosized unilamellar phospholipid bilayer vesicles--undoubtedly represent the most extensively studied and advanced drug delivery vehicles. After a long period of research and development efforts, liposome-formulated drugs have now entered the clinics to treat cancer and systemic or local fungal infections, mainly because they are biologically inert and biocompatible and practically do not cause unwanted toxic or antigenic reactions. A novel, up-coming and promising therapy approach for the treatment of solid tumors is the depletion of macrophages, particularly tumor associated macrophages with bisphosphonate-containing liposomes. In the advent of the use of genetic material as therapeutic molecules the development of delivery systems to target such novel drug molecules to cells or to target organs becomes increasingly important. Liposomes, in particular lipid-DNA complexes termed lipoplexes, compete successfully with viral gene transfection systems in this field of application. Future DDS will mostly be based on protein, peptide and DNA therapeutics and their next generation analogs and derivatives. Due to their versatility and vast body of known properties liposome-based formulations will continue to occupy a leading role among the large selection of emerging DDS

Supplementary Material for: Assessment and evaluation of psychosocial distress in outpatients with cancer at a university hospital in Germany

Introduction: Cancer patients (pts) suffer from a significant amount of psychosocial distress related to tumor disease itself or straining treatments. Despite recommendations how to screen for and to deal with psychosocial distress in cancer pts, data about implementation of psycho-oncological interventions (poi) in outpatient settings of cancer pts is scarce. Aim of this study was to identify outpatients with cancer in need of poi and to evaluate different assessment instruments. Methods: N=200 outpatients with haemato-/oncological malignancies were interviewed between October 2015 and December 2017 at the University Hospital Mannheim using the Basic Documentation for Psycho-Oncology (PO-Bado) and the Hornheider Screening Instrument (HSI) – both clinician-administered assessment tools – followed by descriptive, univariate and agreement analysis. Results: N=61 cancer pts (31%) were identified to be in need for poi considering the results of both questionnaires. The number of identified patients in need of poi was lower when analyzing the results of the PO-Bado (n=42, 21%) and the HSI (n=39, 20%) separately. The degree of agreement the results of PO-Bado and HSI was low (kappa=0.3655). Several factors like gender, age and diagnosis were identified to have significant impact on the need for poi (p≤0.05). Discussion/Conclusion: Our study underlines, that different screening instruments for psychosocial distress may identify disparate populations of cancer pts. The study data also revealed significant characteristics that might be associated with elevated levels of psychosocial distress and a clear indication for poi. However, further analyses on larger populations of cancer pts are needed to provide information how to transfer positive screening to poi in clinical routine