The need for core outcome sets in renal cancer clinical effectiveness research

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

La comunicación entre el paciente oncológico y los profesionales. El cuestionario de comunicación de la EORTC

The aims of the present work are to introduce to the field of communication between the cancer patient and the professionals, to remark the positive influence communication may have on the patient, and to present the EORTC communication questionnaire. Communication between patient and professional is a key element in the support that is offered to cancer patients. It is important to consider different professionals communicate with cancer patients. There is a need of research in communication between patients and professionals. Two main models of patient care are presented: Paternalistic and Patient-Centered Cancer Care. Patient-Centered Care includes Patient- Centered Communication - PCC. The relation between communication and other PROs - Quality of Life, Information and Satisfaction with Care - is presented. There are cross-cultural differences in communication that could be related to the model of patient care. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group is developing a questionnaire to assess communication between cancer patient and the professionals. This Communication questionnaire mainly assesses professionals’ behaviors. Cultural aspects have a key role in the development of the EORTC questionnaire. This instrument is based on the Patient- Centered Communication – PCC model. The EORTC QLQ-COMU26 is presented. It includes six scales and four individual items. The three phases of the questionnaire development process are described. At the present moment the EORTC QLQ-COMU26 is being field-tested in a larger international study (phase IV), to ensure it is an appropriate and psychometrically valid instrument.Este trabajo pretende introducir el área de la comunicación entre el paciente oncológico y los profesionales, y destacar el impacto que tiene en el paciente. Además, se presenta el cuestionario de comunicación de la EORTC. La comunicación entre el paciente y los profesionales es uno de los elementos claves del soporte que se ofrece a dichos pacientes. En dicha comunicación participan un rango importante de profesionales. Hay una necesidad de realizar más investigación sobre la comunicación. Se presentan dos modelos principales de atención al paciente: el Paternalista y el de Atención Centrada en el Paciente con cáncer. Este último lleva asociada la Comunicación Centrada en el Paciente - CCP. Se revisa la relación entre comunicación y otros PRO: Calidad de Vida, información, y Satisfacción con los Cuidados. Existen diferencias culturales en comunicación que pueden estar relacionadas con el modelo de atención al paciente. El Grupo de Calidad de Vida de la Organización Europea para la Investigación y Tratamiento del Cáncer-EORTC está desarrollando una escala de comunicación entre el paciente oncológico y los profesionales. La mayoría del contenido de dicho cuestionario se centra en las conductas de los profesionales. Los aspectos culturales tienen un papel fundamental en el desarrollo del instrumento. El cuestionario se basa en el modelo de Comunicación Centrada en el Paciente – CCP. Se presenta el cuestionario EORTC QLQ-COMU26, que consta de seis escalas y cuatro ítems individuales. Se describen las tres primeras fases que se han dado en su creación. En la actualidad su funcionamiento psicométrico se está valorando en un estudio internacional

Vertebral Bomb Radiocarbon Suggests Extreme Longevity in White Sharks

Conservation and management efforts for white sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) remain hampered by a lack of basic demographic information including age and growth rates. Sharks are typically aged by counting growth bands sequentially deposited in their vertebrae, but the assumption of annual deposition of these band pairs requires testing. We compared radiocarbon (Δ14C) values in vertebrae from four female and four male white sharks from the northwestern Atlantic Ocean (NWA) with reference chronologies documenting the marine uptake of 14C produced by atmospheric testing of thermonuclear devices to generate the first radiocarbon age estimates for adult white sharks. Age estimates were up to 40 years old for the largest female (fork length [FL]: 526 cm) and 73 years old for the largest male (FL: 493 cm). Our results dramatically extend the maximum age and longevity of white sharks compared to earlier studies, hint at possible sexual dimorphism in growth rates, and raise concerns that white shark populations are considerably more sensitive to human-induced mortality than previously thought

The use of EORTC measures in daily clinical practice-A synopsis of a newly developed manual.

Cancer has increasingly become a chronic condition and the routine collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) like quality of life is widely recommended for clinical practice. Nonetheless, the successful implementation of PROs is still a major challenge, although common barriers to and facilitators of their beneficial use are well known. To support health care professionals and other stakeholders in the implementation of the EORTC PRO measures, the EORTC Quality of Life Group provides guidance on issues considered important for their use in daily clinical practice. Herein, we present an outline of the newly developed "'Manual for the use of EORTC measures in daily clinical practice", covering the following issues: * a rationale for using EORTC measures in routine care *selection of EORTC measures, timing of assessments, scoring and presentation of results * aspects of a strategic implementation * electronic data assessment and telemonitoring, and * further use of EORTC measures and ethical considerations. Next to an extensive overview of currently available literature, the manual specifically focuses on knowledge about EORTC measures to give evidence-based recommendations whenever possible and to encourage readers and end-users of EORTC measures to contribute to further needed high-quality research. The manual will be accessible on the EORTC Quality of Life Group website's homepage and will be periodically updated to take into account any new knowledge due to medical, technical, regulatory and scientific advances

A Systematic Review of Heterogeneity in Outcome Definition and Reporting in Localised Renal Cancer

Context: Outcomes in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are reported inconsistently, with variability in definitions and measurement. Hence, it is difficult to compare intervention effectiveness and synthesise outcomes for systematic reviews and to create clinical practice guidelines. This uncertainty in the evidence makes it difficult to guide patient-clinician decision-making. One solution is a core outcome set (COS): an agreed minimum set of outcomes. Objective: To describe outcome reporting, definitions, and measurement heterogeneity as the first stage in co-creating a COS for localised renal cancer. Evidence acquisition: We systematically reviewed outcome reporting heterogeneity in effectiveness trials and observational studies in localised RCC. In total, 2822 studies (randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, systematic reviews) up to June 2020 meeting our inclusion criteria were identified. Abstracts and full texts were screened independently by two reviewers; in cases of disagreement, a third reviewer arbitrated. Data extractions were double-checked. Evidence synthesis: We included 149 studies and found that there was inconsistency in which outcomes were reported across studies and variability in the definitions used for outcomes that were conceptually the same. We structured our analysis using the outcome classification taxonomy proposed by Dodd et al. Outcomes linked to adverse events (eg, bleeding, outcomes linked to surgery) and renal injury outcomes (reduced renal function) were reported most commonly. Outcomes related to deaths from any cause and from cancer were reported in 44% and 25% of studies, respectively, although the time point for measurement and the analysis methods were inconsistent. Outcomes linked to life impact (eg, global quality of life) were reported least often. Clinician-reported outcomes are more frequently reported than patient-reported outcomes in the renal cancer literature. Conclusions: This systematic review underscores the heterogeneity of outcome reporting, definitions, and measurement in research on localised renal cancer. It catalogues the variety of outcomes and serves as a first step towards the development of a COS for localised renal cancer. Patient summary: We reviewed studies on localised kidney cancer and found that multiple terms and definitions have been used to describe outcomes. These are not defined consistently, and often not defined at all. Our review is the first phase in developing a core outcome set to allow better comparisons of studies to improve medical care

EORTC QLQ-COMU26 : a questionnaire for the assessment of communication between patients and professionals. Phase III of the module development in ten countries

Purpose: Communication between patients and professionals is one major aspect of the support offered to cancer patients. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group (QLG) has developed a cancer-specific instrument for the measurement of different issues related to the communication between cancer patients and their health care professionals. Methods: Questionnaire development followed the EORTC QLG Module Development Guidelines. A provisional questionnaire was pre-tested (phase III) in a multicenter study within ten countries from five cultural areas (Northern and South Europe, UK, Poland and Taiwan). Patients from seven subgroups (before, during and after treatment, for localized and advanced disease each, plus palliative patients) were recruited. Structured interviews were conducted. Qualitative and quantitative analyses have been performed. Results: One hundred forty patients were interviewed. Nine items were deleted and one shortened. Patients' comments had a key role in item selection. No item was deleted due to just quantitative criteria. Consistency was observed in patients' answers across cultural areas. The revised version of the module EORTC QLQ-COMU26 has 26 items, organized in 6 scales and 4 individual items. Conclusions: The EORTC COMU26 questionnaire can be used in daily clinical practice and research, in various patient groups from different cultures. The next step will be an international field test with a large heterogeneous group of cancer patients