scholarly journals The current and future role of the medical oncologist in the professional care for cancer patients: a position paper by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.A. Popescu ◽  
R. Schäfer ◽  
R. Califano ◽  
R. Eckert ◽  
R. Coleman ◽  
...  
VASA ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 247-248
Author(s):  
Leonie Kühnemund ◽  
Eva Freisinger
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 476 (4) ◽  
pp. 491-497
Author(s):  
Xavier Matias-Guiu ◽  
◽  
Giorgio Stanta ◽  
Fátima Carneiro ◽  
Ales Ryska ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15052-e15052
Author(s):  
Ozan Yazici ◽  
Nuriye Ozdemir ◽  
Ayse Ocak Duran ◽  
Serkan Menekse ◽  
Mehmet Ali Nahit Sendur ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 352-352
Author(s):  
Daniella Febbraro ◽  
Silvana Spadafora

352 Background: The Algoma District Cancer Program (ADCP) is located in Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada and services the needs of the 125,000 individuals residing in the Algoma District, which has an area of approximately 49,000 square kilometres. Due to its geographic isolation in Northern Ontario, maintaining standards of care can be challenging to deliver. The objective of this project is to document any improvements in the referral process and treatment of patients with prostate cancer at the ADCP since the arrival of new medical oncologists in July 2013. Methods: Patients who had been seen by a medical oncologist at ADCP from July 2013 to July 2015 were included in this study. Patient charts were analyzed in order to gather information including date of diagnosis, stage at time of referral, date of consult with medical oncologist, previous treatments trialed, and dates of treatment. Patients were divided into two groups, diagnosed prior to 2014 and after 2014, to examine progress at ADCP. Results: From July 2013 to July 2015, there were 73 patients seen by a medical oncologist at ADCP with a diagnosis of prostate cancer. Of these patients, 54 were diagnosed prior to 2014 and 19 were diagnosed after 2014. For all patients diagnosed prior to 2014, the average number of years from diagnosis to a medical oncology consult was 5.24 years, with the longest being 19 years for two patients. In comparison, for all patients diagnosed after 2014, a medical oncologist saw them only 0.26 years on average after they were diagnosed. Since 2014, lines of therapy administered after referral to medical oncology have become greater than before 2014. Specifically for stage IV prostate cancer patients, the average number of lines of therapy ordered by a medical oncologist has increased for patients diagnosed after 2014. Conclusions: Since the arrival of new medical oncologists at ADCP in July 2013, the average number of years after diagnosis that a patient is referred to the clinic has decreased, while the average lines of therapies utilized after their consult with a medical oncologist has increased, showing an improvement in both referral processes and adherence to standard guidelines in the treatment of prostate cancer patients.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessio Cortellini ◽  
Giampiero Porzio ◽  
Eva K. Masel ◽  
Anna S. Berghoff ◽  
Barbara Knotzer ◽  
...  

One of the first steps to early integrate palliative care into oncology practice is a timely and efficient evaluation of symptoms (Bakitas et al., 2015; Davis et al., 2015; Temel et al., 2010). In a recent position paper, the Italian Association of Medical Oncology tells oncologists that they “must be able to prevent, recognize, measure, and treat all cancer-related symptoms” (Zagonel et al., 2017). Major international scientific societies such as the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society of Medical Oncology have often defined the key role of symptoms evaluation and management to force the integration of palliative care into oncology (Davis et al., 2015; Ferrel et al., 2017). Nevertheless, a recent survey conducted by the Italian Association of Medical Oncology shows that only 20% of oncologists regularly uses valid tools to evaluate symptoms, 45% exclusively use them in the context of clinical trials, 30% use them only occasionally, and 5% never use them (Zagonel et al., 2016).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document