scholarly journals Need for Global Partnership in Cancer Care: Perceptions of Cancer Care Researchers Attending the 2010 Australia and Asia Pacific Clinical Oncology Research Development Workshop

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 324-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Kim Lyerly ◽  
Amy P. Abernethy ◽  
Martin R. Stockler ◽  
Bogda Koczwara ◽  
Zeba Aziz ◽  
...  

Cancer research globally faces significant barriers, many of which are magnified in the developing country setting.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas J. Vogelzang ◽  
Steven I. Benowitz ◽  
Sylvia Adams ◽  
Carol Aghajanian ◽  
Susan Marina Chang ◽  
...  

A MESSAGE FROM ASCO'S PRESIDENT It has been forty years since President Richard Nixon signed the National Cancer Act of 1971, which many view as the nation's declaration of the “War on Cancer.” The bill has led to major investments in cancer research and significant increases in cancer survival. Today, two-thirds of patients survive at least five years after being diagnosed with cancer compared with just half of all diagnosed patients surviving five years after diagnosis in 1975. The research advances detailed in this year's Clinical Cancer Advances demonstrate that improvements in cancer screening, treatment, and prevention save and improve lives. But although much progress has been made, cancer remains one of the world's most serious health problems. In the United States, the disease is expected to become the nation's leading cause of death in the years ahead as our population ages. I believe we can accelerate the pace of progress, provided that everyone involved in cancer care works together to achieve this goal. It is this viewpoint that has shaped the theme for my presidential term: Collaborating to Conquer Cancer. In practice, this means that physicians and researchers must learn from every patient's experience, ensure greater collaboration between members of a patient's medical team, and involve more patients in the search for cures through clinical trials. Cancer advocates, insurers, and government agencies also have important roles to play. Today, we have an incredible opportunity to improve the quality of cancer care by drawing lessons from the real-world experiences of patients. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) is taking the lead in this area, in part through innovative use of health information technology. In addition to our existing quality initiatives, ASCO is working with partners to develop a comprehensive rapid-learning system for cancer care. When complete, this system will provide physicians with personalized, real-time information that can inform the care of every patient with cancer as well as connect patients with their entire medical teams. The rapid learning system will form a continuous cycle of learning: securely capturing data from every patient at the point of care, drawing on evidence-based guidelines, and evaluating quality of care against those standards and the outcomes of other patients. Clinical trials are another area in which collaboration is critical. Increasing clinical trial participation will require commitment across the cancer community from physicians, patients, insurers, hospitals, and industry. A 2010 report by the Institute of Medicine described challenges to participation in trials by both physicians and patients and provided recommendations for revitalizing clinical trials conducted through the National Cancer Institute's Cooperative Group Program. ASCO has pledged its support for the full implementation of these recommendations. More broadly, ASCO recently outlined a bold vision for translational and clinical cancer research for the next decade and made recommendations to achieve that vision. Accelerating Progress Against Cancer: ASCO's Blueprint for Transforming Clinical and Translational Research, released in November, calls for a research system that takes full advantage of today's scientific and technologic opportunities and sets a high-level agenda for policy makers, regulators, and advocates. Cancer research has transformed cancer care in the past forty years, and this year's Clinical Cancer Advances illustrates how far we have come in the past year alone. We now have a tremendous opportunity to use today's knowledge and collaborate across all facets of cancer care to conquer this deadly disease. Michael P. Link, MD President American Society of Clinical Oncology


Author(s):  
Worta McCaskill-Stevens ◽  
Alan P. Lyss ◽  
Marge Good ◽  
Thomas Marsland ◽  
Rogerio Lilenbaum

Research in the community setting is essential for the translation of advances in cancer research into practice and improving cancer care for all populations. The National Cancer Institute is proposing a new community-based program, NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), which is the alignment of two existing programs, the Community Clinical Oncology Program, Minority-Based Community Clinical Oncology Program, and their Research Bases, and the National Cancer Institute's Community Cancer Centers Program. NCROP will support cancer control, prevention, treatment, and screening clinical trials and expand its research scope to include cancer care delivery research. Cancer disparities research will be integrated into studies across the continuum of NCORP research. Input from current NCI-funded community investigators provides critical insight into the challenges faced by oncology practices within various organizational structures. Furthermore, these investigators identify the resources, both administrative and clinical, that will be required in the community setting to support cancer care delivery research and to meet the requirements for a new generation of clinical research. The American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has initiated a forum to focus on the conduct of clinical research in the community setting. Resources are being developed to help practices in managing cancer care in community settings.


2021 ◽  
pp. 826-832
Author(s):  
Jay G. Ronquillo ◽  
William T. Lester

PURPOSE Cloud computing has led to dramatic growth in the volume, variety, and velocity of cancer data. However, cloud platforms and services present new challenges for cancer research, particularly in understanding the practical tradeoffs between cloud performance, cost, and complexity. The goal of this study was to describe the practical challenges when using a cloud-based service to improve the cancer clinical trial matching process. METHODS We collected information for all interventional cancer clinical trials from ClinicalTrials.gov and used the Google Cloud Healthcare Natural Language Application Programming Interface (API) to analyze clinical trial Title and Eligibility Criteria text. An informatics pipeline leveraging interoperability standards summarized the distribution of cancer clinical trials, genes, laboratory tests, and medications extracted from cloud-based entity analysis. RESULTS There were a total of 38,851 cancer-related clinical trials found in this study, with the distribution of cancer categories extracted from Title text significantly different than in ClinicalTrials.gov ( P < .001). Cloud-based entity analysis of clinical trial criteria identified a total of 949 genes, 1,782 laboratory tests, 2,086 medications, and 4,902 National Cancer Institute Thesaurus terms, with estimated detection accuracies ranging from 12.8% to 89.9%. A total of 77,702 API calls processed an estimated 167,179 text records, which took a total of 1,979 processing-minutes (33.0 processing-hours), or approximately 1.5 seconds per API call. CONCLUSION Current general-purpose cloud health care tools—like the Google service in this study—should not be used for automated clinical trial matching unless they can perform effective extraction and classification of the clinical, genetic, and medication concepts central to precision oncology research. A strong understanding of the practical aspects of cloud computing will help researchers effectively navigate the vast data ecosystems in cancer research.


Author(s):  
Michael P. Kosty ◽  
Anupama Kurup Acheson ◽  
Eric D. Tetzlaff

The clinical practice of oncology has become increasingly complex. An explosion of medical knowledge, increased demands on provider time, and involved patients have changed the way many oncologists practice. What was an acceptable practice model in the past may now be relatively inefficient. This review covers three areas that address these changes. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) National Oncology Census defines who the U.S. oncology community is, and their perceptions of how practice patterns may be changing. The National Cancer Institute (NCI)-ASCO Teams in Cancer Care Project explores how best to employ team science to improve the efficiency and quality of cancer care in the United States. Finally, how physician assistants (PAs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) might be best integrated into team-based care in oncology and the barriers to integration are reviewed.


Diagnostics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 660
Author(s):  
Anca Onaciu ◽  
Raluca Munteanu ◽  
Vlad Cristian Munteanu ◽  
Diana Gulei ◽  
Lajos Raduly ◽  
...  

Considering the complexity of the current framework in oncology, the relevance of animal models in biomedical research is critical in light of the capacity to produce valuable data with clinical translation. The laboratory mouse is the most common animal model used in cancer research due to its high adaptation to different environments, genetic variability, and physiological similarities with humans. Beginning with spontaneous mutations arising in mice colonies that allow for pursuing studies of specific pathological conditions, this area of in vivo research has significantly evolved, now capable of generating humanized mice models encompassing the human immune system in biological correlation with human tumor xenografts. Moreover, the era of genetic engineering, especially of the hijacking CRISPR/Cas9 technique, offers powerful tools in designing and developing various mouse strains. Within this article, we will cover the principal mouse models used in oncology research, beginning with behavioral science of animals vs. humans, and continuing on with genetically engineered mice, microsurgical-induced cancer models, and avatar mouse models for personalized cancer therapy. Moreover, the area of spontaneous large animal models for cancer research will be briefly presented.


2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Weeks ◽  
Dugald Seely ◽  
Lynda Balneaves ◽  
Heather Boon ◽  
Anne Leis ◽  
...  

Objectives: An increasing number of integrative oncology programs are being established across Canada that offer a combination of complementary and conventional medical treatments in a shift towards whole-person cancer care. It was our objective to identify consensus-based research priorities within a coherent research agenda to guide Canadian integrative oncology practice and policy moving forward.Methods: Members of the Integrative Canadian Oncology Research Initiative and the Ottawa Integrative Cancer Centre organized a 2-day consensus workshop, which was preceded by a Delphi survey and stakeholder interviews.Results: Eighty-one participants took part in Round 1 of the Delphi survey, 52 in Round 2 (66.2%) and 45 (86.5%) in Round 3. Nineteen invited stakeholders participated in the 2-day workshop held in Ottawa, Canada. Five inter-related priority research areas emerged as a foundation for a Canadian research agenda: Effectiveness; Safety; Resource and Health Services Utilization; Knowledge Translation; and Developing Integrative Oncology Models. Research is needed within each priority area from a range of different perspectives (e.g., patient, practitioner, health system) and that reflects a continuum of integration from the addition of a single complementary intervention within conventional cancer care to systemic change. Participants brainstormed strategic directions to implement the developing research agenda and identified related opportunities within Canada. A voting process helped to identify working groups to pursue strategic directions within the interest and expertise of meeting participants.Conclusion: The identified research priorities reflect the needs and perspectives of a spectrum of integrative oncology stakeholders. Ongoing stakeholder consultation, including engagement from new stakeholders, is needed to ensure appropriate uptake and implementation of the Canadian research agenda.


2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (11) ◽  
pp. 4479-4481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dorothy Keefe ◽  
Abdullah Al Garni ◽  
Antonio Villalon ◽  
Azza Hassan ◽  
Dora Kwong ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document