Benchmarking Cancer Centers: From Care Pathways to Integrated Practice Units.

Background: Structuring cancer care into pathways can reduce variability in clinical practice and improve patient outcomes. International benchmarking can help centers with regard to development, implementation, and evaluation. A further step in the development of multidisciplinary care is to organize care in integrated practice units (IPUs), encompassing the whole pathway and relevant organizational aspects. However, research on this topic is limited. This article describes the development and results of a benchmark tool for cancer care pathways and explores IPU development in cancer centers. Methods: The benchmark tool was developed according to a 13-step benchmarking method and piloted in 7 European cancer centers. Centers provided data and site visits were performed to understand the context in which the cancer center operates and to clarify additional questions. Benchmark data were structured into pathway development and evaluation and assessed against key IPU features. Results: Benchmark results showed that most centers have formalized multidisciplinary pathways and that care teams differed in composition, and found almost 2-fold differences in mammography use efficiency. Suggestions for improvement included positioning pathways formally and structurally evaluating outcomes at a sufficiently high frequency. Based on the benchmark, 3 centers indicating that they had a breast cancer IPU were scored differently on implementation. Overall, we found that centers in Europe are in various stages of development of pathways and IPUs, ranging from an informal pathway structure to a full IPU-type of organization. Conclusions: A benchmark tool for care pathways was successfully developed and tested, and is available in an open format. Our tool allows for the assessment of pathway organization and can be used to assess the status of IPU development. Opportunities for improvement were identified regarding the organization of care pathways and the development toward IPUs. Three centers are in varying degrees of implementation and can be characterized as breast cancer IPUs. Organizing cancer care in an IPU could yield multiple performance improvements.

Limited induction of tumor cross-reactive T cells without a measurable clinical benefit in early melanoma patients vaccinated with human leukocyte antigen class I-modified peptides.

PURPOSE: The progressive immune dysfunctions that occur in patients with advanced melanoma make them unlikely to efficiently respond to cancer vaccines. A multicenter randomized phase II trial was conducted to test whether immunization with modified HLA class I tumor peptides in the context of adjuvant therapy results in better immunologic responses and improved clinical outcomes in patients with early melanoma (stages IIB/C-III). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Forty-three patients were enrolled to undergo vaccination (n = 22) or observation (n = 21). The vaccine included four HLA-A*0201-restricted modified peptides (Melan-A/MART-1([27L]), gp100([210M]), NY-ESO-1([165V]), and Survivin([97M])) emulsified in Montanide ISA51 and injected subcutaneously in combination with cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m(2)) and low-dose IL-2 (3 × 10(6) IU). The immune responses were monitored using ex vivo IFN-γ-ELISpot, HLA/multimer staining, and in vitro short-term peptide sensitization assays. RESULTS: Vaccination induced a rapid and persistent increase in specific effector memory CD8(+) T cells in 75% of the patients. However, this immunization was not associated with any significant increase in disease-free or overall survival as compared with the observation group. An extensive immunologic analysis revealed a significantly reduced cross-recognition of the corresponding native peptides and, most importantly, a limited ability to react to melanoma cells. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant setting is an appealing approach for testing cancer vaccines because specific CD8(+) T cells can be efficiently induced in most vaccinated patients. However, the marginal antitumor activity of the T cells induced by modified peptides in this study largely accounts for the observed lack of benefit of vaccination. These findings suggest reconsidering this immunization strategy, particularly in early disease.