Applying the Strategic Planning Process to a Large Research Consortium: The Example of the National Cancer Institute Cohort Consortium.

Strategic planning is conducted by many organizations to systematically evaluate and assess their current state, establish or update their mission and/or goals, and identify strategies and activities to achieve the goals. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cohort Consortium is a collaborative network of 62 prospective cohort studies and their affiliated investigators that focus on cancer etiology and outcome research. The organization's membership grew markedly from 10 cohort studies at its inception in 2001 to 59 cohort studies at the time of the launch of the Consortium's strategic planning in 2017. This paper describes the strategic planning process that was conducted to establish organizational goals and to develop strategies and activities consistent with the Consortium's mission. The process involved a 2-year iterative approach combining surveys and in-person meetings. The resulting goals focus on communication, career development, research facilitation, scientific gaps, and common scientific challenges. The NCI Cohort Consortium's strategic plan and evaluation of its progress will advance new initiatives in cancer etiology and survivorship research.

The National Cancer Institute Cohort Consortium: An International Pooling Collaboration of 58 Cohorts from 20 Countries.

Cohort studies have been central to the establishment of the known causes of cancer. To dissect cancer etiology in more detail-for instance, for personalized risk prediction and prevention, assessment of risks of subtypes of cancer, and assessment of small elevations in risk-there is a need for analyses of far larger cohort datasets than available in individual existing studies. To address these challenges, the NCI Cohort Consortium was founded in 2001. It brings together 58 cancer epidemiology cohorts from 20 countries to undertake large-scale pooling research. The cohorts in aggregate include over nine million study participants, with biospecimens available for about two million of these. Research in the Consortium is undertaken by >40 working groups focused on specific cancer sites, exposures, or other research areas. More than 180 publications have resulted from the Consortium, mainly on genetic and other cancer epidemiology, with high citation rates. This article describes the foundation of the Consortium; its structure, governance, and methods of working; the participating cohorts; publications; and opportunities. The Consortium welcomes new members with cancer-oriented cohorts of 10,000 or more participants and an interest in collaborative research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(11); 1307-19. ©2018 AACR.

Frontiers in cancer epidemiology: a challenge to the research community from the Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program at the National Cancer Institute.

The Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program (EGRP) at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) is developing scientific priorities for cancer epidemiology research in the next decade. We would like to engage the research community and other stakeholders in a planning effort that will include a workshop in December 2012 to help shape new foci for cancer epidemiology research. To facilitate the process of defining the future of cancer epidemiology, we invite the research community to join in an ongoing web-based conversation at http://blog-epi.grants.cancer.gov/ to develop priorities and the next generation of high-impact studies.

Cancer and environment: definitions and misconceptions.

BACKGROUND: Scientific evidence supports an association between environmental exposures and cancer. However, a reliable estimate for the proportion of cancers attributable to environmental factors is currently unavailable. This may be related to the varying definitions of the term "environment." The current review aims to determine how the reporting of the definition of the environment and of the estimates of environmentally attributable risks have changed over the past 50 years. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to retrieve all relevant publications relating to the environment and cancer from January 1960 to December 2010 using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science. Definitions of the environment and environmentally attributable risks for cancer were extracted from each relevant publication. RESULTS: The search resulted in 261 relevant publications. We found vast discrepancies in the definition of the environment, ranging from broad (including lifestyle factors, occupational exposures, pollutants, and other non-genetic factors) to narrow (including air, water, and soil pollutants). Reported environmentally attributable risk estimates ranged from 1% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings emphasize the discrepancies in reporting environmental causation of cancer and the limits of inference in interpreting environmentally attributable risk estimates. Rather than achieving consensus on a single definition for the environment, we suggest the focus be on achieving transparency for any environmentally attributable risks.

Educational needs assessment for pediatric health care providers on pesticide toxicity.

PURPOSE: This pilot project, carried out under the National Strategies for Health Care Providers: Pesticides Initiative, assessed the attitudes, beliefs and practices of pediatricians, nurse practitioners, physicians assistants, and nurses in the metropolitan Washington, D.C., area and the surrounding rural counties regarding health effects of pesticide toxicity and continuing education on pesticide toxicity in the years 2001-2002. METHODS: Data were collected from practitioners (physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners) and nurses using questionnaires as well as from practitioners using focus groups. Sites for questionnaire distribution and focus groups were selected to represent a variety of practice types and geographic settings. One-hundred-sixty questionnaires from practitioners and 43 from nurses were analyzed. These issues were probed further in six focus groups with 29 participants. RESULTS: Most respondents in both groups did not frequently diagnose or ask questions about pesticide toxicity on patient histories. Most focus group participants were more comfortable answering questions about acute pesticide toxicity, and many relied on poison control centers for assistance with management of acute cases. They expressed less understanding and more uncertainties about chronic toxicity. When asked questions by patients, 64% of practitioners and 69% of nurses felt poorly prepared to answer them. Forty percent of practitioners but only 26% of nurses felt it was important to obtain more information on pesticides. There were divergent preferences on ways to obtain continuing medical education (CME) in general, but a recurrent theme was the need to make CME on pesticide toxicity clinically relevant and one topic among several in a CME conference. Lectures and short courses were the most commonly preferred modes of education among both practitioners and nurses. CONCLUSION: Educational materials to reach this population of pediatric clinicians on pesticides, as well as other environmental health topics, should make the case justifying the importance of the topics, highlight information of clinical relevance, and use a variety of media. These results should be confirmed before being generalized to a broader group of clinicians, although the consistency of findings between focus groups suggests they are robust, at least for this geographic area.