Stool DNA testing for early detection of colorectal cancer: systematic review using the HTA Core Model® for Rapid Relative Effectiveness Assessment.

Background: Stool DNA testing for early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is a non-invasive technology with the potential to supplement established CRC screening tests. The aim of this health technology assessment was to evaluate effectiveness and safety of currently CE-marked stool DNA tests, compared to other CRC tests in CRC screening strategies in an asymptomatic screening population. Methods: The assessment was carried out following the guidelines of the European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA). This included a systematic literature search in MED-LINE, Cochrane and EMBASE in 2018. Manufacturers were asked to provide additional data. Five patient interviews helped assessing potential ethical or social aspects and patients' experiences and preferences. We assessed the risk of bias using QUADAS-2, and the quality of the body of evidence using GRADE. Results: We identified three test accuracy studies, two of which investigated a multitarget stool DNA test (Cologuard®, compared fecal immunochemical test (FIT)) and one a combined DNA stool assay (ColoAlert®, compared to guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT), Pyruvate Kinase Isoenzyme Type M2 (M2-PK) and combined gFOBT/M2-PK). We found five published surveys on patient satisfaction. No primary study investigating screening effects on CRC incidence or on overall mortality was found. Both stool DNA tests showed in direct comparison higher sensitivity for the detection of CRC and (advanced) adenoma compared to FIT, or gFOBT, respectively, but had lower specificity. However, these comparative results may depend on the exact type of FIT used. The reported test failure rates were higher for stool DNA testing than for FIT. The certainty of evidence was moderate to high for Cologuard® studies, and low to very low for the ColoAlert® study which refers to a former version of the product and yielded no direct evidence on the test accuracy for ad-vanced versus non-advanced adenoma. Conclusions: ColoAlert® is the only stool DNA test currently sold in Europe and is available at a lower price than Cologuard®, but reliable evidence is lacking. A screening study including the current product version of ColoAlert® and suitable comparators would, therefore, help evaluate the effectiveness of this screening option in a European context.

Developments in National Cancer Control Programmes in Europe - Results From the Analysis of a Pan-European Survey.

INTRODUCTION: National Cancer Control Programmes (NCCPs) provide a country's policy framework for the development of cancer control, focussing on the reduction of cancer morbidity and mortality and improving quality of life of cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: Exploring and analysing to which extent some of the key elements of the European Guide for Quality National Cancer Control Programmes (Guide) are implemented in NCCPs in the EU. METHODS: Survey carried out through 30 countries, EU members, Iceland, Montenegro, Norway and Turkey, focussing on stakeholders' participation, inclusion of all the envisaged chapters from the Guide as well as implementation and dissemination. RESULTS: The results of the policy survey on European NCCPs carried out within Cancer Control Joint Action (CANCON JA) are presented. The response was 30 out of 35 countries. In total, 28 out of 30 countries, which completed the survey, had an NCCP or another cancer document. Cancer documents were mostly single documents, managed and supervised by the respective Ministries of Health and communicated to the public via websites and press. Nine documents were defined as programmes, eight as plans and six as strategies; in five countries, terminology was mixed. Regarding the content, recommended by the Guide from 2015, comprising ten chapter areas in three parts. Only 10 countries included in their NCCPs all elements suggested in the Guide. CONCLUSION: Based on our results, we can see that a more comprehensive approach in the process of NCCPs is needed. Policy should focus on the development of instruments for efficient cancer management, which would encompass the entire trajectory of the cancer care from diagnosis to survivorship and supportive care.

Need for comprehensive management of frailty at an individual level: European perspective from the advantage joint action on frailty.

OBJECTIVES: ADVANTAGE Joint Action is a large collaborative project co-founded by the European Commission and its Member States to build a common understanding of frailty for Member States on which to base a common management approach for older people who are frail or at risk of developing frailty. One of the key objectives of the project is presented in this paper; how to manage frailty at the individual level. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted, including grey literature and good practices when possible. RESULTS: The management of frailty should be directed towards comprehensive and holistic treatment in multiple and related fields. Prevention requires a multifaceted approach addressing factors that have resonance across the individual's life course. Comprehensive geriatric assessment to diagnose the condition and plan a personalized multidomain treatment increases better outcomes. Multicomponent exercise programmes, adequate protein and vitamin D intake, when insufficient, and reduction in polypharmacy and inadequate prescription, are the most effective strategies found in the literature to manage frailty effectively. CONCLUSION: Frailty can be effectively prevented and managed with a multidomain intervention strategy based on comprehensive geriatric assessment.

The role of nutrition in ageing: A narrative review from the perspective of the European joint action on frailty - ADVANTAGE JA.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is sufficient evidence that nutrition and frailty status are related. In order to deliver quality management of frail and pre-frail patients, clinicians and dieticians should understand the role of nutrition in the concept of frailty. This study examines the role of nutrition in ageing in general, malnutrition and the risk of frailty, individual nutritional factors as the risk factors of frailty and lastly nutritional interventions that have a significant role in frailty. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Cinahl and UpToDate. The criterion in selecting the literature was that articles were published between 2002 and 2017. From 39,885 initial hits, 28 publications were selected. RESULTS: Malnutrition or being at risk of malnutrition increases the risk of frailty and its consequences. With regard to the importance of recognizing malnutrition and the risk of malnutrition, the Mini Nutritional Assessment is a validated tool with acceptable sensitivity/specificity to be used for screening and assessment. Frail patients who are at an elevated risk of falls and fractures need Vitamin D supplementation. The promotion of a Mediterranean diet and a protein intake of at least 1-1.2 g per kilogram of body weight per day is beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: One of the main variable risk factors for the development of frailty can be unsuitable nourishment and there is evidence that nutrition and frailty status are related. Successful comprehensive management of frailty requires a balanced healthy nutrition at all ages, preferably in combination with physical activity.

The Partnership of Public Health and Anthropology.

Public health focuses on health of the population and it is concerned with threats to health based on population health analysis. Anthropology covers most aspects that concern human beings. Both sciences converge on community and this fact represents a foundation for the partnership between public health and anthropology. Biological/medical anthropology is one of the highly developed fi elds of anthropology and the most important for public health.

Standardized reporting for rapid relative effectiveness assessments of pharmaceuticals.

OBJECTIVES: Many European countries perform rapid assessments of the relative effectiveness (RE) of pharmaceuticals as part of the reimbursement decision making process. Increased sharing of information on RE across countries may save costs and reduce duplication of work. The objective of this article is to describe the development of a tool for rapid assessment of RE of new pharmaceuticals that enter the market, the HTA Core Model® for Rapid Relative Effectiveness Assessment (REA) of Pharmaceuticals. METHODS: Eighteen member organisations of the European Network of Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) participated in the development of the model. Different versions of the model were developed and piloted in this collaboration and adjusted accordingly based on feedback on the content and feasibility of the model. RESULTS: The final model deviates from the traditional HTA Core Model® used for assessing other types of technologies. This is due to the limited scope (strong focus on RE), the timing of the assessment (just after market authorisation), and strict timelines (e.g. 90 days) required for performing the assessment. The number of domains and assessment elements was limited and it was decided that the primary information sources should preferably be a submission file provided by the marketing authorisation holder and the European Public Assessment Report. CONCLUSIONS: The HTA Core Model® for Rapid REA (version 3.0) was developed to produce standardised transparent RE information of pharmaceuticals. Further piloting can provide input for possible improvements, such as further refining the assessment elements and new methodological guidance on relevant areas.

Joint action European partnership for action against cancer.

Cancer is a major European public health issue and represents the second most important cause of death and morbidity in Europe. Moreover, as a result of constant advances in medicine, medical technology and other sciences, and due to improvements in economic circumstances, cancer survival rates are increasing in Europe and prevalent cases (i.e. number of subjects who have experienced cancer) represent a growing proportion of the population. In order to tackle cancer efficiently throughout the European Member states, the European Commission launched the Joint Action (JA) 'European Partnership for Action Against Cancer' (EPAAC) facilitated by the Community Health Programme, in September 2009. EPAAC is designed to fill a gap in cooperation, collaboration and shared experiences for countries with similar needs and diverse experience in the area of their national cancer control policies. Activities and studies are tackling the main challenges of cancer control in Europe as a whole and in the Member states, including the provision of services and health system responses, human resources and research. In contrast with previous European actions in the field of cancer, EPAAC joins different partners and stakeholders at various levels ranging from Member states (including Iceland and Norway) and Regions to patient representatives.