Search

Background: In several European countries, centralization of oesophagogastric cancer surgery has been realized and clinical audits initiated. The present study was designed to evaluate differences in resection rates, outcomes and annual hospital volumes between these countries, and to analyse the relationship between hospital volume and outcomes. Methods: National data were obtained from cancer registries or clinical audits in the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark and England. Differences in outcomes were analysed between countries and between hospital volume categories, adjusting for available case-mix factors. Results: Between 2004 and 2009, 10 854 oesophagectomies and 9010 gastrectomies were registered. Resection rates in England were 18·2 and 21·6 per cent for oesophageal and gastric cancer respectively, compared with 28·5-29·9 and 41·4-41·9 per cent in the Netherlands and Denmark ( P < 0·001). The adjusted 30-day mortality rate after oesophagectomy was lowest in Sweden (1·9 per cent). After gastrectomy, the adjusted 30-day mortality rate was significantly higher in the Netherlands (6·9 per cent) than in Sweden (3·5 per cent; P = 0·017) and Denmark (4·3 per cent; P = 0·029). Increasing hospital volume was associated with a lower 30-day mortality rate after oesophagectomy (odds ratio 0·55 (95 per cent confidence interval 0·42 to 0·72) for at least 41 versus 1-10 procedures per year) and gastrectomy (odds ratio 0·64 (0·41 to 0·99) for at least 21 versus 1-10 procedures per year). Conclusion: Hospitals performing larger numbers of oesophagogastric cancer resections had a lower 30-day mortality rate. Differences in outcomes between several European countries could not be explained by differences in hospital volumes. To understand these differences in outcomes and resection rates, with reliable case-mix adjustments, a uniform European upper gastrointestinal cancer audit with recording of standardized data is warranted. Copyright © 2012 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Various options for axillary staging after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) are available for breast cancer patients with a clinically positive axillary node (cN+). This survey assessed current practices amongst breast cancer specialists., Materials and Methods: A survey was performed amongst members of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and two UK-based Associations: the Association of Breast Surgery and the British Association of Surgical Oncology. The survey included 3 parts: 1. general information, 2. diagnostic work-up and 3. axillary staging after NST., Results: A total of 310 responses were collected: parts 1, 2 and 3 were fully completed by 282 (91%), 270 (87.1%) and 225 (72.6%) respondents respectively. After NST, 153/267 (57.3%) respondents currently perform ALND routinely and 114 (42.7%) respondents perform less invasive restaging of the axilla with possible omission of ALND. In the latter group, 85% does and 15% does not use nodal response seen on imaging to guide the axillary restaging procedure. Regarding respondents that do use imaging: 95% would perform a less invasive staging procedure in case of complete nodal response on imaging (63% sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), excision of a previously marked positive node with SLNB (21%) and without SLNB (11%)). In case of no nodal response on imaging 77% would perform ALND., Conclusion: Current axillary staging and management practices in cN + patients after NST vary widely. To determine optimal axillary staging and management in terms of quality of life and oncologic safety, breast specialists are encouraged to include patients in clinical trials/prospective registries., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

As part of its mission to promote the best surgical care for cancer patients, the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO) has been developing multiple programmes for clinical research along with its educational portfolio. This position paper describes the different research activities of the Society over the past decade and an action plan for the upcoming five years to lead innovative and high quality surgical oncology research. ESSO proposes to consider pragmatic research methodologies as a complement to randomised clinical trials (RCT), advocates for increased funding and operational support in conducting research and aims to enable young surgeons to be active in research and establish partnerships for translational research activities., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Decreased cancer specific survival in older colorectal patients is mainly due to mortality in the first year, emphasizing the importance of the first postoperative year. This study aims to gain an overview and time trends of short-term mortality in octogenarians (≥80 years) with colorectal cancer across four North European countries., Methods: Patients of 80 years or older, operated for colorectal cancer (stage I-III) between 2005 and 2014, were included. Population-based cohorts from Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Sweden were collected. Separately for colon- and rectal cancer, 30-day, 90-day, one-year, and excess one-year mortality were calculated. Also, short-term mortality over three time periods (2005-2008, 2009-2011, 2012-2014) was analyzed., Results: In total, 35,158 colon cancer patients and 10,144 rectal cancer patients were included. For colon cancer, 90-day mortality rate was highest in Denmark (15%) and lowest in Sweden (8%). For rectal cancer, 90-day mortality rate was highest in Belgium (11%) and lowest in Sweden (7%). One-year excess mortality rate of colon cancer patients decreased from 2005 to 2008 to 2012-2014 for all countries (Belgium: 17%-11%, Denmark: 21%-15%, the Netherlands: 18%-10%, and Sweden: 10%-8%). For rectal cancer, from 2005 to 2008 to 2012-2014 one-year excess mortality rate decreased in the Netherlands from 16% to 7% and Sweden: 8%-2%)., Conclusions: Short-term mortality rates were high in octogenarians operated for colorectal cancer. Short-term mortality rates differ across four North European countries, but decreased over time for both colon and rectal cancer patients in all countries., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: As older gastric cancer patients are often excluded from randomized clinical trials, the most appropriate treatment strategy for these patients remains unclear. The current study aimed to gain more insight in treatment strategies and relative survival of older patients with resectable gastric cancer across Europe., Methods: Population-based cohorts from Belgium, Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden were combined. Patients ≥70 years with resectable gastric cancer (cT1-4a, cN0-2, cM0), diagnosed between 2004 and 2014 were included. Resection rates, administration of chemotherapy (irrespective of surgery), and relative survival within a country according to stage were determined., Results: Overall, 6698 patients were included. The percentage of operated patients was highest in Belgium and lowest in Sweden for both stage II (74% versus 56%) and stage III disease (57% versus 25%). For stage III, chemotherapy administration was highest in Belgium (44%) and lowest in Sweden (2%). Three year relative survival for stage I, II, and III disease in Belgium was 67.8% (95% CI:62.8-72.6), 41.2% (95% CI:37.3-45.2), 17.8% (95% CI:12.5-24.0), compared with 56.7% (95% CI:51.5-61.7), 31.3% (95% CI:27.6-35.2), 8.2% (95% CI:4.4-13.4) in Sweden. There were no significant differences in treatment strategies of patients with stage I disease., Conclusion: Substantial treatment differences are observed across North European countries for patients with stages II and III resectable gastric cancer aged 70 years or older. In the present comparison, treatment strategies with a higher proportion of patients undergoing surgery seemed to be associated with higher survival rates for patients with stages II or III disease., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The EUropean REgistration of Cancer CAre (EURECCA) consortium aims to investigate differences in treatment and to improve cancer care through Europe. The purpose of this study was to compare neo- and adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) and outcome after tumor resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma stage I and II in the EURECCA Pancreas consortium., Methods: The eight, collaborating national, regional, and single-center partners shared their anonymized dataset. Patients diagnosed in 2012-2013 who underwent tumor resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma stage I and II were investigated with respect to treatment and survival and compared using uni- and multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses. All comparisons were performed separately per registry type: national, regional, and single-center registries., Results: In total, 2052 patients were included. Stage II was present in the majority of patients. The use of neo-ACT was limited in most registries (range 2.8-15.5%) and was only different between Belgium and The Netherlands after adjustment for potential confounders. The use of ACT was different between the registries (range 40.5-70.0%), even after adjustment for potential confounders. Ninety-day mortality was also different between the registries (range 0.9-13.6%). In multivariable analyses for overall survival, differences were observed between the national and regional registries. Furthermore, patients in ascending age groups and patients with stage II showed a significant worse overall survival., Conclusions: This study provides a clear insight in clinical practice in the EURECCA Pancreas consortium. The differences observed in (neo-)ACT and outcome give us the chance to further investigate the best practices and improve outcome of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Background: In the randomized Asian REGATTA trial, no survival benefit was shown for additional gastrectomy over chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced gastric cancer with a single incurable factor, thereby discouraging surgery for these patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate treatment strategies for patients with metastatic gastric cancer in daily practice in five European countries, along with relative survival in each country., Methods: Nationwide population-based data from Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden were combined. Patients with primary metastatic gastric cancer diagnosed between 2006 and 2014 were included. The proportion of gastric resections performed and the administration of chemotherapy (irrespective of surgery) within each country were determined. Relative survival according to country was calculated., Results: Overall, 15 057 patients with gastric cancer were included. The proportion of gastric resections varied from 8·1 per cent in the Netherlands and Denmark to 18·3 per cent in Belgium. Administration of chemotherapy was 39·2 per cent in the Netherlands, compared with 63·2 per cent in Belgium. The 6-month relative survival rate was between 39·0 (95 per cent c.i. 37·8 to 40·2) per cent in the Netherlands and 54·1 (52·1 to 56·9) per cent in Belgium., Conclusion: There is variation in the use of gastrectomy and chemotherapy in patients with metastatic gastric cancer, and subsequent differences in survival.

Background: In many European countries, short-term 5 × 5 Gy radiotherapy has become the standard preoperative treatment of patients with resectable rectal cancer. Individualized risk assessment might allow a better selection of patients who will benefit from postoperative treatment and intensified follow-up., Patients and Methods: From patient's data from three European rectal cancer trials (N = 2881), we developed multivariate cox nomograms reflecting the risk for local recurrence (LR), distant metastases (DM) and overall survival (OS). Evaluated variables were age, gender, tumour distance from the anal verge, the use of radiotherapy, surgical technique (total mesorectal excision/conventional surgery), surgery type (low anterior resection/abdominoperineal resection), time from randomization to surgery, residual disease (R0 versus R1 + 2), pT-stage, pN-stage and surgical complications., Results: Pathological T- and N-status are of vital importance for an accurate prediction of LR, DM and OS. Short-course radiotherapy reduces the rate of LR. The developed nomograms are capable of predicting events with a validation c-index of 0.79 (LR), 0.76 (DM) and 0.75 (OS). The proposed stratification in risk groups allowed significant distinction between Kaplan-Meier curves for outcome., Conclusion: The developed nomograms can contribute to better individual risk prediction for LR, DM and OS for patients operated on rectal cancer. The practicality of the defined risk groups makes decision support in the consulting room feasible, assisting physicians to select patients for adjuvant therapy or intensified follow-up., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers in Europe. Over the past few decades, important advances have been made in screening, staging and treatment of colorectal cancer. However, considerable variation between and within European countries remains, which implies that further improvements are possible. The most important remaining question now is: when are we, health care professionals, delivering the best available care to patients with colon or rectal cancer? Currently, quality assurance is a major issue in colorectal cancer care and quality assurance awareness is developing in almost all disciplines involved in the treatment of colorectal cancer patients. Quality assurance has shown to be effective in clinical trials. For example, standardisation and quality control were introduced in the Dutch TME trial and led to marked improvements of local control and survival in rectal cancer patients. Besides, audit structures can also be very effective in monitoring cancer management and national audits showed to further improve outcome in colorectal cancer patients. To reduce the differences between European countries, an international, multidisciplinary, outcome-based quality improvement programme, European Registration of Cancer Care (EURECCA), has been initiated. In the near future, the EURECCA dataset will perform research on subgroups as elderly patients or patients with comorbidities, which are often excluded from trials. For optimal colorectal cancer care, quality assurance in guideline formation and in multidisciplinary team management is also of great importance. The aim of this review was to create greater awareness and to give an overview of quality assurance in the management of colorectal cancer., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Although the incidence of gastric cancer has fallen steadily in developed countries over the past 50 years, outcomes in Western countries remain poor, primarily due to the advanced stage of the disease at presentation. While earlier diagnosis would help to improve outcomes for patients with gastric cancer, better understanding of the biology of the disease is also needed, along with advances in therapy. Indeed, progress in the treatment of gastric cancer has been limited, mainly because of its genetic complexity and heterogeneity. As a result, there is an urgent need to apply precision medicine to the management of the disease in order to ensure that individuals receive the most appropriate treatment. This article suggests a number of strategies that may help to accelerate progress in treating patients with gastric cancer. Incorporation of some of these approaches could help to improve the quality of life and survival for patients diagnosed with the disease. Standardisation of care across Europe through expansion of the European Registration of Cancer Care (EURECCA) registry - a European cancer audit that aims to improve quality and decrease variation in care across the region - may also be expected to lead to improved outcomes for those suffering from this common malignancy., (Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The first multidisciplinary consensus conference on colon and rectal cancer was held in December 2012, achieving a majority of consensus for diagnostic and treatment decisions using the Delphi Method. This article will give a critical appraisal of the topics discussed during the meeting and in the consensus document by well-known leaders in surgery that were involved in this multidisciplinary consensus process. Scientific evidence, experience and opinions are collected to support multidisciplinary teams (MDT) with arguments for medical decision-making in diagnosis, staging and treatment strategies for patients with colon or rectal cancer. Surgery is the cornerstone of curative treatment for colon and rectal cancer. Standardizing treatment is an effective instrument to improve outcome of multidisciplinary cancer care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. In this article, a review of the following focuses; Perioperative care, age and colorectal surgery, obstructive colorectal cancer, stenting, surgical anatomical considerations, total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery and training, surgical considerations for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and local recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), surgery in stage IV colorectal cancer, definitions of quality of surgery, transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), laparoscopic colon and rectal surgery, preoperative radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy, and how about functional outcome after surgery?, (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cancer care is undergoing an important paradigm shift from a disease-focused management to a patient-centred approach, in which increasingly more attention is paid to psychosocial aspects, quality of life, patients' rights and empowerment and survivorship. In this context, multidisciplinary teams emerge as a practical necessity for optimal coordination among health professionals and clear communication with patients. The European Partnership for Action Against Cancer (EPAAC), an initiative launched by the European Commission in 2009, addressed the multidisciplinary care from a policy perspective in order to define the core elements that all tumour-based multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) should include. To that effect, a working group conference was held in January 2013 within the EPAAC Work Package 7 (on Healthcare) framework., Methods: The consensus group consisted of high-level representatives from the following European scientific societies, patient associations and stakeholders: European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European SocieTy for Radiology & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG), European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS), International Psycho-Oncology Society (IPOS),European Cancer Patient Coalition (ECPC), EuropaColon, Europa Donna - The European Breast Cancer Coalition, Association of European Cancer Leagues (ECL), Organisation of European Cancer Institutes (OECI), EUSOMA - European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists, European Hospital and Healthcare Federation (HOPE) and EPAAC Work Packages 5 (Health promotion and prevention), 7, 8 (Research), 9 (Information systems) and 10 (Cancer plans). A background document with a list of 26 core issues drawn from a systematic review of the literature was used to guide the discussion. Five areas related to MDTs were covered: care objectives, organisation, clinical assessment, patients' rights and empowerment and policy support. Preliminary drafts of the document were widely circulated for consultation and amendments by the working group before final approval., Results: The working group unanimously formulated a Policy Statement on Multidisciplinary Cancer Care to define the core elements that should be implemented by all tumour-based MDTs. This document identifies MDTs as the core component in cancer care organisation and sets down the key elements to guide changes across all European health systems., Conclusion: MDTs are an essential instrument of effective cancer care policy, and their continued development crucial to providing patients the care they need and deserve. While implementation must remain in local hands, European health systems can still benefit from having a basis for an effective multidisciplinary model of cooperation. This policy statement is intended to serve as a reference for policymakers and healthcare providers who wish to improve the services currently provided to the cancer patients whose lives and well-being depend on their action., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Over 40% of breast cancer patients are diagnosed above the age of 65. Treatment of these elderly patients will probably vary over countries. The aim of this study was to make an international comparison (several European countries and the US) of surgical and radiation treatment for elderly women with early stage breast cancer. Survival comparisons were also made. Data were obtained from national or regional population-based registries in the Netherlands, Switzerland, Ireland, Belgium, Germany, and Portugal. For the US patients were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Early stage breast cancer patients aged ≥ 65 diagnosed between 1995 and 2005 were included. An international comparison was made for breast and axillary surgery, radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery (BCS), and relative or cause-specific survival. Overall, 204.885 patients were included. The proportion of patients not receiving any surgery increased with age in many countries; however, differences between countries were large. In most countries more than half of all elderly patients received breast conserving surgery (BCS), with the highest percentage in Switzerland. The proportion of elderly patients that received radiotherapy after BCS decreased with age in all countries. Moreover, in all countries the proportion of patients who do not receive axillary surgery increased with age. No large differences in survival between countries were recorded. International comparisons of surgical treatment for elderly women with early stage breast cancer are scarce. This study showed large international differences in treatment of elderly early stage breast cancer patients, with the most striking result the large proportion of elderly who did not undergo surgery at all. Despite large treatment differences, survival does not seem to be affected in a major way.

Quality of healthcare is a hot topic and this is especially true for cancer care. New surgical techniques and effective neoadjuvant treatment regimens have significantly improved colorectal cancer outcome. Nevertheless, there seem to be substantial differences in quality of care between European countries, hospitals and doctors. To reduce hospital variation, most initiatives aim on selective referral, encouraging patients to seek care in high-volume hospitals, where cancer care is concentrated to site-specialist multidisciplinary teams. As an alternative to volume-based referral, hospitals and surgeons can also improve their results by learning from their own outcome statistics and those from colleagues treating a similar patient group. European national audit registries in surgical oncology have led to improvements with a greater impact on survival than any of the adjuvant therapies currently under study. Moreover, they offer the possibility to perform research on patient groups that are usually excluded from clinical trials. Nevertheless, between European countries remain differences in outcome and treatment schedules that cannot be easily explained. The European CanCer Organisation (ECCO) has recognised these importances and created the 'European Registration of Cancer Care' (EURECCA) framework to develop a European colorectal audit structure. EURECCA will advance future treatment improvements and spread these to all European cancer patients. It provides opportunities to treat elderly and comorbid patients evidence based while it offers an unique insight in social-economical healthcare matters such as the consequences of commercialisation, treatment availability and screening initiatives. As such, ECCO has established the basis for a strong, multidisciplinary audit structure with the commitment to improve cancer care for every European cancer patient., (Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The purpose of this study is to analyze the pooled results of multimodality treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) in four major treatment centers with particular expertise in intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT)., Patients and Methods: A total of 605 patients with LARC who underwent multimodality treatment up to 2005 were studied. The basic treatment principle was preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy, intended radical surgery, IORT and elective adjuvant chemotherapy (aCT). In uni- and multivariate analyses, risk factors for local recurrence (LR), distant metastases (DM) and overall survival (OS) were studied., Results: Chemoradiotherapy lead to more downstaging and complete remissions than radiotherapy alone (P < 0.001). In all, 42% of the patients received aCT, independent of tumor-node-metastasis stage or radicality of the resection. LR rate, DM rate and OS were 12.0%, 29.2% and 67.1%, respectively. Risk factors associated with LR were no downstaging, lymph node (LN) positivity, margin involvement and no postoperative chemotherapy. Male gender, preoperatively staged T4 disease, no downstaging, LN positivity and margin involvement were associated with a higher risk for DM. A risk model was created to determine a prognostic index for individual patients with LARC., Conclusions: Overall oncological results after multimodality treatment of LARC are promising. Adding aCT to the treatment can possibly improve LR rates.

In recent years there have been significant improvements in outcome of rectal cancer treatment. Both new surgical techniques as well as effective neoadjuvant treatment regimens have contributed to these improvements. It is key to spread these advances towards every rectal cancer patient and to make sure that not only patients who are treated within the framework of clinical trials may benefit from these advancements. Throughout Europe there have been interesting quality programs that have proved to facilitate the spread of up to date knowledge and skills among medical professionals resulting in improved treatment outcome. Nevertheless, between European countries remain differences in outcome and treatment schedules that cannot be easily explained. The European CanCer Organisation (ECCO) has recognised these importances's and created the 'European Registration of Cancer Care' (EURECCA) framework to develop a European colorectal audit structure. EURECCA will advance future treatment improvements and spread these to all European cancer patients. It provides opportunities to treat elderly and comorbid patients evidence based while it offers an unique insight in social-economical healthcare matters. As such, ECCO has established the basis for a strong, multidisciplinary audit structure with the commitment to improve cancer care for every European cancer patient.

Cancer incidence increases each year in Europe and the role of surgeons to diagnose and treat patients with cancer is pivotal. In Europe many cancer surgeons are organised in the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO). Surgical oncology covers the treatment of solid tumours of the oro-eosophago-gastrointestinal tract, of parenchymal and endocrine organs and of skin, mesenchymal, neurogenic, bone and soft tissues. Surgical oncology also includes prevention, genetic counselling, specific diagnostic and staging procedures, rehabilitation and follow-up care. Surgical oncology is focused on multimodality therapy. For appropriate education in surgical oncology, a surgeon must work in a multidisciplinary environment. Many cancer centers and surgical departments within Europe provide good cancer care. However, no common criteria to become a teaching unit in surgical oncology have been defined. Furthermore, we do not have a system for validation and accreditation of their teaching capability. Therefore, ESSO proposes a core curriculum for the specialist training in surgical oncology in Europe.

A multidisciplinary approach is mandatory for patients with gastric cancer. Patients should be managed by an experienced team of physicians. The outcome of patients is related to the experience of the multidisciplinary team. Surgery is the cornerstone of the management of patients with resectable gastric cancer. The standard recommendations for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma are free-margin surgery with at least D1 resection combined to removal of a minimum of 15 lymph nodes. It has been shown that the outcome of patients with resectable gastric cancer can be improved by a strategy of perioperative (pre- and postoperative) chemotherapy or by postoperative chemoradiotherapy. The evidence comes from large randomised phase 3 studies. In the treatment of unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, no chemotherapy combination was accepted as the gold standard. Cisplatin/5-FU (CF) and ECF (epirubicin plus CF) regimens have been investigated widely in clinical studies and were until recently presented as the reference regimens. Despite a relative chemosensitivity of gastric cancer, a low rate of complete response was obtained, the response duration was short and patients' outcomes remained poor. Recently, new options have been introduced in the management of advanced gastric cancer. It has been shown that capecitabine is at least as good as 5-FU and that oxaliplatin at least as good as cisplatin in these combinations. It has also been demonstrated that the addition of docetaxel to CF resulted in statistically significant improved efficacy endpoints (including patient's quality of life), but also in an increased toxicity. The DCF regimen (docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-FU) has become, therefore, a new active option in advanced gastric cancer in selected patients in good condition. Further randomised trials are therefore to be designed to further improve chemotherapy by modifying and optimising the chemotherapy regimens, and investigating novel treatment combinations. The addition of biological agents to the optimal chemotherapy regimen may achieve further improvements in efficacy.

The aim of this study was to evaluate prognostic factors for isolated loco-regional recurrence in patients treated for invasive stage I or II breast cancer. The study population comprised 3602 women who had undergone primary surgery for early stage breast cancer, who were enrolled in European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trials 10801, 10854, or 10902, by breast conservation (55%) and mastectomy (45%). The median follow-up time varied from 5.3 (range: 0.6-9.5) to 11.9 years (range: 0.6-17.4). Main outcome was the occurrence of isolated loco-regional recurrence. The results of multivariate analysis showed that younger age and breast conservation were risk factors for isolated loco-regional recurrence (breast cancer under 35 years of age versus over 50 years of age: hazard ratio 2.80 (95% CI 1.41-5.60)); breast cancer age 35-50 years versus over 50 years: hazard ratio 1.72 (95% CI 1.17-2.54); breast conservation (hazard ratio: 1.82 (95% CI 1.17-2.86)). After perioperative chemotherapy, less isolated loco-regional recurrences were observed (hazard ratio 0.63 (95% CI 0.44-0.91)). No significant interaction effects were observed. It is concluded that young age and breast conserving therapy are both independent predictors for isolated loco-regional recurrence. As an isolated loco-regional recurrence is a potentially curable condition, women treated with breast conservation or diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age should be monitored closely to detect local recurrence at an early stage.

Surgery is the key to cure for patients with rectal cancer. Surgical techniques are evolving with conventional blunt dissection being increasingly abandoned for the sake of total mesorectal excision (TME), leading to favourable clinical and functional outcome. Surgical quality assurance programmes, involving training of general surgeons to adopt the TME technique, have proven to be feasible and result in improved outcome compared to historical controls. In this overview, developments in rectal cancer treatment are highlighted, the relation of surgeon and/or hospital volume with treatment outcome is discussed, and future directions in optimising rectal cancer treatment are considered.

The EORTC Breast Cancer Group (EBCG) is a multidisciplinary international group created in 1962 in conjunction with the EORTC. This group has always focused its activities on the development of new cancer treatments and strategies for all categories of breast cancer. It has been active both in drug development, as well as in the development of new radiotherapy and surgical techniques to attempt to improve cure rates and loco-regional control. Over 40 years, the EBCG has performed dozens of clinical studies including several thousands of patients. Many of these studies have contributed to the clinical knowledge on the treatment of breast cancer and have influenced the standard management of this tumour. Beside its clinical research activities, the Group has also been very active in developing guidelines for breast cancer research, promoting high standards of care in conferences, as well as in fellowships and quality assurance programmes. EBCG is a founding member of the Breast InterGroup (BIG).

The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) has a long history in the development of quality assurance, in particular in radio- and chemotherapy. Quality assurance in surgical oncology is considered to be more complicated, because it is a multistep procedure depending on the individual. Because of the growing importance of the quality of surgical intervention in the multi-modality treatment approach of most cancers, the EORTC recently decided to investigate the current status of quality assurance programmes, both outside and within, the EORTC. The review of EORTC involvement in this area has been conducted on the basis of interviews with subcommittee chairmen and Data Center teams of the EORTC clinical research groups. In addition, clinical trial protocols, case report forms (CRFs) and publications by the EORTC groups related to this field were considered as possible sources of information. Several methods have been used or are currently under investigation to ensure the quality of surgery within clinical trials. These include review of reported data, standardisation of surgery and pathology forms, training sessions and site visits. However, there has been no attempt to harmonise these initiatives across the different medical specialties. The EORTC will have to address this problem within its short-term scientific strategy.

The outcome after surgery for rectal cancer differs markedly between patient series regarding local recurrence rates and survival. A high incidence of local recurrence is associated with conventional, nonstandardized procedures. To improve results of surgery, various additional treatments, such as radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy, have been tested. The Swedish Rectal Cancer Trial (SRCT) was the first trial to show that better local control achieved with preoperative radiotherapy resulted in improved survival. In recent years local control and survival have been further improved by the introduction of standardized total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery. A major problem of published studies on adjuvant therapy is that surgery was not standardized in these studies. Furthermore, quality control of the surgical technique by standardized pathological examination of the specimen is absent in most studies. In Europe, TME has become the preferred standard of operative management for rectal cancer. Adjuvant therapy studies should now be reexamined based on a platform of standardized, optimal surgery and pathology. We studied the European trials in which TME surgery is intentionally performed. Most of these trials are still in progress, with follow-up too short for definitive results, apart from interim analyses. However, the Dutch TME trial has already shown that performing a large, multicenter trial with quality control of both surgery and pathology is feasible.

Purpose: Patients with invasive breast cancer may develop a local recurrence (LR) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Younger age has been found to be an independent risk factor for LR. Within a group of premenopausal node-negative breast cancer patients, we studied risk factors for LR and the effect of perioperative chemotherapy (PeCT) on LR., Patients and Methods: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) conducted a randomized trial (EORTC 10854) to compare surgery followed by one course of PeCT (fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide) with surgery alone. From patients treated on this trial, we selected premenopausal patients with node-negative breast cancer who were treated with BCT to examine whether histologic characteristics and the expression of various proteins (estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, p53, Ki-67, bcl-2, CD31, c-erbB-2/neu) are risk factors for subsequent LR. Also, the effect of one course of PeCT on the LR risk (LRR) was studied., Results: Using multivariate analysis, age younger than 43 years (relative risk [RR], 2.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.46 to 5.18; P =.002), multifocal growth (RR, 3.34; 95% CI, 1.27 to 8.77; P =.014), and elevated levels of p53 (RR, 2. 14; 95% CI, 1.13 to 4.05; P =.02) were associated with higher LRR. Also, PeCT was found to reduce LRR by more than 50% (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.86; P =.02). Patients younger than 43 years who received PeCT achieved similar LR rates as those of patients younger than 43 years who were treated with BCT alone., Conclusion: In premenopausal node-negative patients, age younger than 43 years is the most important risk factor for LR after BCT; this risk is greatly reduced by one course of PeCT. The main reason for administering systemic adjuvant treatment is to improve overall survival. The important reduction of LR after BCT is an additional reason for considering systemic treatment in young node-negative patients with breast cancer.

The elderly population is expanding and, from the early 1990s, one-quarter of newly diagnosed gastric cancer patients are over 80 years of age. The main risk factors for post-operative complications and mortality are total gastrectomy, radical lymphadenectomy, splenectomy and/or pancreatectomy and these should, therefore, not be practised routinely. Good long-term results can be achieved with careful monitoring of concomitant disease.

The aims of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) are to conduct, develop, coordinate, and stimulate research in Europe on the experimental and clinical bases of cancer treatment. Along these lines, the EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group, which belongs to the EORTC treatment division, aims at improving the standard of early and advanced breast cancer treatment in Europe through the conduct of large, prospective, randomized, multicenter cancer clinical trials investigating innovative approaches as well as relevant questions regarding optimal surgery and radiotherapy or the optimal integration of these various treatment modalities. This paper reviews the current clinical research programme of this group in the field of "early" breast cancer and briefly alludes to the ongoing efforts of the group in areas such as quality control and translational research. Finally, the EORTC-BCCG has been instrumental in the foundation of the Breast International Group, "BIG", which is a large "intergroup" of existing European and Australian breast cancer research groups. It is hoped that BIG will accelerate the turnover of sufficiently large and well-designed breast cancer adjuvant clinical trials through increasing cooperation between its group members as well as collaboration, whenever indicated, with the American Breast Cancer Intergroup.

Purpose: In the tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system, no recommendations are provided on what lymph node retrieval technique is to be used to determine lymph node status, which leads to variability in nodal status assessment and TNM staging., Patient and Methods: Lymph node retrieval was quantitated using data from 237 curatively resected gastric cancer patients, from a prospective, randomized trial that compared the Western resection with limited (D1) and the Japanese resection with extended lymphadenectomy (D2), and compared data from the literature. Moreover, the efficacy of different lymph node retrieval techniques was determined., Results: The mean yield of lymph nodes was 15 in D1 and 30 in D2, which is similar to results from German investigators, but substantially lower than results from Japanese investigators (60 in D2). Use of a fat-clearance technique significantly increased (P = .01) nodal yields compared with conventional retrieval. Significantly higher yields (P < .001) were obtained by a Japanese surgeon using conventional retrieval directly postoperatively. Experience of surgicopathologic teams with processing resection specimens did not influence nodal yields. Further analysis showed that reference values for nodal yields per anatomically defined station as reported in the literature were contradicted by our results and indicated the ambiguity of such standards., Conclusion: Despite some anatomical variability in the distribution of lymph nodes, advice on the number of nodes to examine per N level, feasible in all patients, should be incorporated into the TNM classification to standardize nodal status assessment. Based on our findings, we advocate retrieval of nodes immediately postoperatively by the surgeon.

Purpose: To investigate whether a short intensive course of perioperative polychemotherapy can change the course of early breast cancer., Patients and Methods: A total of 2,795 women with early breast cancer, stage I to IIIA, were randomized onto a trial (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] 10854) to compare surgery followed by one course of perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone. Patients assigned to the chemotherapy arm received one course of fluorouracil 600 mg/m2, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 (FAC) intravenously, within 24 hours after surgery. In both randomized treatment arms, a recommendation was made for premenopausal women with positive axillary nodes to receive prolonged courses of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF), according to the standard treatment for this subgroup., Results: At a median follow-up time of 41 months, local control was significantly better in the perioperative treatment arm as compared with the observation arm (hazards ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.44 to 0.83; P < .01). Disease-free survival was significantly prolonged in the chemotherapy arm (hazards ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.70 to 0.99; P = .04). Premenopausal node-negative patients especially showed an advantage for the perioperative chemotherapy arm. No advantage for perioperative chemotherapy was observed in premenopausal node-positive women who also had received prolonged chemotherapy., Conclusion: We conclude that one course of perioperative FAC is able to improve local control and can prolong disease-free survival in women with early breast cancer. However, our results also suggest that a perioperative timing cannot improve the results of standard prolonged chemotherapy in premenopausal women with positive axillary nodes.

In order to obtain insight in attitudes towards detection and management of hepatic metastases of colorectal origin, a questionnaire was sent to hospitals in 13 Western countries. Response rate was 98.0% (n = 284). In almost all hospitals (98%) some method of follow-up was employed. Carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) determinations were performed in 84% of all hospitals: most frequently in Germany and the U.S.A., but only in 50% of the British hospitals. Hepatic resection for liver metastases was performed in 95% of all hospitals. Resectability criteria varied considerably among the countries. In the majority of German and American hospitals multiple hepatic metastases were considered resectable (including bilobar disease in 58% of German hospitals). In the majority of British and Dutch hospitals only solitary metastases were considered resectable, or liver resections were not performed at all. The mean reported number of liver resections annually per hospital, reflecting these attitudes, was 11.2 and 7.2 for German and American hospitals, and 2.1 and 1.8 for British and Dutch hospitals respectively. When irresectable hepatic metastases were diagnosed, some form of chemotherapy was applied in 74% of hospitals. Hepatic artery infusion of chemotherapeutics was performed most frequently. The mean reported number of medically treated patients annually per hospital was 34 for Germany, 18 for the U.S.A., and 12 and 9 for Great Britain and the Netherlands respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy was performed after liver resection in 30% of all hospitals, most frequently in German and American hospitals. Considerable disparity was observed in attitudes towards detection and in management of hepatic metastases among Western countries. On the basis of the reported 1421 liver resections and 3590 medically treated patients (annually) it is concluded that selection of the best detection and treatment policies is obviously hampered by insufficient clinical data and inconclusive evidence of purported optimal approach. To determine the optimal policy useful information can only be provided by inclusion of patients in prospective randomized trials.