Dataset Information

International Web-based consultation on priorities for translational breast cancer research.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Large numbers of translational breast cancer research topics have been completed or are underway, but they differ widely in their immediate and/or future importance to clinical management. We therefore conducted an international Web-based consultation of breast cancer professionals to identify the topics most widely considered to be of highest priority.

Methods

Potential participants were contacted via two large e-mail databases and asked to register, at a Web site, the issues that they felt to be of highest priority. Four hundred nine questions were reduced by a steering committee to 70 unique issues, and registrants were asked to select the 6 questions they considered to be the most important.

Results

Votes were recorded from 420 voters (2,520 votes) from 48 countries, with 48% of voters coming from North America. Half of the voters identified themselves as clinicians, with the remainder being academics, research scientists, or pathologists. The highest priority was to identify molecular signatures to select patients who could be spared chemotherapy, which gained about 50% more votes than the second topic and was consistently voted top by voters in North America, Europe, and the rest of the world. Research scientists voted the determination of the role of stem cells in breast cancer development, progression, and treatment sensitivity as the most important issue, but this was considered the sixth priority for clinicians and fourth overall.

Conclusion

This exercise may bring a greater focus of research resources onto issues voted as top priorities.

SUBMITTER: Dowsett M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2246180 | biostudies-literature | 2007

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Breast cancer remains a significant scientific, clinical and societal challenge. This gap analysis has reviewed and critically assessed enduring issues and new challenges emerging from recent research, and proposes strategies for translating solutions into practice.More than 100 internationally recognised specialist breast cancer scientists, clinicians and healthcare professionals collaborated to address nine thematic areas: genetics, epigenetics and epidemiology; molecular pathology and cell biology; hormonal influences and endocrine therapy; imaging, detection and screening; current/novel therapies and biomarkers; drug resistance; metastasis, angiogenesis, circulating tumour cells, cancer 'stem' cells; risk and prevention; living with and managing breast cancer and its treatment. The groups developed summary papers through an iterative process which, following further appraisal from experts and patients, were melded into this summary account.The 10 major gaps identified were: (1) understanding the functions and contextual interactions of genetic and epigenetic changes in normal breast development and during malignant transformation; (2) how to implement sustainable lifestyle changes (diet, exercise and weight) and chemopreventive strategies; (3) the need for tailored screening approaches including clinically actionable tests; (4) enhancing knowledge of molecular drivers behind breast cancer subtypes, progression and metastasis; (5) understanding the molecular mechanisms of tumour heterogeneity, dormancy, de novo or acquired resistance and how to target key nodes in these dynamic processes; (6) developing validated markers for chemosensitivity and radiosensitivity; (7) understanding the optimal duration, sequencing and rational combinations of treatment for improved personalised therapy; (8) validating multimodality imaging biomarkers for minimally invasive diagnosis and monitoring of responses in primary and metastatic disease; (9) developing interventions and support to improve the survivorship experience; (10) a continuing need for clinical material for translational research derived from normal breast, blood, primary, relapsed, metastatic and drug-resistant cancers with expert bioinformatics support to maximise its utility. The proposed infrastructural enablers include enhanced resources to support clinically relevant in vitro and in vivo tumour models; improved access to appropriate, fully annotated clinical samples; extended biomarker discovery, validation and standardisation; and facilitated cross-discipline working.With resources to conduct further high-quality targeted research focusing on the gaps identified, increased knowledge translating into improved clinical care should be achievable within five years.

Project description:Objectives:Medication errors continue to contribute substantially to global morbidity and mortality. In the context of the recent launch of the World Health Organization's (WHO) Third Global Patient Safety Challenge: Medication Without Harm, we sought to establish agreement on research priorities for medication safety. Methods:We undertook a consensus prioritisation exercise using an approach developed by the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative. Based on a combination of productivity and citations, we identified leading researchers in patient and medication safety and invited them to participate. We also extended the invitation to a further pool of experts from the WHO Global Patient Safety Network. All experts independently generated research ideas, which they then independently scored based on the criteria of: answerability, effectiveness, innovativeness, implementation, burden reduction and equity. An overall Research Priority Score and Average Expert Agreement were calculated for each research question. Findings:131 experts submitted 333 research ideas, and 42 experts then scored the proposed research questions. The top prioritised research areas were: (1) deploying and scaling technology to enhance medication safety; (2) developing guidelines and standard operating procedures for high-risk patients, medications and contexts; (3) score-based approaches to predicting high-risk patients and situations; (4) interventions to increase patient medication literacy; (5) focused training courses for health professionals; and (6) universally applicable pictograms to avoid medication-related harm. Whilst there was a focus on promoting patient education and involvement across resource settings, priorities identified in high-resource settings centred on the optimisation of existing systems through technology. In low- and middle-resource settings, priorities focused on identifying systemic issues contributing to high-risk situations. Conclusions:WHO now plans to work with global, regional and national research funding agencies to catalyse the investment needed to enable teams to pursue these research priorities in medication safety across high-, middle- and low-resource country settings.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2012, the World Health Assembly endorsed the Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP) that set a target to eliminate measles and rubella in five of the six World Health Organization (WHO) regions by 2020. Significant progress has been made toward achieving this goal through intensive efforts by countries and Measles & Rubella Initiative (M&RI) partners. Accelerating progress will require evidence-based approaches to improve implementation of the core strategies in the Global Measles and Rubella Strategic Plan. The M&RI Research and Innovation Working Group (R&IWG) conducted a web-based survey as part of a process to identify measles and rubella research priorities. Survey findings were used to inform discussions during a meeting of experts convened by the M&RI at the Pan American Health Organization in November 2016.MethodsThe cross-sectional web-based survey of scientific and programmatic experts included questions in four main topic areas: (1) epidemiology and economics (epidemiology); (2) new tools for surveillance, vaccine delivery, and laboratory testing (new tools); (3) immunization strategies and outbreak response (strategies); and (4) vaccine demand and communications (demand). Analyses were stratified by the six WHO regions and by global, regional, or national/sub-national level of respondents.ResultsThe six highest priority research questions selected by survey respondents from the four topic areas were the following: (1) What are the causes of outbreaks in settings with high reported vaccination coverage? (epidemiology); (2) Can affordable diagnostic tests be developed to confirm measles and rubella cases rapidly and accurately at the point of care? (new tools); (3) What are effective strategies for increasing coverage of the routine first dose of measles vaccine administered at 9 or 12 months? (strategies); (4) What are effective strategies for increasing coverage of the second dose given after the first year of life? (strategies); (5) How can communities best be engaged in planning, implementing and monitoring health services including vaccinations? (demand); (6) What capacity building is needed for health workers to be able to identify and work more effectively with community leaders? (demand). Research priorities varied by region and by global/regional/national levels for all topic areas.ConclusionsResearch and innovation will be critical to make further progress toward achieving the GVAP measles and rubella elimination goals. The results of this survey can be used to inform decision-making for investments in research activities at the global, regional, and national levels.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Personal narratives have been seen as a useful way of communicating about cancer treatment options and providing recovery information. Many printed versions of such material are available, including comics that explore the individual memories of patients who have gone through cancer treatment. These studies have been used to orientate patients, patients' relatives, and physicians. However, only a few Web-based comics have been specifically designed for patients with breast cancer and used as aids to decision making. OBJECTIVE:We aimed to describe the developmental process of creating an animated comic as a Web-based surgery decision-making tool; the comic was aimed at illustrating the feelings, thoughts, and meanings when a patient suffers from breast cancer. This was done by recounting the symptoms, diagnostic process, treatments, and treatment effects of such women from the diagnosis stage onward. METHODS:Using cycles of planning, action, evaluation, and reflection, which involved collaborative work, action research was conducted to develop a Web-based animated comic. The stages of action research consisted of (1) semistructured and in-depth interviews to collect experiences of women with breast cancer; (2) construction of an animated comic by editors, graphics designers, dubbers, and information technology engineers; (3) redrawing of pictures of the comic after gathering feedback from a breast surgeon; and (4) evaluation of the Web-based animated comic using 6 patient focus groups. RESULTS:The comic was produced and showcased on the website "The Network of Making-decision Aids for Breast Cancer Surgery"; the comic was accompanied by soft music and audio explanations. The comic functions as a personal statement that describes experiencing breast cancer. The animated comic consists of 8 chapters, based on the 8 themes deducted from the findings obtained during the analysis of relevant interviews. The 8 chapters include (1) the appearance of a lump; (2) confirmation by medical diagnosis; (3) the uncertainty of waiting (4) fear of life-threatening disease; (5) choosing life over despair; (6) being brave and deciding to undergo treatment; (7) choosing the type of surgery; and (8) being reborn. CONCLUSIONS:Using action research, this study illustrated that the comic that sheds light on issues of feelings, emotions, and thoughts that are present when a woman is diagnosed with breast cancer and provides a communication medium to explain the steps in the process. Meanwhile, it implies that hope will be able to overcome the challenges that will be faced. Within the Web-based decision aid for patients with breast cancer, the animated comic acts as an information resource and is aimed at patients' understanding of impacts of emotions arising when suffering from breast cancer. It is potentially applicable as a therapeutic tool that facilitates self-reflection and self-healing among newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer.

Project description:ObjectiveInternationally recognised specialist breast cancer scientists, clinicians and healthcare professionals have published breast cancer research gaps that are informing research funding priorities in the UK and worldwide. We aimed to determine the breast cancer research priorities of the public to compare with those identified by clinicians and scientists.DesignWe conducted a qualitative study and thematic analysis using 'listening events' where patients with breast cancer and public representatives used a patient's breast cancer journey to identify research themes.Participants and settingFemale participants were recruited from attendees at participating hospitals and support groups in the northwest of England, including patients, their family and friends as well as staff at a local retail centre.InterventionA framework approach was used to analyse transcribed discussions until thematic saturation was reached.Main outcome measuresBreast cancer research priorities were identified from participant discussions and compared with the published gaps identified by scientists and healthcare professionals.ResultsThematic saturation was reached after 27 female participants participated in listening events. Our participants consistently focused on improved methods of dissemination of information and improving education on the signs and symptoms of breast cancer. This was not highlighted by scientists or healthcare professionals. There was strong emphasis on quality of life-related issues such as side effects of treatment. There was some agreement between the priorities deduced by our study and those of the professionals in the areas of screening, prevention and breast reconstruction.ConclusionOur study identified some research themes that were not identified by scientists and healthcare professionals in two earlier landmark studies. This highlights the importance of including patients and public representatives when setting research priorities. The results should be used to guide investigators when planning future studies and for funding bodies in allocating resources for future projects.