Aims and ObjectivesStudies in adult medicine have shown that physicians base testing decisions on the patient's clinical condition but also consider other factors, including local practice or... Show moreAims and ObjectivesStudies in adult medicine have shown that physicians base testing decisions on the patient's clinical condition but also consider other factors, including local practice or patient expectations. In pediatrics, physicians and parents jointly decide on behalf of a (young) child. This might demand more explicit and more complex deliberations, with sometimes conflicting interests. We explored pediatricians' considerations in diagnostic test ordering and the factors that influence their deliberation. MethodWe performed in-depth, semistructured interviews with a purposively selected heterogeneous sample of 20 Dutch pediatricians. We analyzed transcribed interviews inductively using a constant comparative approach, and clustered data across interviews to derive common themes. ResultsPediatricians perceived test-related burden in children higher compared with adults, and reported that avoiding an unjustified burden causes them to be more restrictive and deliberate in test ordering. They felt conflicted when parents desired testing or when guidelines recommended diagnostic tests pediatricians perceived as unnecessary. When parents demanded testing, they would explore parental concern, educate parents about harms and alternative explanations of symptoms, and advocate watchful waiting. Yet they reported sometimes performing tests to appease parents or to comply with guidelines, because of feared personal consequences in the case of adverse outcomes. ConclusionWe obtained an overview of the considerations that are weighed in pediatric test decisions. The comparatively strong focus on prevention of harm motivates pediatricians to critically appraise the added value of testing and drivers of low-value testing. Pediatricians' relatively restrictive approach to testing could provide an example for other disciplines. Improved guidelines and physician and patient education could help to withstand the perceived pressure to test. Show less
Aelvoet, A.S.; Pellise, M.; Bastiaansen, B.A.J.; Leerdam, M.E. van; Jover, R.; Balaguer, F.; ... ; European FAP Consortium 2023
Background and study aims: Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) undergo colectomy and lifelong endoscopic surveillance to prevent colorectal, duodenal and gastric cancer. Endoscopy... Show moreBackground and study aims: Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) undergo colectomy and lifelong endoscopic surveillance to prevent colorectal, duodenal and gastric cancer. Endoscopy has advanced significantly in recent years, including both detection technology as well as treatment options. For the lower gastrointestinal tract, current guidelines do not provide clear recommendations for surveillance intervals. Furthermore, the Spigelman staging system for duodenal polyposis has its limitations. We present a newly developed personalized endoscopic surveillance strategy for the lower and upper gastrointestinal tract, aiming to improve the care for patients with FAP. We aim to inform centers caring for FAP patients and encourage the discussion on optimizing endoscopic surveillance and treatment in this high-risk population. Methods: The European FAP Consortium, consisting of endoscopists with expertise in FAP, collaboratively developed new surveillance protocols. The proposed strategy was consensus-based and a result of several consortium meetings, discussing current evidence and limitations of existing systems. This strategy provides clear indications for endoscopic polypectomy in the rectum, pouch, duodenum and stomach and defines new criteria for surveillance intervals. This strategy will be evaluated in a 5-year prospective study in nine FAP expert centers in Europe. Results: We present a newly developed personalized endoscopic surveillance and endoscopic treatment strategy for patients with FAP aiming to prevent cancer, optimize endoscopic resources and limit the number of surgical interventions. Following this new strategy, prospectively collected data in a large cohort of patients will inform us on the efficacy and safety of the proposed approaches. Show less
Mulder, F.I.; Kraaijpoel, N.; Carrier, M.; Guman, N.A.; Jara-Palomares, L.; Nisio, M. di; ... ; Es, N. van 2023
BackgroundPlatelet RNA sequencing has been shown to accurately detect cancer in previous studies.ObjectivesTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of platelet RNA sequencing with standard-of-care limited .Show moreBackgroundPlatelet RNA sequencing has been shown to accurately detect cancer in previous studies.ObjectivesTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of platelet RNA sequencing with standard-of-care limited cancer screeningin patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE).MethodsPatients aged ≥40 years with unprovoked VTE were recruited at 13 centers and followed for 12 months for cancer. Participants underwent standard-of-care limited cancer screening, and platelet RNA sequencing analysis was performed centrally at study end for cases and selected controls. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated, using the predefined primary positivity threshold of 0.54 for platelet RNA sequencing aiming at 86% test sensitivity, and an additional predefined threshold of 0.89 aiming at 99% test specificity.ResultsA total of 476 participants were enrolled, of whom 25 (5.3%) were diagnosed with cancer during 12-month follow-up. For each cancer patient, 3 cancer-free patients were randomly selected for the analysis. The sensitivity of limited screening was 72% (95% CI, 52-86) at a specificity of 91% (95% CI, 82-95). The area under the receiver operator characteristic for platelet RNA sequencing was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.41-0.66). At the primary positivity threshold, all patients had a positive test, for a sensitivity estimated at 100% (95% CI, 87-99) and a specificity of 8% (95% CI, 3.7-16.4). At the secondary threshold, sensitivity was 68% (95% CI, 48-83; p value compared with limited screening 0.71) at a specificity of 36% (95% CI, 26-47).ConclusionPlatelet RNA sequencing had poor diagnostic accuracy for detecting occult cancer in patients with unprovoked VTE with the current algorithm. Show less
Vanstapel, F.J.L.A.; Orth, M.; Streichert, T.; Capoluongo, E.D.; Oosterhuis, W.P.; Cubukcu, H.C.; ... ; Neumaier, M. 2023
The EU In-Vitro Diagnostic Device Regulation (IVDR) aims for transparent risk-and purpose-based validation of diagnostic devices, traceability of results to uniquely identified devices, and post... Show moreThe EU In-Vitro Diagnostic Device Regulation (IVDR) aims for transparent risk-and purpose-based validation of diagnostic devices, traceability of results to uniquely identified devices, and post-market surveillance. The IVDR regulates design, manufacture and putting into use of devices, but not medical services using these devices. In the absence of suitable commercial devices, the laboratory can resort to laboratory-developed tests (LDT) for in-house use. Documentary obligations (IVDR Art 5.5), the performance and safety specifications of ANNEX I, and development and manufacture under an ISO 15189-equivalent quality system apply. LDTs serve specific clinical needs, often for low volume niche applications, or correspond to the translational phase of new tests and treatments, often extremely relevant for patient care. As some commercial tests may disappear with the IVDR roll-out, many will require urgent LDT replacement. The workload will also depend on which modifications to commercial tests turns them into an LDT, and on how national legislators and competent authorities (CA) will handle new competences and responsibilities. We discuss appropriate interpretation of ISO 15189 to cover IVDR requirements. Selected cases illustrate LDT implementation covering medical needs with commensurate management of risk emanating from intended use and/or design of devices. Unintended collateral damage of the IVDR comprises loss of non-profitable niche applications, increases of costs and wasted resources, and migration of innovative research to more cost-efficient environments. Taking into account local specifics, the legislative framework should reduce the burden on and associated opportunity costs for the health care system, by making diligent use of existing frameworks. Show less
Toledo, D.E.F.W.M. van; IJspeert, J.E.G.; Bossuyt, P.M.M.; Bleijenberg, A.G.C.; Leerdam, M.E. van; Vlugt, M. van der; ... ; Dekker, E. 2022
Background Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a well-established quality indicator for colonoscopy and is inversely associated with the incidence of interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer.... Show moreBackground Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a well-established quality indicator for colonoscopy and is inversely associated with the incidence of interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. However, interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers frequently develop from serrated polyps, which are not included in the ADR. Therefore, the proximal serrated polyp detection rate (PSPDR) has been proposed as a quality indicator, but its association with interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer has not been studied. We aimed to evaluate this potential association based on data collected in the Dutch colorectal cancer screening programme. Methods In this population-based study, using colonoscopy data from the Dutch faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening programme and cancer data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, we evaluated the association between endoscopists' individual PSPDR and their patients' risk of interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer with a shared frailty Cox proportional-hazard regression analysis. Participants in the screening programme who were eligible for inclusion were aged 55-76 years, had a positive faecal immunochemical test (cutoff 15 mu g Hb/g faeces at start and changed mid-2014 to 47 mu g Hb/g faeces), were asymptomatic, and underwent a colonoscopy between Jan 1, 2014, and Dec 31, 2020. The PSPDR was defined as the proportion of colonoscopies in which at least one serrated polyp proximal to the descending colon was detected, confirmed by histopathology. The ADR was defined as the proportion of all colonoscopies in which at least one conventional adenoma was detected, confirmed by histopathology. Detection rates were determined for each endoscopist individually. We additionally evaluated the risk of interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer for endoscopists with a PSPDR and ADR above the median versus endoscopists with either one or both parameters below the median. This study is registered with the Netherlands Trial Registry, NL8350. Findings During the study period, 329 104 colonoscopies were done, of which 277 555, done by 441 endoscopists, were included in the PSPDR calculations. The median PSPDR was 11.9% (IQR 8.3-15.8) and median ADR was 66.3% (61.4-69.9). The correlation between the PSDPR and ADR was moderate (r=0.59; p < 0middot0001). During a median follow-up of 33 months (IQR 21-42), 305 interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers were detected. For each percentage point increase in PSPDR, the adjusted interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer hazard was 7% lower (hazard ratio [HR] 0.93, 95% CI 0.90-0.95; p < 0middot0001). Compared with endoscopists with a PSPDR greater than 11middot9% and ADR greater than 66middot3%, the HR of interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer for endoscopists with a low PSPDR and high ADR was 1.79 (95% CI 1.22-2.63), for endoscopists with a high PSPDR and low ADR was 1.97 (1.19-3.24), and for endoscopists with a low PSPDR and low ADR was 2.55 (1.89-3.45). Gastroenterology, (Prof Gastroenterology the (Prof Interpretation The PSPDR of an endoscopist is inversely associated with the incidence of interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer. Implementation of PSPDR monitoring, in addition to ADR monitoring, could optimise colorectal cancer prevention. Copyright (C) 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Show less
Laboratory medicine in the European Union is at the dawn of a regulatory revolution as it reaches the end of the transition from IVDD 98/79/EC (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri... Show moreLaboratory medicine in the European Union is at the dawn of a regulatory revolution as it reaches the end of the transition from IVDD 98/79/EC (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31998L00 79&qid=1628781352814) to IVDR 2017/746 https://eur-lex. europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/746. Without amendments and contingency plans, implementation of the IVDR in May 2022 will lead the healthcare sector into uncharted waters due to unpreparedness of the EU regulatory infrastructure. Prospective risk analyses were not made by the European Commission, and if nothing happens it can be anticipated that the consequences will impact all stakeholders of the medical test pipeline, may seriously harm patients and may prevent caregivers from making appropriate clinical decisions due to non-availability of medical tests. Finally, it also may discourage manufacturers and academia from developing specialty tests, thereby hampering innovation in medical diagnostic care. We hereby inform laboratory professionals about the imminent diagnostic collapse using testimonies from representative stakeholders of the diagnostic supply chain and from academia developing innovative in-house tests in domains of unmet clinical needs. Steps taken by the EFLM Task Force on European Regulatory Affairs, under the umbrella of the Biomedical Alliance in Europe, will be highlighted, as well as the search for solutions through dialogue with the European Commission. Although we recognize that the IVDR promotes positive goals such as increased clinical evidence, surveillance, and transparency, we need to ensure that the capabilities of the diagnostic sector are not damaged by infra structural unpreparedness, while at the same time being forced to submit to a growing bureaucratic and unsupportive structure that will not support its "droit d'exister". Show less
Gorgec, B.; Hansen, I.; Kemmerich, G.; Syversveen, T.; Abu Hilal, M.; Belt, E.J.T.; ... ; CAMINO Study Grp 2021
Background: Abdominal computed tomography (CT) is the standard imaging method for patients with suspected colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) in the diagnostic workup for surgery or thermal ablation... Show moreBackground: Abdominal computed tomography (CT) is the standard imaging method for patients with suspected colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) in the diagnostic workup for surgery or thermal ablation. Diffusion-weighted and gadoxetic-acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the liver is increasingly used to improve the detection rate and characterization of liver lesions. MRI is superior in detection and characterization of CRLM as compared to CT. However, it is unknown how MRI actually impacts patient management. The primary aim of the CAMINO study is to evaluate whether MRI has sufficient clinical added value to be routinely added to CT in the staging of CRLM. The secondary objective is to identify subgroups who benefit the most from additional MRI.Methods: In this international multicentre prospective incremental diagnostic accuracy study, 298 patients with primary or recurrent CRLM scheduled for curative liver resection or thermal ablation based on CT staging will be enrolled from 17 centres across the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, and Italy. All study participants will undergo CT and diffusion-weighted and gadoxetic-acid enhanced MRI prior to local therapy. The local multidisciplinary team will provide two local therapy plans: first, based on CT-staging and second, based on both CT and MRI. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of clinically significant CRLM (CS-CRLM) detected by MRI not visible on CT. CS-CRLM are defined as liver lesions leading to a change in local therapeutical management. If MRI detects new CRLM in segments which would have been resected in the original operative plan, these are not considered CS-CRLM. It is hypothesized that MRI will lead to the detection of CS-CRLM in >= 10% of patients which is considered the minimal clinically important difference. Furthermore, a prediction model will be developed using multivariable logistic regression modelling to evaluate the predictive value of patient, tumor and procedural variables on finding CS-CRLM on MRI.Discussion: The CAMINO study will clarify the clinical added value of MRI to CT in patients with CRLM scheduled for local therapy. This study will provide the evidence required for the implementation of additional MRI in the routine work-up of patients with primary and recurrent CRLM for local therapy. Show less
BackgroundGenomic tests may improve upon clinical risk estimation with traditional prognostic factors. We aimed to explore how evidence on the prognostic strength of a genomic signature (clinical... Show moreBackgroundGenomic tests may improve upon clinical risk estimation with traditional prognostic factors. We aimed to explore how evidence on the prognostic strength of a genomic signature (clinical validity) can contribute to individualized decision making on starting chemotherapy for women with breast cancer (clinical utility).MethodsThe MINDACT trial was a randomized trial that enrolled 6693 women with early-stage breast cancer. A 70-gene signature (Mammaprint) was used to estimate genomic risk, and clinical risk was estimated by a dichotomized version of the Adjuvant!Online risk calculator. Women with discordant risk results were randomized to the use of chemotherapy. We simulated the full risk distribution of these women and estimated individual benefit, assuming a constant relative effect of chemotherapy.ResultsThe trial showed a prognostic effect of the genomic signature (adjusted hazard ratio 2.4). A decision-analytic modeling approach identified far fewer women as candidates for genetic testing (4% rather than 50%) and fewer benefiting from chemotherapy (3% rather than 27%) as compared with the MINDACT trial report. The selection of women benefitting from genetic testing and chemotherapy depended strongly on the required benefit from treatment and the assumed therapeutic effect of chemotherapy.ConclusionsA high-quality pragmatic trial was insufficient to directly inform clinical practice on the utility of a genomic test for individual women. The indication for genomic testing may be far more limited than suggested by the MINDACT trial. Show less
Roos, V.H.; Mangas-Sanjuan, C.; Rodriguez-Girondo, M.; Medina-Prado, L.; Steyerberg, E.W.; Bossuyt, P.M.M.; ... ; Leerdam, M.E. van 2019