1
|
Weiss L, Dorman K, Boukovala M, Schwinghammer F, Jordan P, Fey T, Hasselmann K, Subklewe M, Bücklein V, Bargou R, Goebeler M, Sayehli C, Spoerl S, Lüke F, Heudobler D, Claus R, von Luettichau I, Lorenzen S, Lange S, Westphalen CB, von Bergwelt-Baildon M, Heinemann V, Gießen-Jung C. Early clinical trial unit tumor board: a real-world experience in a national cancer network. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2023; 149:13383-13390. [PMID: 37490102 PMCID: PMC10587227 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-023-05196-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2023] [Accepted: 07/17/2023] [Indexed: 07/26/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Early clinical trials are the first step into clinical therapies for new drugs. Within the six Bavarian university-based hospitals (Augsburg, Erlangen, Regensburg, Munich (LMU and TU), Würzburg) we have enrolled a virtual network platform for patient discussion. METHODS The virtual Early Clinical Trial Unit Tumor Board (ECTU Tumor Board) is a secured web-based meeting to evaluate early clinical trial options for patients, where representatives from local ECTUs participate. We retrospectively analyzed patient cases discussed between November 2021 and November 2022. RESULTS From November 2021 to November 2022, a total of 43 patients were discussed in the ECTU Tumor Board. Median age at diagnosis was 44.6 years (range 10-76 years). The median number of previous lines of therapies was 3.7 (range 1-9 therapies) including systemic treatment, surgery, and radiation therapy. A total of 27 different tumor entities were presented and 83.7% (36/43) patients received at least one trial recommendation. In total, 21 different active or shortly recruiting clinical trials were recommended: ten antibody trials, four BiTE (bispecific T cell engager) trials, six CAR (chimeric antigen receptor) T-cell trials, and one chemotherapy trial. Only six trials (28.6%) were recommended on the basis of the previously performed comprehensive genetic profiling (CGP). CONCLUSION The ECTU Tumor Board is a feasible and successful network, highlighting the force of virtual patient discussions for improving patient care as well as trial recruitment in advanced diseases. It can provide further treatment options after local MTB presentation, aiming to close the gap to access clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Weiss
- Department Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - K Dorman
- Department Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - M Boukovala
- Department Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - F Schwinghammer
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - P Jordan
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - T Fey
- Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC Munich LMU), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - K Hasselmann
- Department Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC Munich LMU), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - M Subklewe
- Department Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - V Bücklein
- Department Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - R Bargou
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - M Goebeler
- Early Clinical Trials Unit, Department of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - C Sayehli
- Early Clinical Trials Unit, Department of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - S Spoerl
- Department of Internal Medicine 5 (Hematology and Clinical Oncology), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - F Lüke
- Department of Internal Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
- Division of Personalized Tumor Therapy, Fraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine, Regensburg, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - D Heudobler
- Department of Internal Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - R Claus
- Department of Hematology and Clinical Oncology, University Medical Center Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - I von Luettichau
- Department of Pediatrics and Children's Cancer Research Center, TUM School of Medicine, Kinderklinik München Schwabing, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - S Lorenzen
- Department of Medicine II (Gastroenterology), Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - S Lange
- Department of Medicine II (Gastroenterology), Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - C B Westphalen
- Department Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC Munich LMU), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - M von Bergwelt-Baildon
- Department Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - V Heinemann
- Department Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- Comprehensive Cancer Center (CCC Munich LMU), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany
| | - C Gießen-Jung
- Department Medicine III (Hematology and Oncology), LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany.
- Bavarian Cancer Research Center (BZKF), Munich, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wasserman L, Wasserman Y. Hospital cybersecurity risks and gaps: Review (for the non-cyber professional). Front Digit Health 2022; 4:862221. [PMID: 36033634 PMCID: PMC9403058 DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2022.862221] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2022] [Accepted: 07/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Healthcare is facing a growing threat of cyberattacks. Myriad data sources illustrate the same trends that healthcare is one of the industries with the highest risk of cyber infiltration and is seeing a surge in security incidents within just a few years. The circumstances thus begged the question: are US hospitals prepared for the risks that accompany clinical medicine in cyberspace? Objective The study aimed to identify the major topics and concerns present in today's hospital cybersecurity field, intended for non-cyber professionals working in hospital settings. Methods Via structured literature searches of the National Institutes of Health's PubMed and Tel Aviv University's DaTa databases, 35 journal articles were identified to form the core of the study. Databases were chosen for accessibility and academic rigor. Eighty-seven additional sources were examined to supplement the findings. Results The review revealed a basic landscape of hospital cybersecurity, including primary reasons hospitals are frequent targets, top attack methods, and consequences hospitals face following attacks. Cyber technologies common in healthcare and their risks were examined, including medical devices, telemedicine software, and electronic data. By infiltrating any of these components of clinical care, attackers can access mounds of information and manipulate, steal, ransom, or otherwise compromise the records, or can use the access to catapult themselves to deeper parts of a hospital's network. Issues that can increase healthcare cyber risks, like interoperability and constant accessibility, were also identified. Finally, strategies that hospitals tend to employ to combat these risks, including technical, financial, and regulatory, were explored and found to be weak. There exist serious vulnerabilities within hospitals' technologies that many hospitals presently fail to address. The COVID-19 pandemic was used to further illustrate this issue. Conclusions Comparison of the risks, strategies, and gaps revealed that many US hospitals are unprepared for cyberattacks. Efforts are largely misdirected, with external-often governmental-efforts negligible. Policy changes, e.g., training employees in cyber protocols, adding advanced technical protections, and collaborating with several experts, are necessary. Overall, hospitals must recognize that, in cyber incidents, the real victims are the patients. They are at risk physically and digitally when medical devices or treatments are compromised.
Collapse
|
4
|
Fernandes CS. Rehabilitation games in a world in digital transition. REVISTA CIÊNCIAS EM SAÚDE 2021. [DOI: 10.21876/rcshci.v11i2.1150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Is it possible to analyze the world in the same way, after this globalized and most widespread event of all time? Of course, not; the complexity of this event leads us to the need to address many changes, especially in the health area. Indeed, the pandemic course of COVID-19 has led us to a true digital revolution in such a way that the reality as we know it will be something of the "last century". We live in moments of changing care practices where it is essential to discuss the advantages and potential of other health resources, abandoning a traditionalist view of care. Although the tremendous technological development of the last decades, the health sector is still structured in a historical model of mandatory personal interactions between people and health professionals, that is, in need of face-to-face interaction. Now, the times are of transition, in what can be called hybrid care, functioning as a bridge between the traditional provision of face-to-face care and digital health solutions. These aspects must also be integrated when we think about rehabilitation and its wide range of interventions.
Collapse
|