Search

The objective of explainable artificial intelligence systems designed for clinical decision support (XAI-CDSS) is to enhance physicians' diagnostic performance, confidence and trust through the implementation of interpretable methods, thus providing for a superior epistemic positioning, a robust foundation for critical reflection and trustworthiness in times of heightened technological dependence. However, recent studies have revealed shortcomings in achieving these goals, questioning the widespread endorsement of XAI by medical professionals, ethicists and policy-makers alike. Based on a surgical use case, this article challenges generalising calls for XAI-CDSS and emphasises the significance of time-sensitive clinical environments which frequently preclude adequate consideration of system explanations. Therefore, XAI-CDSS may not be able to meet expectations of augmenting clinical decision-making in specific circumstances where time is of the essence. This article, by employing a principled ethical balancing methodology, highlights several fallacies associated with XAI deployment in time-sensitive clinical situations and recommends XAI endorsement only where scientific evidence or stakeholder assessments do not contradict such deployment in specific target settings., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Driven by technological innovations, newborn screening (NBS) panels have been expanded and the development of genomic NBS pilot programs is rapidly progressing. Decisions on disease selection for NBS are still based on the Wilson and Jungner (WJ) criteria published in 1968. Despite this uniform reference, interpretation of the WJ criteria and actual disease selection for NBS programs are highly variable. A systematic literature search [PubMED search "Wilson" AND "Jungner"; last search 16.07.22] was performed to evaluate the applicability of the WJ criteria for current and future NBS programs and the need for adaptation. By at least two reviewers, 105 publications (systematic literature search, N = 77; manual search, N = 28) were screened for relevant content and, finally, 38 publications were evaluated. Limited by the study design of qualitative text analysis, no statistical evaluation was performed, but a structured collection of reported aspects of criticism and proposed improvements was instead collated. This revealed a set of general limitations of the WJ criteria, such as imprecise terminology, lack of measurability and objectivity, missing pediatric focus, and absent guidance on program management. Furthermore, it unraveled specific aspects of criticism on clinical, diagnostic, therapeutic, and economical aspects. A major obstacle was found to be the incompletely understood natural history and phenotypic diversity of rare diseases prior to NBS implementation, resulting in uncertainty about case definition, risk stratification, and indications for treatment. This gap could be closed through the systematic collection and evaluation of real-world evidence on the quality, safety, and (cost-)effectiveness of NBS, as well as the long-term benefits experienced by screened individuals. An integrated NBS public health program that is designed to continuously learn would fulfil these requirements, and a multi-dimensional framework for future NBS programs integrating medical, ethical, legal, and societal perspectives is overdue.

In recent years, the principle of informed consent has come under significant pressure with the rise of biobanks and data infrastructures for medical research. Study-specific consent is unfeasible in the context of biobank and data infrastructure research; and while broad consent facilitates research, it has been criticised as being insufficient to secure a truly informed consent. Dynamic consent has been promoted as a promising alternative approach that could help patients and research participants regain control over the use of their biospecimen and health data in medical research. Critical voices have focused mainly on concerns around its implementation; but little has been said about the argument that dynamic consent is morally superior to broad consent as a way to respect people's individual autonomy. In this paper, we identify two versions of this argument-an information-focused version and a control-focused version-and then argue that both fail to establish the moral superiority of dynamic over broad consent. In particular, we argue that since autonomous choices are a certain species of choices, it is neither obvious that dynamic consent would meaningfully enhance people's autonomy, nor that it is morally justifiable to act on every kind of consent choice enabled by dynamic consent., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Targeted modifications of the human epigenome, epigenome editing (EE), are around the corner. For EE, techniques similar to genome editing (GE) techniques are used. While in GE the genetic information is changed by directly modifying DNA, intervening in the epigenome requires modifying the configuration of DNA, for example, how it is folded. This does not come with alterations in the base sequence ('genetic code'). To date, there is almost no ethical debate about EE, whereas the discussions about GE are voluminous. Our article introduces EE into bioethics by translating knowledge from science to ethics and by comparing the risks of EE with those of GE. We, first (I), make the case that a broader ethical debate on EE is due, provide scientific background on EE, compile potential use-cases and recap previous debates. We then (II) compare EE and GE and suggest that the severity of risks of novel gene technologies depends on three factors: (i) the choice of an ex vivo versus an in vivo editing approach, (ii) the time of intervention and intervention windows and (iii) the targeted diseases. Moreover, we show why germline EE is not effective and reject the position of strong epigenetic determinism. We conclude that EE is not always ethically preferable to GE in terms of risks, and end with suggestions for next steps in the current ethical debate on EE by briefly introducing ethical challenges of new areas of preventive applications of EE (III)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: For biomedical data-driven research purposes, secondary use of clinical data carries great but largely untapped potential. Physicians' attitudes and their needs towards secondary data use are essential to inform its practical and ethically sound implementation but are currently understudied., Objective: Therefore, the objectives of the study are to assess physicians' (i) general attitudes and concerns, (ii) willingness to adapt workflows and to make data available for secondary use, (iii) group-specific conditions toward implementation of secondary use and associated concerns of physician-scientists and purely clinical physicians., Methods: We developed an online survey based on a literature review and an expert interview study. Physicians in private practice and at two large German university hospitals were surveyed from May 2021 until January 2022., Results: In total, 446 physicians participated in the survey. 96% [380/397] of all physicians reported a positive attitude towards secondary use; 87% [31/397] are in-principle willing to support secondary use of clinical data along with a small proportion of physicians with fundamental reservations. Secondly, the most important conditions for adapting workflows were funding of additional time and effort for research-adequate documentation (71% [286/390]) and the most important condition for providing patients' clinical data was reliable protection of patients' privacy (67% [254/382]). Thirdly, physician-scientists were more likely than purely clinical physicians to request additional funding for research-adequate documentation as a precondition for support (83% vs 69%, P = .002) and the privilege to conduct research with their own patients' clinical data before other researchers are allowed to (43% vs 11%, P < .001); while purely clinical physicians more frequently require reliable protection of patient privacy (76% vs 62%, P = .007) and monetary compensation (45% vs 25%, P < .001)., Conclusion: Since this study presents high in-principle willingness of physicians to support secondary use along with little general concerns, it seems essential to address physicians' group-specific conditions toward secondary use in order to gain their support., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Köngeter et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

To enable a collective effort that generates a new level of UNderstanding CANcer (UNCAN.eu) [Cancer Discov (2022) 12 (11): OF1], the European Union supports the creation of a sustainable platform that connects cancer research across Member States. A workshop hosted in Heidelberg gathered European cancer experts to identify ongoing initiatives that may contribute to building this platform and discuss the governance and long-term evolution of a European Federated Cancer Data Hub., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a scarcity of resources with various effects on the care of cancer patients. This paper provides an English summary of a German guideline on prioritization and resource allocation for colorectal and pancreatic cancer in the context of the pandemic. Based on a selective literature review as well as empirical and ethical analyses, the research team of the CancerCOVID Consortium drafted recommendations for prioritizing diagnostic and treatment measures for both entities. The final version of the guideline received consent from the executive boards of nine societies of the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF), 20 further professional organizations and 22 other experts from various disciplines as well as patient representatives. The guiding principle for the prioritization of decisions is the minimization of harm. Prioritization decisions to fulfill this overall goal should be guided by (1) the urgency relevant to avoid or reduce harm, (2) the likelihood of success of the diagnostic or therapeutic measure advised, and (3) the availability of alternative treatment options. In the event of a relevant risk of harm as a result of prioritization, these decisions should be made by means of a team approach. Gender, age, disability, ethnicity, origin, and other social characteristics, such as social or insurance status, as well as the vehemence of a patient's treatment request and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status should not be used as prioritization criteria. The guideline provides concrete recommendations for (1) diagnostic procedures, (2) surgical procedures for cancer, and (3) systemic treatment and radiotherapy in patients with colorectal or pancreatic cancer within the context of the German healthcare system., (© 2024 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Secondary use of clinical data in research or learning activities ( SeConts ) has the potential to improve patient care and biomedical knowledge. Given this potential, the ethical question arises whether physicians have a professional duty to support SeConts . To investigate this question, we analyze prominent international declarations on physicians' professional ethics to determine whether they include duties that can be considered as good reasons for a physicians' professional duty to support SeConts . Next, we examine these documents to identify professional duties that might conflict with a potential duty of physicians to support SeConts .

Background: Research using data from medical care promises to advance medical science and improve healthcare. Academia is not the only sector that expects such research to be of great benefit. The research-based health industry is also interested in so-called 'real-world' health data to develop new drugs, medical technologies or data-based health applications. While access to medical data is handled very differently in different countries, and some empirical data suggest people are uncomfortable with the idea of companies accessing health information, this paper aims to advance the ethical debate about secondary use of medical data generated in the public healthcare sector by for-profit companies for medical research (ReuseForPro)., Methods: We first clarify some basic concepts and our ethical-normative approach, then discuss and ethically evaluate potential claims and interests of relevant stakeholders: patients as data subjects in the public healthcare system, for-profit companies, the public, and physicians and their healthcare institutions. Finally, we address the tensions between legitimate claims of different stakeholders in order to suggest conditions that might ensure ethically sound ReuseForPro., Results: We conclude that there are good reasons to grant for-profit companies access to medical data if they meet certain conditions: among others they need to respect patients' informational rights and their actions need to be compatible with the public's interest in health benefit from ReuseForPro., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ECW and CS have been receiving grants by the German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) in the frame of the German Medical Informatics Initiative (MII) and have been involved in the MII Working Group "Consent" ., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

This paper serves two purposes: first, the proposition of an ethical fiduciary theory that substantiates the often-cited assertion that the patient-physician relationship is fiduciary in nature; and second, the application of this theory to the case of informed consent. Patients' decision-making preferences vary significantly. While some seek fully autonomous decision-making, others prefer to delegate parts of their decision. Therefore, we propose an ethical fiduciary theory that allows physician and patient to jointly determine the physician's role on a spectrum from fiduciary as advisor to fiduciary as agent. Drawing on legal concepts of the fiduciary relationship and on phenomenological accounts of obligation by Lévinas and Løgstrup, our theory relies on the key attributes of trust, vulnerability and otherness. Finally, practical implications of this theory for the informed consent process are developed: we propose a preassessment of patients' risk and value profiles as well as a restructuring of the oral consent interview and the written consent materials., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Data Sharing is widely recognised as crucial for accelerating scientific research and improving its quality. However, data sharing is still not a common practice. Funding agencies tend to facilitate the sharing of research data by both providing incentives and requiring data sharing as part of their policies and conditions for awarding grants. The goal of our article is to answer the following question: What challenges do international funding agencies see when it comes to their own efforts to foster and implement data sharing through their policies?, Methods: We conducted a series of sixteen guideline-based expert interviews with representatives of leading international funding agencies. As contact persons for open science at their respective agencies, they offered their perspectives and experiences concerning their organisations' data sharing policies. We performed a qualitative content analysis of the interviews and categorised the challenges perceived by funding agencies., Results: We identify and illustrate six challenges surrounding data sharing policies as perceived by leading funding agencies: The design of clear policies, monitoring of compliance, sanctions for non-compliance, incentives, support, and limitations for funders' own capabilities. However, our interviews also show how funders approach potential solutions to overcome these challenges, for example by coordinating with other agencies or adjusting grant evaluation metrics to incentivise data sharing., Discussion and Conclusion: Our interviews point to existing flaws in funders' data sharing policies, such as a lack of clarity, a lack of monitoring of funded researchers' data sharing behaviour, and a lack of incentives. A number of agencies could suggest potential solutions but often struggle with the overall complexity of data sharing and the implementation of these measures. Funders cannot solve each challenge by themselves, but they can play an active role and lead joint efforts towards a culture of data sharing., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Amongst common diseases, cancer is often both a leader in self-regulatory policy, or the field for contentious ethical issues such as the patenting of the BRCA1/2 genes. With the advent of genomic sequencing technologies, achieving precision cancer medicine requires prospective norms due to the large and varied sources of data involved. Here, we discuss the ethical and legal aspects of the policy debate around the relevant topics in precision cancer medicine: the return of incidental findings and sequencing raw data to patients, the communication of genetic results to patients' relatives, privacy and communication risks with concomitant oversight strategies, patient participation and consent models. We present the arguments and empirical data supporting specific policy solutions delineating still contested areas. What type of consent and oversight are required to acquire genomic data or to access it where desired, either by the participant/patient or third-party researchers? Most of the raw sequencing data is still uninterpretable and the variants revealed subject to reinterpretation over time. No doubt the ethical challenges of precision cancer medicine are a prototype of what's to come for other diseases. They are also paradigmatic for regulatory and ethical questions of the translational endeavors since the two worlds - basic science and patient care - are governed by different ethical and legal principles that need to be reconciled in precision cancer medicine., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Secondary use of clinical data for biomedical research purposes holds great potential for various types of noninterventional, data-driven studies. Patients' willingness to support research with their clinical data is a crucial prerequisite for research progress., Objective: The aim of the study was to learn about patients' attitudes and expectations regarding secondary use of their clinical data. In a next step, our results can inform the development of an appropriate governance framework for secondary use of clinical data for research purposes., Methods: A questionnaire was developed to assess the willingness of patients with cancer to provide their clinical data for biomedical research purposes, considering different conditions of data sharing and consent models. The Cancer Registry of the German federal state of Baden-Württemberg recruited a proportionally stratified random sample of patients with cancer and survivors of cancer based on a full census., Results: In total, 838 participants completed the survey. Approximately all participants (810/838, 96.7%) showed general willingness to make clinical data available for biomedical research purposes; however, they expected certain requirements to be met, such as comparable data protection standards for data use abroad and the possibility to renew consent at regular time intervals. Most participants (620/838, 73.9%) supported data use also by researchers in commercial companies. More than half of the participants (503/838, 60%) were willing to give up control over clinical data in favor of research benefits. Most participants expressed acceptance of the broad consent model (494/838, 58.9%), followed by data use by default (with the option to opt out at any time; 419/838, 50%); specific consent for every study showed the lowest acceptance rate (327/838, 39%). Patients expected physicians to share their data (763/838, 91.1%) and their fellow patients to support secondary use with their clinical data (679/838, 81%)., Conclusions: Although patients' general willingness to make their clinical data available for biomedical research purposes is very high, the willingness of a substantial proportion of patients depends on additional requirements. Taking these perspectives into account is essential for designing trustworthy governance of clinical data reuse and sharing. The willingness to accept the loss of control over clinical data to enhance the benefits of research should be given special consideration., (©Anja Köngeter, Christoph Schickhardt, Martin Jungkunz, Susanne Bergbold, Katja Mehlis, Eva C Winkler. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 25.08.2022.)

Objectives: We addressed two questions: (1) Does advanced cancer in later life affect a person's awareness of time and their subjective age? (2) Are awareness of time and subjective age associated with distress, perceived quality of life, and depression?, Methods: We assessed patients suffering terminal cancer (OAC, n = 91) and older adults free of any life-threatening disease (OA, n = 89), all subjects being aged 50 years or older., Results: Older adults with advanced cancer perceived time more strongly as being a finite resource and felt significantly older than OA controls. Feeling younger was meaningfully related with better quality of life and less distress. In the OA group, feeling younger was also associated to reduced depression. Perceiving time as a finite resource was related to higher quality of life in the OA group., Discussion: Major indicators of an older person's awareness of time and subjective aging differ between those being confronted with advanced cancer versus controls.

In response to the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, governments imposed various measures to decrease the rate of disease spread, and health care policy makers prioritized resource allocation to accommodate COVID-19 patients. We conducted a cross-sectional online survey in Germany (July 2020-June 2021) to assess the frequency of changes to cancer care among cancer patients and to explore the psychological impact of the pandemic writ large. Cancer patients who contacted the Cancer Information Service (Krebsinformationsdienst, KID) of the German Cancer Research Center (Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, DKFZ) via email were invited to complete an online questionnaire, capturing demographics, cancer specifics (e.g., type, disease phase, primary place of treatment, etc.), and any changes to their medical, follow-up, psycho-oncological or nursing care. General level of psychological distress was measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) along with face-validated items regarding worries and social isolation specific to the pandemic. In total, 13% of 621 patients reported a change to their treatment or care plan. Of those patients with changes, the majority of changes were made to follow-up care after treatment (56%), to monitoring during treatment (29%) and to psychological counseling (20%). Of the overall sample, more than half of patients (55%) reported symptoms of anxiety and 39% reported symptoms of depression. Patients with a change in cancer care were more likely to report symptoms of depression than those with no change (AOR: 2.18; 95% CI: 1.26-3.76). Concern about the pandemic affecting the quality of health care was a predictor of both anxiety (AOR: 2.76; 95% CI: 1.75-4.35) and depression (AOR: 2.15; 95% CI: 1.43-3.23). Results showed that the majority of cancer patients in our study did not experience a change in their cancer care. However, the level of anxiety and psycho-social burden of cancer patients during the pandemic was high throughout the study period. Our findings underscore the need for health care services and policy makers to assess and to attend cancer patients' medical needs, with added emphasis on patients' psychological and social well-being. This applies particularly in situations where the healthcare system is strained and prioritization is necessary., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Eckford, Gaisser, Arndt, Baumann, Kludt, Mehlis, Ubels, Winkler, Weg-Remers and Schlander.)

Introduction: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a disease of older patients, but evidence-based guidelines for chemotherapy in older patients are scarce. Geriatric assessment (GA) evaluates a patient's functional status (FS) and helps in decision-making when choosing chemotherapy for older patients. However, the change of FS during chemotherapy is rarely studied as GA is mostly performed once instead of sequentially., Methods: We performed a subgroup analysis of a prospective, multicenter study EpiReal 75. Patients aged ≥75 years with gastrointestinal malignancy prior to initiation of chemotherapy or receiving palliative chemotherapy were screened. We defined geriatric core assessments including the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score, Barthel's activities of daily living (ADL) scale, Lawton's instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scale, and G-8 questionnaire, which were performed at baseline and repeated every 3 months. Quality of life (QoL) assessed by QLQ-C30 questionnaire was also re-evaluated every 3 months. We defined any deterioration in any of the geriatric parameters as unstable in the corresponding function., Results: 28 patients with CRC were enrolled between April 2014 and December 2018. 20 patients were evaluable for statistical analysis with a mean age of 78.5 years (range, 75-88). Most patients received chemotherapy in palliative setting. During 3 months of chemotherapy, 25% of patients became more dependent as measured by ADL or IADL. During a median follow-up of 15 months, patients with unstable ADL or IADL had a significantly shorter overall survival (OS) than those with stable ADL or IADL (plogrank = 0.0055 and 0.0253, respectively), without a significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS). Also, unstable IADL correlated with a deterioration in aspects of QoL such as role functioning and emotional functioning (p = 0.0189 and 0.0239, respectively). 20% of patients experienced treatment-related grade 3 adverse events (AEs), no grade 4-5 AEs occurred., Conclusion: Sequential GA revealed changes in FS in older patients with CRC receiving chemotherapy. A deterioration of FS during chemotherapy did not influence PFS but had a negative impact on OS and QoL. It is therefore important to maintain FS in older patients with cancer, and regular performance of geriatric core assessments should be encouraged in the clinical practice., (© 2022 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) aims to accelerate biomedical advances by enabling the responsible sharing of clinical and genomic data through both harmonized data aggregation and federated approaches. The decreasing cost of genomic sequencing (along with other genome-wide molecular assays) and increasing evidence of its clinical utility will soon drive the generation of sequence data from tens of millions of humans, with increasing levels of diversity. In this perspective, we present the GA4GH strategies for addressing the major challenges of this data revolution. We describe the GA4GH organization, which is fueled by the development efforts of eight Work Streams and informed by the needs of 24 Driver Projects and other key stakeholders. We present the GA4GH suite of secure, interoperable technical standards and policy frameworks and review the current status of standards, their relevance to key domains of research and clinical care, and future plans of GA4GH. Broad international participation in building, adopting, and deploying GA4GH standards and frameworks will catalyze an unprecedented effort in data sharing that will be critical to advancing genomic medicine and ensuring that all populations can access its benefits.

Financial toxicity is a side effect of cancer that results from the perceived financial distress an individual may experience in the course of the disease. The purpose of this paper is to analyse underlying factors related to subjective financial distress in high-income countries with universal healthcare coverage. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify qualitative and quantitative studies of cancer patient-reported subjective financial distress by performing a search in the databases of PubMed, PsycINFO and CINAHL up to December 2020. A qualitative synthesis was performed linking the time-dependent occurrence of risk factors to derived categories of risk factors. Out of 4321 identified records, 30 quantitative and 16 qualitative studies were eligible. Classification of risk factors resulted in eight categories with a total of 34 subcategories. Subjective financial distress is primarily determined by pre-diagnosis sociodemographic- factors as well as financial and work factors that might change during the course of the disease. The design of healthcare and social security systems shapes the country-specific degree of subjective financial distress. Further research should focus on evolving multidisciplinary intervention schemes and multidimensional instruments for subjective financial distress to account for identified risk factors in universal healthcare systems more precisely.

Purpose of Review: The family plays a significant role in end-of-life care and decision-making with advanced cancer patients. This non-systematic review aims to summarize the family role and possible emerging conflicts and problems related to family involvement in decisions with advanced cancer patients., Recent Findings: Four important domains were identified: (1) discordance between patients and caregivers' understanding of prognosis and goals of care; (2) internal family conflicts; (3) cultural differences regarding the role of the family in end-of life decision-making; (4) the burden on caregivers through caring for cancer patients. Based on the findings, we formulated some implications to consider for clinical practice. We suggest to involve the family in decision-making, to ascertain patients' wish for family involvement and if necessary, taking a mediator role between patients and their caregivers; to be aware of "invisible" family influence on patients' decisions; to assess systematically family burden and needs; to provide timely information, psychological support interventions and palliative care., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The secondary use of clinical data in data-gathering, non-interventional research or learning activities (SeConts) has great potential for scientific progress and health care improvement. At the same time, it poses relevant risks for the privacy and informational self-determination of patients whose data are used., Objective: Since the current literature lacks a tailored framework for risk assessment in SeConts as well as a clarification of the concept and practical scope of SeConts, we aim to fill this gap., Methods: In this study, we analyze each element of the concept of SeConts to provide a synthetic definition, investigate the practical relevance and scope of SeConts through a literature review, and operationalize the widespread definition of risk (as a harmful event of a certain magnitude that occurs with a certain probability) to conduct a tailored analysis of privacy risk factors typically implied in SeConts., Results: We offer a conceptual clarification and definition of SeConts and provide a list of types of research and learning activities that can be subsumed under the definition of SeConts. We also offer a proposal for the classification of SeConts types into the categories non-interventional (observational) clinical research, quality control and improvement, or public health research. In addition, we provide a list of risk factors that determine the probability or magnitude of harm implied in SeConts. The risk factors provide a framework for assessing the privacy-related risks for patients implied in SeConts. We illustrate the use of risk assessment by applying it to a concrete example., Conclusions: In the future, research ethics committees and data use and access committees will be able to rely on and apply the framework offered here when reviewing projects of secondary use of clinical data for learning and research purposes., (©Martin Jungkunz, Anja Köngeter, Katja Mehlis, Eva C Winkler, Christoph Schickhardt. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 08.06.2021.)

Background: Family communication has been increasingly recognized as an important factor in decision making near the end of life. However, the role of the family in decision making is less studied in oncology settings, where most patients are conscious and able to communicate almost until dying. The aim of this study was to explore oncologists' and nurses' perceptions of family involvement in decision making about forgoing cancer-specific treatment in patients with advanced cancer., Materials and Methods: Qualitative semistructured interviews with 22 oncologists and 7 oncology nurses were analyzed according to the grounded theory approach. The results were discussed against the background of the clinical and ethical debate on family role near the end of life., Results: We could identify two approaches shared by both oncologists and nurses toward family involvement. These approaches could be partly explained by different perception and definition of the concept of patients' autonomy: (a) a patient-focused approach in which a patient's independence in decision making was the highest priority for oncologists and (b) a mediator approach with a family focus in which oncologists and nurses assigned an active role to patients' family in decision making and strived for building consensus and resolving conflicts., Conclusion: The main challenge was to involve family, increasing their positive influences on the patient and avoiding a negative one. Thereby, the task of both oncologists and oncology nurses is to support a patient's family in understanding of a patient's incurable condition and to identify a patient's preference for therapy., Implications for Practice: This study focused on oncologists' and oncology nurses' perceptions of family involvement in decision making about treatment limitation in patients with advanced cancer who are able to communicate in a hospital setting. Oncologists and oncology nurses should be aware of both positive aspects and challenges of family involvement. Positive aspects are patients' emotional support and support in understanding and managing the information regarding treatment decisions. Challenges are diverging family preferences with regard to treatment goals that might become a barrier to advanced care planning, a possible increased psychological burden for the family. Especially challenging is involving the family of a young patient because increased attention, more time investment, and detailed discussions are needed., (© 2020 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

Background: In addition to physical, psychological and social effects, economic effects and the associated financial burden of a cancer diagnosis may also gain in importance during prolonged disease progression. Counselling by social services is an important factor in coping with this burden., Methods: People employed in social work in oncology were invited to participate in a survey. The survey comprises 16 items on the perception of financial burdens, changes in the relevance of the topic, risk factors and current counselling practice., Results: 81% of the respondents reported that the financial burden arising from a cancer diagnosis is a relevant topic of consultation for at least half of the patients. For 55%, this topic has become more important in recent years, which is due to higher survival rates, an increased number of younger patients, and poorer social security and working conditions., Discussion and Conclusion: Despite comprehensive insurance coverage, the financial burden of cancer patients has also gained in importance in Germany and must be increasingly taken into account in everyday social service counselling. Due to numerous risk factors and complex reasons, further measures are required to enable the early identification of risk constellations and to improve the situation of those affected., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)

Well-differentiated grade 3 neuroendocrine tumors (NET G3) have been distinguished from poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NEC) in the most current WHO classifications. Commonly applied first-line chemotherapy protocols with cisplatin or carboplatin in combination with etoposide (PE) are less effective in NET G3 than NEC. Suggested alternative treatment protocols have not been studied in first-line therapy of NET G3 so far. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with NET G3 in the databases of 3 German cancer centers. Out of 142 patients, 136 patients received palliative first-line therapy: overall response rate (ORR) was 35.1% for PE ( n = 37), 56.4% for FOLFOX ( n = 39), 27.3% for temozolomide/capecitabine (TEM/CAP) ( n = 22), 45.0% for streptozotocin/5-fluorouracil (STZ/5-FU) ( n = 20), and 16.7% for other ( n = 18). Median progression-free survival (PFS) for PE was 6.9 months. Compared to PE, PFS in the other treatment groups was 6.9 months for FOLFOX ( p = 0.333), 12.0 months for TEM/CAP ( p = 0.093), 4.8 months for STZ/5-FU ( p = 0.919), and 14.1 months for other ( p = 0.014). In a univariate setting, all non-PE patients combined showed a significantly prolonged PFS vs. PE (9.0 months; p = 0.049) which could not be confirmed in a multivariate analysis. In conclusion, NET G3 with FOLFOX showed the highest ORR, and with TEM/CAP showed the longest PFS. Further prospective evaluation of the optimal therapeutic strategy for this tumor entity is needed.

'Disease interception' describes the treatment of a disease in its clinically inapparent phase and is increasingly used in medical literature. However, no precise definition, much less an ethical evaluation, has been developed yet. This article starts with a definition of 'disease interception' by distinguishing it from other preventions. It then analyses the ethical and social implications of the concept in light of the four principles of medical ethics by Beauchamp and Childress. The term 'disease interception' refers to a form of secondary prevention applied in a short interception window intended to prevent a preclinical disease from developing further. We propose the definition 'early and targeted secondary prevention by treatment'. The ethical evaluation of the concept shows that while it promises to be beneficial, it raises a number of ethical and social challenges regarding patient autonomy and justice. In order to ensure decision-making that respects patient autonomy, commercially motivated metaphors such as 'disease interception' should make way for precise definitions. Future research should not only focus on how to detect clinically inapparent diseases but also on the ethical question, when this is justifiable and what consequences it has for the individual and society as a whole., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Mobile phone video call applications generally did not undergo testing in randomised controlled clinical trials prior to their implementation in patient care regarding the rate of successful patient visits and impact on the physician-patient relationship., Methods: The National Center for Tumour Diseases (NCT) MOBILE trial was a monocentric open-label randomised controlled clinical trial of patients with solid tumours undergoing systemic cancer therapy with need of a follow-up visit with their consulting physician at outpatient clinics. 66 patients were 1:1 randomised to receive either a standard in-person follow-up visit at outpatient clinics or a video call via a mobile phone application. The primary outcome was feasibility defined as the proportion of patients successfully completing the first follow-up visit. Secondary outcomes included success rate of further video calls, time spent by patient and physician, patient satisfaction and quality of physician-patient relationship., Findings: Success rate of the first follow-up visit in the intention-to-treat cohort was 87.9% (29 of 33) for in-person visits and 78.8% (26 of 33) for video calls (relative risk: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.13, p=0.51). The most common reasons for failure were software incompatibility in the video call and no-show in the in-person visit arm. The success rate for further video visits was 91.7% (11 of 12). Standardised patient questionnaires showed significantly decreased total time spent and less direct costs for patients (Δmean -170.8 min, 95% CI -246 min to -95.5 min), p<0.0001; Δmean -€14.37, 95% CI -€23.9 to -€4.8, p<0.005) and comparable time spent for physicians in the video call arm (Δmean 0.5 min, 95% CI -5.4 min to 6.4 min, p=0.86). Physician-patient relationship quality mean scores assessed by a validated standardised questionnaire were higher in the video call arm (1.13-fold, p=0.02)., Interpretation: Follow-up visits with the tested mobile phone video call application were feasible but software compatibility should be critically evaluated., Trial Registration Number: DRKS00015788., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LM is an employee of Minxli, München, Germany., (© Author (s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Background: Decisions to limit treatment (DLTs) are important to protect patients from overtreatment but constitute one of the most ethically challenging situations in oncology practice. In the Ethics Policy for Advance Care Planning and Limiting Treatment study (EPAL), we examined how often DLT preceded a patient's death and how early they were determined before (T1) and after (T2) the implementation of an intrainstitutional ethics policy on DLT., Methods: This prospective quantitative study recruited 1.134 patients with haematological/oncological neoplasia in a period of 2×6 months at the University Hospital of Munich, Germany. Information on admissions, discharges, diagnosis, age, DLT, date and place of death, and time span between the initial determination of a DLT and the death of a patient was recorded using a standardised form., Results: Overall, for 21% (n=236) of the 1.134 patients, a DLT was made. After implementation of the policy, the proportion decreased (26% T1/16% T2). However, the decisions were more comprehensive, including more often the combination of 'Do not resuscitate' and 'no intense care unit' (44% T1/64% T2). The median time between the determination of a DLT and the patient's death was similarly short with 6 days at a regular ward (each T1/T2) and 10.5/9 (T1/T2) days at a palliative care unit. For patients with solid tumours, the DLTs were made earlier at both regular and palliative care units than for the deceased with haematological neoplasia., Conclusion: Our results show that an ethics policy on DLT could sensitise for treatment limitations in terms of frequency and extension but had no significant impact on timing of DLT. Since patients with haematological malignancies tend to undergo intensive therapy more often during their last days than patients with solid tumours, special attention needs to be paid to this group. To support timely discussions, we recommend the concept of advance care planning., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author (s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Background: Particularly in the context of severe diseases like cancer, many patients wish to include caregivers in the planning of treatment and care. Many caregivers like to be involved but feel insufficiently enabled. This study aimed at providing insight into patients' and caregivers' perspectives on caregivers' roles in managing the patient portal of an electronic personal health record (PHR)., Methods: A descriptive qualitative study was conducted comprising two study phases: (1) Usability tests and interviews with patients with cancer and caregivers (2) additional patient interviews after a 3-month-pilot-testing of the PHR. For both study parts, a convenience sample was selected, focusing on current state of health and therapy process and basic willingness to participate and ending up with a mixed sample as well as saturation of data. All interviews were audio-recorded, pseudonymized, transcribed verbatim and qualitatively analyzed., Results: Two main categories emerged from qualitative data: 'Caregivers' role' and 'Graduation of access rights' - consisting of four subcategories each. The interviewed patients (n = 22) and caregivers (n = 9) felt that the involvement of caregivers is central to foster the acceptance of a PHR for cancer patients. However, their role varied from providing technical support to representing patients, e.g. if the patient's state of health made this necessary. Heterogeneous opinions emerged regarding the question whether caregivers should receive full or graduated access on a patient's PHR., Conclusions: In order to support the patient and to participate in the care process, caregivers need up-to-date information on the patient's health and treatment. Nevertheless, some patients do not want to share all medical data with caregivers, which might strain the patient-caregiver relationship. This needs to be considered in development and implementation of personal health records. Generally, in the debate on patient portals of a personal health record, paying attention to the role of caregivers is essential. By appreciating the important relationship between patients and caregivers right from the beginning, implementation, of a PHR would be enhanced., Trial Registration: ISRCTN85224823 . Date of registration: 23/12/2015 (retrospectively registered).

Background: Financial toxicity of cancer has so far been discussed primarily in the US health care system and is associated with higher morbidity and mortality. In European health care systems, the socio-economic impact of cancer is poorly understood. This study investigates the financial burden and patient-reported outcomes of neuroendocrine (NET) or colorectal (CRC) cancer patients at a German Comprehensive Cancer Center., Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study surveyed 247 advanced stage patients (n = 122 NET/n = 125 CRC) at the National Center for Tumor Diseases, in Germany about cancer-related out-of-pocket costs, income loss, distress, and quality of life. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to demonstrate the effects of economic deterioration on patients' quality of life and distress., Results: 81% (n = 199) of the patients reported out-of-pocket costs, and 37% (n = 92) income loss as a consequence of their disease. While monthly out-of-pocket costs did not exceed 200€ in 77% of affected patients, 24% of those with income losses reported losing more than 1.200€ per month. High financial loss relative to income was significantly associated with patients' reporting a worse quality of life (p < .05) and more distress (p < .05)., Conclusions: Financial toxicity in third-party payer health care systems like Germany is caused rather by income loss than by co-payments. Distress and reduced quality of life due to financial problems seem to amplify the burden that already results from a cancer diagnosis and treatment. If confirmed at a broader scale, there is a need for targeted support measures at the individual and system level.

Background: Economic considerations play an ever-increasing role in the decisions and actions of physicians, at times compromising the doctor-patient relationship and the quality of treatment. A reflection on an appropriate form of economization in the medical system therefore seems to be necessary., Objectives: This article examines the conditions under which moral standards can be effective in daily clinical practice., Materials and Methods: Strategies against the scarcity of resources are evaluated using ethical criteria. Organizational ethics approaches are discussed as a possible solution., Results: Economic considerations are desirable if they increase efficiency in the healthcare system. However, rationing for purely cost reasons or delivering services to increase profit are ethically questionable motives. In addition to individual care decisions, cost decisions need to be transparently weighed at the institutional and health policy levels. Through this higher-level approach, carers will be better able to focus on the core of medical treatment which is the patient's well-being., Conclusions: Codes of conduct such as the DGIM (German Society of Internal Medicine) Clinic Codex can be useful ethical guidelines for patient care if they are institutionally implemented and actually used in the institution.

Background: The implementation of a personal electronic health record (PHR) is a central objective of digitalization policies in the German health care system. Corresponding legislation was passed with the 2015 Act for Secure Digital Communication and Applications in the Health Sector (eHealth Act). However, compared with other European countries, Germany still lags behind concerning the implementation of a PHR., Objective: In order to explore potential barriers and facilitators for the adoption of a PHR in routine health care in Germany, this paper aims to identify policies, structures, and practices of the German health care system that influence the uptake and use of a PHR., Methods: A total of 33 semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of experts: 23 interviews with different health care professionals and 10 interviews with key actors of the German health care system who were telematics, eHealth, and information technology experts (eHealth experts). The interviews were transcribed verbatim and subjected to a content analysis., Results: From the expert perspective, a PHR was basically considered desirable and unavoidable. At the same time, a number of challenges for implementation in Germany have been outlined. Three crucial themes emerged: (1) documentation standards: prevailing processes of the analog bureaucratic paper world, (2) interoperability: the plurality of actors and electronic systems, and (3) political structure: the lack of clear political regulations and political incentive structures., Conclusions: With regard to the implementation of a PHR, an important precondition of a successful digitalization will be the precedent reform of the system to be digitized. Whether the recently passed Act for Faster Appointments and Better Care will be a step in the right direction remains to be seen., (©Sabrina Pohlmann, Aline Kunz, Dominik Ose, Eva C Winkler, Antje Brandner, Regina Poss-Doering, Joachim Szecsenyi, Michel Wensing. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 29.01.2020.)

Background: As Next Generation Sequencing technologies are increasingly implemented in biomedical research and (translational) care, the number of study participants and patients who ask for release of their genomic raw data is set to increase. This raises the question whether research participants and patients have a legal and moral right to receive their genomic raw data and, if so, how this right should be implemented into practice., Methods: In a first step we clarify some central concepts such as "raw data"; in a second step we sketch the international legal framework. The third step provides an extensive ethical analysis which comprehends two parts: an evaluation of whether there is a prima facie moral right to receive one's raw data, and a contextualization and discussion of the right in light of potentially conflicting interests and rights of the data subject herself and third parties; in a last fourth step we emphasize the main practical consequences of the ethical analyses and propose recommendations for the release of raw data., Results: In several legislations like the new European General Data Protection Regulation, patients do in principle have the right to receive their raw data. However, the procedural implementation of this right and whether it involves genetic counselling is at the discretion of the Member States. Even more questions remain with respect to the research context. The ethical analysis suggests that patients and research subjects have a moral right to receive their genomic raw data and addresses aspects which are also of relevance for the legal discussion such as the costs of release of raw data and its impact on academic freedom., Conclusion: Taking into account the specific nature and implications of genomic raw data and the contexts of research and health care, several concerns and potentially conflicting interests of the data subjects themselves and involved researchers, physicians, biomedical institutions and relatives arise. Instead of using them to argue in favor of restrictions of the data subjects' legal and moral right to genomic raw data, the concerns should be addressed through provision of information and other measures. To this end, we propose relevant recommendations.

The outlined empirical study on the decision-making process concerning the limitation of life-prolonging treatment (DLT) in patients with advanced cancer at a University hospital setting triggered some new questions for research ethics with respect to studies using empirical methods in medical ethics. The analyzed data of the study showed that less than half of the patients were involved in DLT. Deciding against CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) and transferal to the ICU (intensive care unit) without informing and explaining it to the perfectly competent patient can be regarded as a violation of the ethical principle of respect for autonomy. This is what the embedded researcher witnessed throughout the study recruitment and data acquisition, as the noninvolvement of patients was not just a result of the final data analysis. The ethical question raised in this situation was as follows: Does the embedded researcher has a moral duty to intervene when she witnesses that ethical standards are not upheld?

Patients experiencing financial distress as a side-effect of cancer are not only reported in the United States, but also in third-party payer healthcare systems in Europe. Since validated survey instruments are a prerequisite for robust and comparable results, we aimed to compile and classify available instruments to enable both a better understanding of the underlying construct of financial toxicity and to facilitate further studies that are adjustable to various healthcare systems. We did a systematic literature search on studies that provide data on perceived cancer-related financial distress experienced by adult patients using PubMed, CINAHL and Web of Science databases up to 2018. We analyzed all detected instruments, items domains and questions with regard to their wording, scales and the domains of financial distress covered. Among 3298 records screened, 41 publications based on 40 studies matched our inclusion criteria. Based on the analysis of 352 different questions we identified 6 relevant subdomains that represent perceptions of and reactions to experienced financial distress: (i) active financial spending, (ii) use of passive financial resources, (iii) psychosocial responses, (iv) support seeking, (v) coping with care or (vi) coping with ones' lifestyle. We found an inconsistent coverage and use of these domains that makes it difficult to compare and quantify the prevalence of financial distress. Moreover, some existing instruments do not reflect relevant domains for patients in third-party payer systems. There is neither a consistent understanding of the construct of financial burden nor do available instruments cover all relevant aspects of a patients' distress perception. We encourage using the identified six domains to further develop survey instruments and adjust them to different health systems., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Background: Neuroendocrine carcinomas of the prostate (NEPCs) are rare tumors with poor prognosis. While platinum and etoposide-based chemotherapy regimens (PE) are commonly applied in first-line for advanced disease, evidence for second-line therapy and beyond is very limited., Methods: Retrospective analysis of all patients with NEPCs including mixed differentiation with adenocarcinoma component and well differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs, carcinoids) at two high-volume oncological centers between 12/2000 and 11/2017., Results: Of 46 identified patients 39.1 % had a prior diagnosis of prostatic adenocarcinoma only, 43.5 % had a mixed differentiation at NEPC diagnosis, 67.4 % developed visceral metastases, 10.9 % showed paraneoplastic syndromes. Overall survival (OS) from NEPC diagnosis was 15.5 months, and significantly shorter in patients with a prior prostatic adenocarcinoma (5.4 vs. 32.7 months, p=0.005). 34 patients received palliative first-line systemic therapy with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 6.6 months, mostly PE. Overall response rate (ORR) for PE was 48.1 %. 19 patients received second-line therapy, mostly with poor responses. Active regimens were topotecan (1 PR, 3 PD), enzalutamide (1 SD), abiraterone (1 SD), FOLFIRI (1 SD), and ipilimumab+nivolumab (1 PR). One patient with prostatic carcinoid was sequentially treated with octreotide, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy and everolimus, and survived for over 9 years., Conclusions: EP in first-line shows notable ORR, however limited PFS. For second-line therapy, topotecan, FOLFIRI, enzalutamide, abiraterone and immune checkpoint blockade are treatment options. Prostatic carcinoids can be treated in analogy to well differentiated gastrointestinal NETs., Competing Interests: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors declare no conflict of interest in relation to the work described.

Background: Cancer patients often face decisions whether to proceed with cancer-specific treatment or to switch to best supportive care. In these decisions, patients' preferences should be determining cornerstones. The aim of this survey was to elicit patients' preferences regarding discussions about forgoing treatment and factors influencing their preferences., Methods: We surveyed 194 patients at the National Center for Tumor Diseases, Germany. Quality of life (FACT-G), cancer-specific distress (QSC-R10), anxiety/depression (PHQ-4/GAD-2), preferences regarding quality/length of life (QQ), patient-physician communication (CARES-SF), and family role (CCAT-P) were assessed., Results: Patients weighting quality of life over lifetime wanted their oncologists to address treatment limitations as early as possible (p = 0.00). Patients striving for a longer lifetime did not want such discussions (p = 0.05). Having discussed treatment limitations was not associated with increased anxiety, depression, or distress. Limiting treatment was discussed only with one-third of the patients with a prognosis of less than 6 months and rather with elderly patients or patients in a worse medical condition. Attributing an important role to family decisions was associated with striving for lifetime (p = 0.01)., Conclusion: Preferences for either quality or length of life were associated with patients' willingness to discuss forgoing cancer-specific treatment. Timely discussion of realistic treatment goals is one way to avoid overtreatment. Patients striving for lifetime require increased attention and opportunities to address prognosis and risks of treatment., (© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Eliciting and integrating patients' preferences in decision-making in palliative oncology is an important criterion for the quality of end-of-life care. It is an essential prerequisite in supporting the integrity of patients' decision-making process, enhancing patients' right to self-determination and facilitating patients' autonomy. In this review we summarize the data on: (1) patients' preference for a decisional model in advanced cancer, (2) patients' preferences for quality versus length of life and the enrollment of patients in early-phase clinical studies, and (3) preferences for caregiver involvement in decision-making. Timely assessment of patients' preferences enables advance care planning with respect to considering patients' values, discussing therapy goals and planning for patients' end-of-life care. It helps avoiding overtreatment near the end of life and giving care that is aligned to patients' wishes and family capacities., (© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Objective: Decisions to limit life-prolonging treatment (DLT) are often accompanied by psychological and ethical difficulties. The aim of the study is to investigate prevalence and intensity of moral distress (MD) as well as potential causes experienced by oncology physicians and nurses in DLT situations., Methods: This prospective study at a German university hospital included n = 100 advanced cancer inpatients with DLT. We surveyed their respective physicians and nurses to assess MD in DLT using an adapted distress thermometer and an open-ended question to specify reasons of MD. We also collected data on the decision-making process from the perspective of the clinicians., Results: Physicians report MD in 67% (n = 51) and nurses in 74% (n = 67) of the cases. The MD level in nurses (mean 2.3; SD 2.3) is significantly higher (P = .005) than in physicians (mean 1.5; SD 1.4). Uncertainties concerning ethical aspects in DLT in a patient case are associated with MD in both physicians (P = .024) and nurses (P = .004). Involvement of nurses in DLT is the strongest predictor (P = .000) for MD as indicated by physicians. Nurses experience MD especially, if the patient has a low quality of life (P = .001)., Conclusions: Moral distress is experienced by both oncologists and nurses in DLT. Nurses report higher MD intensity compared with physicians although the ultimate responsibility for DLT lies with the physicians. Support for the challenging decisions may be provided through the implementation of an ethical guideline and enhanced interprofessional communication., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Molecular tumour boards (MTBs) offer recommendations for potentially effective, but potentially burdensome, molecularly targeted treatments to a patient's treating physician. In this paper, we discuss the question of who is responsible for ensuring that there is an adequate evidence base for any treatments recommended to a patient. We argue that, given that treating oncologists cannot usually offer a robust evaluation of the evidence underlying an MTB's recommendation, members of the MTB are responsible for ensuring that the evidence level is adequate. We explore two models for how to share responsibility between MTB members. According to the first model, each MTB member, as well as the treating physician, should be held maximally and equally responsible for the recommendations. We argue that this insufficiently accounts for differences in roles and expertise of MTB members. We propose instead that responsibility is delegated via relationships of trust. We argue if these relationships of trust are to be instances of reasonable trust, (a) MTBs should offer a clinical representative to whom a treating physician may delegate the responsibility of ensuring there is sufficient evidence for treatment recommendations, (b) the relationships of trust between the representative and the other MTB members should be clearly defined, and (c) MTB members should be carefully selected. Treating oncologists retain a responsibility to consider general limitations of the evidence for targeted treatments in assessing whether the treatment recommendation offered by an MTB's representative is adequate for a given clinical situation., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Personal electronic health records (PHR) are considered instrumental in improving health care quality and efficiency, enhancing communication between all parties involved and strengthening the patient's role. Technical architectures, data privacy, and applicability issues have been discussed for many years. Nevertheless, nationwide implementation of a PHR is still pending in Germany despite legal regulations provided by the eHealth Act passed in 2015. Within the information technology for patient-oriented care project funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (2012-2017), a Web-based personal electronic health record prototype (PEPA) was developed enabling patient-controlled information exchange across different care settings. Gastrointestinal cancer patients and general practitioners utilized PEPA during a 3-month trial period. Both patients and physicians authorized by them could view PEPA content online and upload or download files., Objective: This paper aims to outline findings of the posttrial qualitative study carried out to evaluate user-reported experiences, perceptions, and perspectives, focusing on their interpretation of PEPA beyond technical usability and views on a future nationwide implementation., Methods: Data were collected through semistructured guide-based interviews with 11 patients and 3 physicians (N=14). Participants were asked to share experiences, views of perceived implications, and perspectives towards nationwide implementation. Further data were generated through free-text fields in a subsequent study-specific patient questionnaire and researcher's notes. Data were pseudonymized, audiotaped, and transcribed verbatim. Content analysis was performed through the Framework Analysis approach. All qualitative data were systemized by using MAXQDA Analytics PRO 12 (Rel.12.3.1). Additionally, participant characteristics were analyzed descriptively using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 24., Results: Users interpreted PEPA as a central medium containing digital chronological health-related documentation that simplifies information sharing across care settings. While patients consider the implementation of PEPA in Germany in the near future, physicians are more hesitant. Both groups believe in PEPA's concept, but share awareness of concerns about data privacy and older or impaired people's abilities to manage online records. Patients perceive benefits for involvement in treatment processes and continuity of care but worry about financing and the implementation of functionally reduced versions. Physicians consider integration into primary systems critical for interoperability but anticipate technical challenges, as well as resistance from older patients and colleagues. They omit clear positioning regarding PEPA's potential incremental value for health care organizations or the provider-patient relationship., Conclusions: Digitalization in German health care will continue to bring change, both organizational and in the physician-patient relationship. Patients endorse and expect a nationwide PEPA implementation, anticipating various benefits. Decision makers and providers need to contribute to closing modernization gaps by committing to new concepts and by invigorating transformed roles., (©Regina Poss-Doering, Aline Kunz, Sabrina Pohlmann, Helene Hofmann, Marion Kiel, Eva C Winkler, Dominik Ose, Joachim Szecsenyi. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (http://formative.jmir.org), 03.08.2018.)

Background: Many patients with advanced cancer receive chemotherapy close to death and are referred too late to palliative or hospice care, and therefore die under therapy or in intensive care units. Oncologists still have difficulties in involving patients appropriately in decisions about limiting tumor-specific or life-prolonging treatment., Objective: The aim of this Ethics Policy for Advanced Care Planning and Limiting Treatment Study is to develop an ethical guideline for end-of-life decisions and to evaluate the impact of this guideline on clinical practice regarding the following target goals: reduction of decisional conflicts, improvement of documentation transparency and traceability, reduction of distress of the caregiver team, and better knowledge and consideration of patients' preferences., Methods: This is a protocol for a pre-post interventional study that analyzes the clinical practice on treatment limitation before and after the guideline implementation. An embedded researcher design with a mixed-method approach encompassing both qualitative and quantitative methods is used. The study consists of three stages: (1) the preinterventional phase, (2) the intervention (development and implementation of the guideline), and 3) the postinterventional phase (evaluation of the guideline's impact on clinical practice). We evaluate the process of decision-making related to limiting treatment from different perspectives of oncologists, nurses, and patients; comparing them to each other will allow us to develop the guideline based on the interests of all parties., Results: The first preintervention data of the project have already been published, which detailed a qualitative study with oncologists and oncology nurses (n=29), where different approaches to initiation of end-of-life discussions were ethically weighted. A framework for oncologists was elaborated, and the study favored an anticipatory approach of preparing patients for forgoing therapy throughout the course of disease. Another preimplementational study of current decision-making practice (n=567 patients documented) demonstrated that decisions to limit treatment preceded the death of many cancer patients (62/76, 82% of deceased patients). However, such decisions were usually made in the last week of life, which was relatively late., Conclusions: The intervention will be evaluated with respect to the following endpoints: better knowledge and consideration of patients' treatment wishes; reduction of decisional conflicts; improvement of documentation transparency and traceability; and reduction of the psychological and moral distress of a caregiver team., Registered Report Identifier: RR1-10.2196/9698., (©Katsiaryna Laryionava, Katja Mehlis, Elena Bierwirth, Friederike Mumm, Wolfgang Hiddemann, Pia Heußner, Eva C Winkler. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 15.06.2018.)

Background: Family members are important companions of severely ill patients with cancer. However, studies about the desirability and difficulties of integrating relatives in the decision-making process are rare in oncology. This qualitative study explores the family role in decisions to limit treatment near the end of life from the professionals' point of view., Methods: Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted with oncologists (n = 12) and nurses (n = 6) working at the Department of Hematology/Oncology at the University Hospital in Munich, Germany. The data were analyzed using a descriptive qualitative methodology and discussed from a medical ethics perspective., Results: Four major themes played a central role in the perception of the medical staff in regard to family members. (1) Family impact on patients' treatment preferences. (2) Strong family wish for further treatment. (3) Emotional distress of the family related to the involvement in end-of-life decision-making. (4) Importance of knowing family structures., Conclusions: The important role of the family members in patients' disease process is recognized by oncologists and oncology nurses. However, this does not seem to lead to an early involvement of the family members. Developing and establishing a systematic assessment of family members' needs and wishes in order to provide a specific-tailored support should become a priority for interdisciplinary clinical research in the near future.

Background: Empirical research demonstrates that there is a tendency to administer tumor-directed therapy to patients with advanced cancer close to death, especially if they are young. The aim of this qualitative study was to understand oncologists' treatment decisions and oncology nurses' perception of these decisions in young adult patients and to investigate the extent to which young age was a factor in cancer treatment decisions., Materials and Methods: We conducted 29 face-to-face interviews with oncologists and oncology nurses at the Department of Hematology and Oncology at the University Hospital in Munich, Germany. The interviews were analyzed according to the grounded theory approach., Results: Oncologists and nurses reported that decisions about limiting cancer treatment with young adult patients are the most challenging and stressful in clinical practice. Apart from using young age as a proxy for patient's medical fitness, oncologists' decisions in favor of more aggressive treatment of younger patients were mainly guided by ethical reasons such as patient preferences and the perceptions of injustice associated with dying at a young age, as well as by psychological reasons, such as identification and emotional entanglement., Conclusion: "Struggling" together with the patient against the injustice of dying young for a longer lifetime is an important factor driving aggressive treatment in young adult patients. However, oncologists might run a risk of neglecting other ethical aspects, such as a principle of nonmaleficence, that might even result in life-shortening adverse events., Implications for Practice: This study identifies two ethical and one psychological reasons for patients' overtreatment: 1) patients' preference for further treatment; 2) oncologists' perception of un-fairness of dying young; and 3) identification and emotional entanglement with patient. These findings emphasize the need for oncologists' awareness of the reasons guiding their treatment decisions - a sole focus on patients' preferences and on the fighting against the unfairness of dying young might lead to neglecting obligations of non-maleficence. Self-reflection, the balance of empathy and professional distance as well as timely end of life discussions and involvement of psycho-oncologists are needed in the care of young cancer patients., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2017.)

Background: Systems medicine has become a key word in biomedical research. Although it is often referred to as P4-(predictive, preventive, personalized and participatory)-medicine, it still lacks a clear definition and is open to interpretation. This conceptual lack of clarity complicates the scientific and public discourse on chances, risks and limits of Systems Medicine and may lead to unfounded hopes. Against this background, our goal was to develop a sufficiently precise and widely acceptable definition of Systems Medicine., Methods: In a first step, PubMed was searched using the keyword "systems medicine". A data extraction tabloid was developed putting forward a means/ends-division. Full-texts of articles containing Systems Medicine in title or abstract were screened for definitions. Definitions were extracted; their semantic elements were assigned as either means or ends. To reduce complexity of the resulting list, summary categories were developed inductively. In a second step, we applied six criteria for adequate definitions (necessity, non-circularity, non-redundancy, consistency, non-vagueness, and coherence) to these categories to derive a so-called précising definition of Systems Medicine., Results: We identified 185 articles containing the term Systems Medicine in title or abstract. 67 contained at least one definition of Systems Medicine. In 98 definitions, we found 114 means and 132 ends. From these we derived the précising definition: Systems Medicine is an approach seeking to improve medical research (i.e. the understanding of complex processes occurring in diseases, pathologies and health states as well as innovative approaches to drug discovery) and health care (i.e. prevention, prediction, diagnosis and treatment) through stratification by means of Systems Biology (i.e. data integration, modeling, experimentation and bioinformatics). Our study also revealed the visionary character of Systems Medicine., Conclusions: Our insights, on the one hand, allow for a realistic identification of actual ethical as well as legal issues arising in the context of Systems Medicine and, in consequence, for a realistic debate of questions concerning its matter and (future) handling. On the other hand, they help avoiding unfounded hopes and unrealistic expectations. This especially holds for goals like improving patient participation which are intensely debated in the context of Systems Medicine, however not implied in the concept.

Background  Decisions to limit treatment (DLT) are important in order to prevent overtreatment at the end of life. However, they are not always discussed with the patient in advance or sufficiently documented. In a study to improve DLT in patients with an advanced hematological/ oncological disease we examined how often DLT precede deaths and how early they are determined. Methods  In a period of 6 months, 567 patients with advanced hematological/ oncological neoplasias had been recruited for the cross-sectional study at the University hospital in Munich. Using a standardized registration form an embedded researcher documented which DLT were determined for the patients and which of them were implemented until death. Results  For 26 % (n = 147) of the 567 patients a DLT was determined. These DLT were mostly documented in writing from the beginning on (90 %; n = 132), 20 % (n = 30) were modified. The proportion of deceased patients with DLT was 82 % (n = 62 of 76 deceased). The median time between the initial determination of a DLT and the patient's death was 6 days at normal ward and 10.5 days at palliative ward. Compared to hematological patients, DLT were more frequently diagnosed in patients with an oncological disease (64 vs. 36 %) and the decisions were made slightly earlier (7 vs. 5 days before death). Conclusion  Our results show that DLT precede the death of many patients with a hematological/ oncological disease, but usually are made in the last week of life. This leads to the risk that the remaining few days to death are not sufficient for discussions with all parties involved and the planning of the end of life. These findings resulted in the development of an ethics policy for treatment limitation in cancer patients, which should support the concept of advance care planning. The project is funded by the German Cancer Aid., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Background: The integration of information and communication technologies (ICT) is increasingly considered in the development of healthcare structures. This fact is also recognised in the e-Health Act. In this context, personal health records (PHR) have a specific meaning. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview on utilization, barriers and possible effects on the implementation of PHR., Methods: This analysis is based on a literature search in Web of Science (Core Collection) (01/2000 to 12/2014) using the following terms: "personal health record", "personal medical record", "personal electronic health record", "interpersonal health record", "personally controlled health record"., Results: In general, patients have positive attitudes towards the electronic exchange of personal health information (PHI) on a PHR. Even the sharing of PHI with physicians, health professionals, family and friends appears to be an option for many patients. Physicians also see the potential of a PHR on the internet, but they are more critical than patients. Barriers exist towards the use of complex and non-intuitive PHR concepts along with technical faults and the lack of functionality. From the physicians' perspective, prejudices concerning the use of PHR have not been confirmed and, other than previously expected, the workload has not increased so much. However, clinical outcomes have so far been rather moderate. Stronger effects may be achieved by embedding the PHR in a broader healthcare concept., Conclusion: In the context of chronic disease, a connected PHR (patient-controlled, cross-sectoral, and interoperable) can be a valuable tool for organizing healthcare for patients. To take full effect, the development of such systems should focus on patients and their families as well as on physicians and other healthcare professionals. Whether the e-Health Act is a step in the right direction will have to be established by future analysis., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)

Purpose: Given the inherent complexity of cancer care, in which personal, social, and clinical aspects accumulate and interact over time, self-management support need to become more comprehensive. This study has the following two aims: 1) to analyze and describe the complexity of individual patient situations and 2) to analyze and describe already established self-management strategies of patients to handle this complexity., Methods: A qualitative study was conducted. Ten focus groups were performed collecting perspectives of the following three user groups: patients with colorectal cancer (n=12) and representatives from support groups (n=2), physicians (n=17), and other health care professionals (HCPs; n=16). Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis., Results: The results showed that cancer patients are struggling with the complexity of their individual situations characterized by the 1) "complexity of disease", 2) "complexity of care", and 3) "complexity of treatment-related data". To deal with these multifaceted situations, patients have established several individual strategies. These strategies are "proactive demanding" (eg, to get support and guidance or a meaningful dialog with the doctor), "proactive behavior" (eg, preparation of visits), and "proactive data management" (eg, in terms of merging treatment-related data and to disseminate these to their health care providers)., Conclusion: Patients with colorectal cancer have to handle a high complexity of individual situations within treatment and care of their disease. Private and social challenges have a culminating effect. This complexity increases as patients experience a longer duration of treatment and follow-up as patients have to handle a significantly higher amount of data over time. Self-management support should focus more on the individual complexity in a patient's life. This includes assisting patients with strategies that have already been established by themselves (like preparation of visits)., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Background: A significant potential for patient empowerment is seen in concepts aiming to give patients access to their personal health information (PHI) and to share this PHI across different care settings and health systems. Personal health records (PHRs) and the availability of information through health information exchanges are considered to be key components of effective and efficient health care. With tethered PHRs, as often used in the United States, patients' opportunities to manage their PHI are strongly restricted. Therefore, within the INFOPAT (information technology for patient oriented care) project (2012-2016) in Germany, funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), the development of a patient-controlled "personal electronic health record" (PEPA) was based on user requirements right from the beginning., Objective: The overall objective of the study is to implement and evaluate a PEPA prototype for patients with colorectal cancer who are treated at the National Center for Tumor Diseases in Heidelberg. To achieve this aim, this study has 2 parts: a pre-implementation study (phase 1) and an implementation study (phase 2). The pre-implementation study will include a usability evaluation of the PEPA approach and the consideration of organizational preconditions for the implementation. With the implementation study, we will evaluate the process of implementation (eg, barriers or facilitators), the need for organizational change (eg, processes of communication), and the impact on outcomes (eg, self-efficacy, involvement in care)., Methods: The pre-implementation study is based on a mixed methods approach and comprises qualitative and quantitative element according to our research aim. We will use a think-aloud method for the usability analysis. Additionally, participants will be asked to evaluate their overall satisfaction based on a standardized questionnaire, the System Usability Scale. For the analysis of preconditions, we will conduct semistructured personal interviews with, for example, patients, medical assistants, and physicians. Within the implementation study the outcome evaluation is planned as a prospective, 3-month, open-label "before and after" trial. Additionally, for the analysis of processes and the need for organizational change, we will conduct interviews with the participants (eg, patients, general practitioners, physicians) of the before and after trial., Results: This project is part of the INFOPAT project, which is funded (2012-2016) by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). The enrolment was completed in July 2016. Data analysis is currently under way and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication at end of 2017., Conclusions: Existing approaches of PHRs aim to give patients access to their treatment data. With the PEPA approach and this study, we go a step further: patients have access to their PHI and they can give other persons (eg, their general practitioner) access. With this approach, new possibilities for professional collaboration and the engagement of patients can arise., (©Dominik Ose, Aline Kunz, Sabrina Pohlmann, Helene Hofmann, Markus Qreini, Johannes Krisam, Lorenz Uhlmann, Christian Jacke, Eva C Winkler, Hans-Joachim Salize, Joachim Szecsenyi. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 02.03.2017.)

Cross-sectoral cancer care is complex and involves collaboration from health care professionals (HCPs) across multiple sectors. However, when health information exchange (HIE) is not adequate, it results in impeded coordination and continuity of care. A web-based personal electronic health record (PEPA) under patients' control, providing access to personal health data across sectors, is being developed. Aim of this study was to explore perceived benefits and concerns. Using a qualitative approach, 10 focus groups were performed collecting views of three prospective user groups: patients with colorectal cancer (n = 12), physicians (n = 17) and other HCPs (n = 16). Representatives from different health sectors across the Rhine-Neckar region (Germany) participated. Data were audio- and videotaped, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. Our study shows that patients and HCPs expected a PEPA to enhance cross-sectoral availability of information, cross-sectoral cooperation and facilitate data management. Quality of cancer care was expected to be improved. Concerns were expressed in terms of data protection and data security. Concepts like a PEPA offer the chance to support HIE and avoid gaps of information in cross-sectoral cancer care. This may lead to improvements in coordination and continuity of care. Issues concerning data security and protection have to be addressed., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)