Search

Abstract Background Systematically screening published literature to determine the relevant publications to synthesize in a review is a time-consuming and difficult task. Large language models (LLMs) are an emerging technology with promising capabilities for the automation of language-related tasks that may be useful for such a purpose. Methods LLMs were used as part of an automated system to evaluate the relevance of publications to a certain topic based on defined criteria and based on the title and abstract of each publication. A Python script was created to generate structured prompts consisting of text strings for instruction, title, abstract, and relevant criteria to be provided to an LLM. The relevance of a publication was evaluated by the LLM on a Likert scale (low relevance to high relevance). By specifying a threshold, different classifiers for inclusion/exclusion of publications could then be defined. The approach was used with four different openly available LLMs on ten published data sets of biomedical literature reviews and on a newly human-created data set for a hypothetical new systematic literature review. Results The performance of the classifiers varied depending on the LLM being used and on the data set analyzed. Regarding sensitivity/specificity, the classifiers yielded 94.48%/31.78% for the FlanT5 model, 97.58%/19.12% for the OpenHermes-NeuralChat model, 81.93%/75.19% for the Mixtral model and 97.58%/38.34% for the Platypus 2 model on the ten published data sets. The same classifiers yielded 100% sensitivity at a specificity of 12.58%, 4.54%, 62.47%, and 24.74% on the newly created data set. Changing the standard settings of the approach (minor adaption of instruction prompt and/or changing the range of the Likert scale from 1–5 to 1–10) had a considerable impact on the performance. Conclusions LLMs can be used to evaluate the relevance of scientific publications to a certain review topic and classifiers based on such an approach show some promising results. To date, little is known about how well such systems would perform if used prospectively when conducting systematic literature reviews and what further implications this might have. However, it is likely that in the future researchers will increasingly use LLMs for evaluating and classifying scientific publications.

BackgroundDigitalization has become integral to healthcare and specifically cancer treatment. Healthcare providers in oncology widely use electronic data collection and management systems in contemporary clinical practice. However, some reports point to severe problems regarding usability, which negatively impact the clinical workforce, as well as safety issues related to electronic health records, which potentially endanger patients. This systematic review aims to evaluate current scientific literature on the usability and safety aspects of electronic health records in oncology.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature review on PubMed and Scopus to identify articles on the usability and safety aspects of electronic health records and clinical information systems utilized in oncological care. Two authors independently evaluated available literature according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, we quantitatively analyzed and classified the reported findings.ResultsOur literature research strategy retrieved 1032 articles. We included seven articles for further processing. Three projects focused on the assessment of electronic health record functionality, three projects described the process of user-driven design, and one article described remediation procedures introduced to compensate inability of computer systems to adapt to user requirements.ConclusionLiterature on the usability and safety of electronic health records in oncology is sparse. It is essential to raise awareness and start systematic activity to promote research on the usability of electronic health records in oncology.

Objectives: To evaluate effects of dose intensified salvage radiotherapy (sRT) on erectile function in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (PC) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Materials and methods: Eligible patients had evidence of biochemical failure after RP and a PSA at randomization of ≤ 2 ng/ml. Erectile dysfunction (ED) was investigated as secondary endpoint within the multicentre randomized trial (February 2011 to April 2014) in patients receiving either 64 Gy or 70 Gy sRT. ED and quality of life (QoL) were assessed using CTCAE v4.0 and the EORTC QoL questionnaires C30 and PR25 at baseline and up to 5 years after sRT. Results: 344 patients were evaluable. After RP 197 (57.3 %) patients had G0-2 ED while G3 ED was recorded in 147 (42.7 %) patients. Subsequently, sexual activity and functioning was impaired. 5 years after sRT, 101 (29.4 %) patients noted G0-2 ED. During follow-up, 44.2 % of patients with baseline G3 ED showed any improvement and 61.4 % of patients with baseline G0-2 ED showed worsening. Shorter time interval between RP and start of sRT (p = 0.007) and older age at randomization (p = 0.005) were significant predictors to more baseline ED and low sexual activity in the long-term. Age (p = 0.010) and RT technique (p = 0.031) had a significant impact on occurrence of long-term ED grade 3 and worse sexual functioning. During follow-up, no differences were found in erectile function, sexual activity, and sexual functioning between the 64 Gy and 70 Gy arm. Conclusion: ED after RP is a known long-term side effect with significant impact on patients’ QoL. ED was further affected by sRT, but dose intensification of sRT showed no significant impact on erectile function recovery or prevalence of de novo ED after sRT. Age, tumor stage, prostatectomy and RT-techniques, nerve-sparing and observation time were associated with long-term erectile function outcome.ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT01272050.

Purpose: Technological progress of machine learning and natural language processing has led to the development of large language models (LLMs), capable of producing well-formed text responses and providing natural language access to knowledge. Modern conversational LLMs such as ChatGPT have shown remarkable capabilities across a variety of fields, including medicine. These models may assess even highly specialized medical knowledge within specific disciplines, such as radiation therapy. We conducted an exploratory study to examine the capabilities of ChatGPT to answer questions in radiation therapy. Methods and Materials: A set of multiple-choice questions about clinical, physics, and biology general knowledge in radiation oncology as well as a set of open-ended questions were created. These were given as prompts to the LLM ChatGPT, and the answers were collected and analyzed. For the multiple-choice questions, it was checked how many of the answers of the model could be clearly assigned to one of the allowed multiple-choice-answers, and the proportion of correct answers was determined. For the open-ended questions, independent blinded radiation oncologists evaluated the quality of the answers regarding correctness and usefulness on a 5-point Likert scale. Furthermore, the evaluators were asked to provide suggestions for improving the quality of the answers. Results: For 70 multiple-choice questions, ChatGPT gave valid answers in 66 cases (94.3%). In 60.61% of the valid answers, the selected answer was correct (50.0% of clinical questions, 78.6% of physics questions, and 58.3% of biology questions). For 25 open-ended questions, 12 answers of ChatGPT were considered as “acceptable,” “good,” or “very good” regarding both correctness and helpfulness by all 6 participating radiation oncologists. Overall, the answers were considered “very good” in 29.3% and 28%, “good” in 28% and 29.3%, “acceptable” in 19.3% and 19.3%, “bad” in 9.3% and 9.3%, and “very bad” in 14% and 14% regarding correctness/helpfulness. Conclusions: Modern conversational LLMs such as ChatGPT can provide satisfying answers to many relevant questions in radiation therapy. As they still fall short of consistently providing correct information, it is problematic to use them for obtaining medical information. As LLMs will further improve in the future, they are expected to have an increasing impact not only on general society, but also on clinical practice, including radiation oncology.

Abstract Background The management of meningiomas is challenging, and the role of postoperative radiotherapy is not standardized. Methods Radiation oncology experts in Swiss centres were asked to participate in this decision-making analysis on the use of postoperative radiotherapy (RT) for meningiomas. Experts from ten Swiss centres agreed to participate and provided their treatment algorithms. Their input was converted into decision trees based on the objective consensus methodology. The decision trees were used as a basis to identify consensus and discrepancies in clinical routine. Results Several criteria used for decision-making in postoperative RT in meningiomas were identified: histological grading, resection status, recurrence, location of the tumour, zugzwang (therapeutic need to treat and/or severity of symptoms), size, and cell division rate. Postoperative RT is recommended by all experts for WHO grade III tumours as well as for incompletely resected WHO grade II tumours. While most centres do not recommend adjuvant irradiation for WHO grade I meningiomas, some offer this treatment in recurrent situations or routinely for symptomatic tumours in critical locations. The recommendations for postoperative RT for recurrent or incompletely resected WHO grade I and II meningiomas were surprisingly heterogeneous. Conclusions Due to limited evidence on the utility of postoperative RT for meningiomas, treatment strategies vary considerably among clinical experts depending on the clinical setting, even in a small country like Switzerland. Clear majorities were identified for postoperative RT in WHO grade III meningiomas and against RT for hemispheric grade I meningiomas outside critical locations. The limited data and variations in clinical recommendations are in contrast with the high prevalence of meningiomas, especially in elderly individuals.

Abstract In oncology, decision-making in individual situations is often very complex. To deal with such complexity, people tend to reduce it by relying on their initial intuition. The downside of this intuitive, subjective way of decision-making is that it is prone to cognitive and emotional biases such as overestimating the quality of its judgements or being influenced by one’s current mood. Hence, clinical predictions based on intuition often turn out to be wrong and to be outperformed by statistical predictions. Structuring and objectivizing oncological decision-making may thus overcome some of these issues and have advantages such as avoidance of unwarranted clinical practice variance or error-prevention. Even for uncertain situations with limited medical evidence available or controversies about the best treatment option, structured decision-making approaches like clinical algorithms could outperform intuitive decision-making. However, the idea of such algorithms is not to prescribe the clinician which decision to make nor to abolish medical judgement, but to support physicians in making decisions in a systematic and structured manner. An example for a use-case scenario where such an approach may be feasible is the selection of treatment dose in radiation oncology. In this paper, we will describe how a clinical algorithm for selection of a fractionation scheme for palliative irradiation of bone metastases can be created. We explain which steps in the creation process of a clinical algorithm for supporting decision-making need to be performed and which challenges and limitations have to be considered.

Abstract Aim There is no general consensus on the optimal treatment for prostate cancer (PC) patients with intrapelvic nodal oligorecurrences after radical prostatectomy. Besides androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) as standard of care, both elective nodal radiotherapy (ENRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as well as salvage lymph node dissection (sLND) are common treatment options. The aim of our study was to assess decision making and practice patterns for salvage radiotherapy (RT) in this setting. Methods Treatment recommendations from 14 Swiss radiation oncology centers were collected and converted into decision trees. An iterative process using the objective consensus methodology was applied to assess differences and consensus. Results PSMA PET/CT was recommended by 93% of the centers as restaging modality. For unfit patients defined by age, comorbidities or low performance status, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone was recommended by more than 70%. For fit patients with unfavorable tumor characteristics such as short prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time or initial high-risk disease, the majority of the centers (57–71%) recommended ENRT + ADT for 1–4 lesions. For fit patients with favorable tumor characteristics, there were low levels of consensus and a wide variety of recommendations. For 1–4 nodal lesions, focal SBRT was offered by 64% of the centers, most commonly as a 5-fraction course. Conclusions As an alternative to ADT, ENRT or SBRT for pelvic nodal oligorecurrences of PC are commonly offered to selected patients, with large treatment variations between centers. The exact number of lymph nodes had a major impact on treatment selection.

Background Current treatment options for stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consist of different combinations of chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy and immunotherapy. Treatment choices are highly individual decisions, in which adverse events (AEs) are relevant for decision-making. This study aims to analyse reporting of AEs in prospective stage III NSCLC trials, focussing on trials including radiotherapy and/or surgery. Methods PubMed was searched for prospective studies dealing with stage III NSCLC from January 1987 to April 2019. Meta-analyses were screened as a positive control. Pearson's Chi-squared test and smooth kernel distribution were used to estimate distributions. Data was resampled using bootstrapping. Results Out of 1193 initially identified studies, 119 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 31 had a surgical procedure in any study arm. Grade 3 and 4 AEs were reported in 94.12% and 92.44% of the included studies, respectively. Reporting of grade 5 AEs was provided in 87.39% of cases. Grade 1 and 2 AEs were less commonly reported at 53.78% and 63.03%, respectively. One study did not mention any AEs. Of the 31 treatment arms including any form of surgery, AEs were not reported in 10. Overall, 231 different AE items were reported, only 18 of them were included in at least 20% of the analysed studies. Conclusion Overall, AE reporting in stage III NSCLC was inconsistent and inhomogeneous. Studies including surgical study arms often reported only treatment-related deaths in regards of surgical AEs. Underreporting of AEs prohibits the extraction of patient-relevant information for decision-making and represents a suboptimal use of invested resources.

Abstract Background A minority of European countries have participated in international comparisons with high level data on lung cancer. However, the nature and extent of data collection across the continent is simply unknown, and without accurate data collection it is not possible to compare practice and set benchmarks to which lung cancer services can aspire. Methods Using an established network of lung cancer specialists in 37 European countries, a survey was distributed in December 2014. The results relate to current practice in each country at the time, early 2015. The results were compiled and then verified with co-authors over the following months. Results Thirty-five completed surveys were received which describe a range of current practice for lung cancer data collection. Thirty countries have data collection at the national level, but this is not so in Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Italy, Spain and Switzerland. Data collection varied from paper records with no survival analysis, to well-established electronic databases with links to census data and survival analyses. Conclusion Using a network of committed clinicians, we have gathered validated comparative data reporting an observed difference in data collection mechanisms across Europe. We have identified the need to develop a well-designed dataset, whilst acknowledging what is feasible within each country, and aspiring to collect high quality data for clinical research.

Abstract Background Several societies around the world issue guidelines incorporating the latest evidence. However, even the most commonly cited guidelines of the European Association of Urology (EAU) and the American Urological Association (AUA) leave the clinician with several treatment options and differ on specific points. We aimed to identify discrepancies and areas of consensus between guidelines to give novel insights into areas where low consensus between the guideline panels exists, and therefore where more evidence might increase consensus. Methods The webpages of the 61 members of the Societé Internationale d’Urologie were analysed to identify all listed or linked guidelines. Decision trees for the surgical management of urolithiasis were derived, and a comparative analysis was performed to determine consensus and discrepancies. Results Five national and one international guideline (EAU) on surgical stone treatment were available for analysis. While 7 national urological societies refer to the AUA guidelines and 11 to the EAU guidelines, 43 neither publish their own guidelines nor refer to others. Comparative analysis revealed a high degree of consensus for most renal and ureteral stone scenarios. Nevertheless, we also identified a variety of discrepancies between the different guidelines, the largest being the approach to the treatment of proximal ureteral calculi and larger renal calculi. Conclusions Six guidelines with recommendations for the surgical treatment of urolithiasis to support urologists in decision-making were available for inclusion in our analysis. While there is a high grade of consensus for most stone scenarios, we also detected some discrepancies between different guidelines. These are, however, controversial situations where adequate evidence to assist with decision-making has yet to be elicited by further research.

Abstract Background The objective consensus methodology has recently been applied in consensus finding in several studies on medical decision-making among clinical experts or guidelines. The main advantages of this method are an automated analysis and comparison of treatment algorithms of the participating centers which can be performed anonymously. Methods Based on the experience from completed consensus analyses, the main steps for the successful implementation of the objective consensus methodology were identified and discussed among the main investigators. Results The following steps for the successful collection and conversion of decision trees were identified and defined in detail: problem definition, population selection, draft input collection, tree conversion, criteria adaptation, problem re-evaluation, results distribution and refinement, tree finalisation, and analysis. Conclusion This manuscript provides information on the main steps for successful collection of decision trees and summarizes important aspects at each point of the analysis.

Stage III N2 nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a complex disease with poor treatment outcomes. For patients in whom the disease is considered technically resectable, the main treatment options include surgery (with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy/neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT)) or CRT followed by adjuvant immunotherapy (dependent on programmed death ligand 1 status). As there is no clear evidence demonstrating a survival benefit between these options, patient preference plays an important role. A lack of a consensus definition of resectability of N2 disease adds to the complexity of the decision-making process. We compared 10 international guidelines on the treatment of NSCLC to investigate the recommendations on preoperatively diagnosed stage III N2 NSCLC. This comparison simplified the treatment paths to multimodal therapy based on surgery or radiotherapy (RT). We analysed factors relevant to decision-making within these guidelines. Overall, for nonbulky mediastinal lymph node involvement there was no clear preference between surgery and CRT. With increasing extent of mediastinal nodal disease, a tendency towards multimodal treatment based on RT was identified. In multiple scenarios, surgery or RT-based treatments are feasible and patient involvement in decision-making is critical.

Background: The Head and Neck Cancer Working Group of Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) has investigated the level of consensus (LOC) and discrepancy in everyday practice of diagnosis and treatment in head and neck cancer.Materials and Methods: An online survey was iteratively generated with 10 Swiss university and teaching hospitals. LOC below 50% was defined as no agreement, while higher LOC were arbitrarily categorized as low (51–74%), moderate (75–84%), and high (≥85%).Results: Any LOC was achieved in 62% of topics (n = 60). High, moderate, and low LOC were found in 18, 20, and 23%, respectively. Regarding Head and Neck Surgery, Radiation Oncology, Medical Oncology, and biomarkers, LOC was achieved in 50, 57, 83, and 43%, respectively.Conclusions: Consensus on clinical topics is rather low for surgeons and radiation oncologists. The questions discussed might highlight discrepancies, stimulate standardization of practice, and prioritize topics for future clinical research.

Background: The Head and Neck Cancer Working Group of Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) has investigated the level of consensus (LOC) and discrepancy in everyday practice of diagnosis and treatment in head and neck cancer.Materials and Methods: An online survey was iteratively generated with 10 Swiss university and teaching hospitals. LOC below 50% was defined as no agreement, while higher LOC were arbitrarily categorized as low (51–74%), moderate (75–84%), and high (≥85%).Results: Any LOC was achieved in 62% of topics (n = 60). High, moderate, and low LOC were found in 18, 20, and 23%, respectively. Regarding Head and Neck Surgery, Radiation Oncology, Medical Oncology, and biomarkers, LOC was achieved in 50, 57, 83, and 43%, respectively.Conclusions: Consensus on clinical topics is rather low for surgeons and radiation oncologists. The questions discussed might highlight discrepancies, stimulate standardization of practice, and prioritize topics for future clinical research.

Background: The Head and Neck Cancer Working Group of Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) has investigated the level of consensus (LOC) and discrepancy in everyday practice of diagnosis and treatment in head and neck cancer.Materials and Methods: An online survey was iteratively generated with 10 Swiss university and teaching hospitals. LOC below 50% was defined as no agreement, while higher LOC were arbitrarily categorized as low (51–74%), moderate (75–84%), and high (≥85%).Results: Any LOC was achieved in 62% of topics (n = 60). High, moderate, and low LOC were found in 18, 20, and 23%, respectively. Regarding Head and Neck Surgery, Radiation Oncology, Medical Oncology, and biomarkers, LOC was achieved in 50, 57, 83, and 43%, respectively.Conclusions: Consensus on clinical topics is rather low for surgeons and radiation oncologists. The questions discussed might highlight discrepancies, stimulate standardization of practice, and prioritize topics for future clinical research.

Background: The Head and Neck Cancer Working Group of Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) has investigated the level of consensus (LOC) and discrepancy in everyday practice of diagnosis and treatment in head and neck cancer.Materials and Methods: An online survey was iteratively generated with 10 Swiss university and teaching hospitals. LOC below 50% was defined as no agreement, while higher LOC were arbitrarily categorized as low (51–74%), moderate (75–84%), and high (≥85%).Results: Any LOC was achieved in 62% of topics (n = 60). High, moderate and low LOC were found in 18, 20, and 23%, respectively. Regarding Head and Neck Surgery, Radiation Oncology, Medical Oncology, and biomarkers, LOC was achieved in 50, 57, 83, and 43%, respectively.Conclusions: Consensus on clinical topics is rather low for surgeons and radiation oncologists. The questions discussed might highlight discrepancies, stimulate standardization of practice, and prioritize topics for future clinical research.

Background: The management of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) is challenging, and the optimal treatment strategy is debated among experts. In an attempt to identify treatment decision criteria and to investigate variations in the first-line management of this disease, we performed an analysis of treatment algorithms among experts in the field of pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to identify relevant criteria in the complex process of patient selection and decision making for the management of mPC patients. Methods: Experts from the ABCSG (Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group) Pancreatic Cancer Club were contacted and agreed to participate in this analysis. Eight experts from seven centers in Austria provided their decision algorithms for the first-line treatment of patients with mPC. Their responses were converted into decision trees based on the objective consensus methodology. The decision trees were used to identify consensus and discrepancies. Results: The final treatment algorithms included four decision criteria (performance status, age, comorbidities, and symptomatic disease) and six treatment options: mFOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine mono, 5-FU mono, gemcitabine/erlotinib, and best supportive care (BSC). Conclusions: We identified consensus for the treatment of young and fit patients with mFOLFIRINOX. With higher age and reduced performance status, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel was increasingly used. For patients with Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) 4, BSC was the treatment of choice. Among experts, different decision criteria and treatment options are implemented in clinical routine. Despite multiple options in current recommendations, a consensus for specific recommendations was identified.

Definitive radiochemotherapy is the standard treatment for many patients with locally advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Treatment outcomes have improved over the last decades. Several treatment regimens have been shown effective and safe. This review summarises the results of significant studies between 1996 and 2015 on concomitant and sequential radiochemotherapy regimens and radiation dose per fraction. Beside therapy regimens, optimised radiotherapy planning is indispensable to improve outcome and minimise radiation-induced toxicity. An insight into the rationale of radiotherapy planning for stage III NSCLC is also provided.

Introduction: In radiotherapy, erythema is a common side-effect, especially during radiotherapy treatment regimes that last several weeks. The measurement of erythema might be of clinical relevance, especially when standardized interpretation is possible. Aim: The aim of this article is to present a tool that can be implemented for automatized and time efficient quantification of erythema from digital images taken during radiotherapy treatment. Method: Instead of relying on commercially available graphic editors and performing manual operations on the images within these programs we developed a java based tool that can automatically evaluate the “redness” of images. These erythema values receive a score number, are connected with the date and time the pictures were taken and are exported into a comma separated values (CSV) file. Results: The Erythema values of images could be quickly evaluated with the developed tool. With spreadsheet software the exported file could be easily manipulated to produce graphical representations of erythema rise. Conclusion: Erythema quantification from digital images can be easily performed by custom developed java tools. An automated quantification provides a method of detecting an increase in erythema that may not be visible to the naked eye.

COPD is associated with a relevant burden of disease and a high mortality worldwide. Only recently, the importance of comorbidities of COPD has been recognized. Studies postulated an association with inflammatory conditions potentially sharing pathogenic pathways and worsening overall prognosis. More evidence is required to estimate the role of comorbidities of COPD. Our aim was to investigate the prevalence and clustering of comorbidities associated with COPD, and to estimate their impact on clinically relevant outcomes. In this population-based case-control study, a nation-wide database provided by the Swiss Federal Office for Statistics enclosing every hospital entry covering the years 2002-2010 (n = 12'888'075) was analyzed using MySQL and R statistical software. Statistical methods included non-parametric hypothesis testing by means of Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test, as well as linear models with generalized estimating equation to account for intra-patient variability. Exploratory multivariate approaches were also used for the identification of clusters of comorbidities in COPD patients. In 2.6% (6.3% in patients aged >70 years) of all hospitalization cases an active diagnosis of COPD was recorded. In 21% of these cases, COPD was the main reason for hospitalization. Patients with a diagnosis of COPD had more comorbidities (7 [IQR 4-9] vs. 3 [IQR 1-6]; [Formula: see text]), were more frequently rehospitalized (annual hospitalization rate 0.33 [IQR 0.20-0.67] vs. 0.25 [IQR 0.14-0.43]/year; [Formula: see text]), had a longer hospital stay (9 [IQR 4-15] vs. 5 [IQR 2-11] days; [Formula: see text]), and had higher in-hospital mortality (5.9% [95% CI 5.8%-5.9%] vs. 3.4% [95% CI 3.3%-3.5%]; [Formula: see text]) compared to matched controls. A set of comorbidities was associated with worse outcome. We could identify COPD-related clusters of COPD-comorbidities.