University of Leicester
Browse

Critical research gaps and recommendations to inform research prioritisation for more effective prevention and improved outcomes in colorectal cancer

Download (710.43 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2018-04-30, 09:44 authored by M. Lawler, D. Alsina, R. A. Adams, A. S. Anderson, G. Brown, N. S. Fearnhead, S. W. Fenwick, S. P. Halloran, D. Hochhauser, M. A. Hull, V. H. Koelzer, A. G. K. McNair, K. J. Monahan, I. Näthke, C. Norton, M. R. Novelli, R. J. C. Steele, Anne L. Thomas, L. M. Wilde, R. H. Wilson, Bowel Cancer UK Critical Research Gaps in Colorectal Cancer Initiative
Objective: Colorectal cancer (CRC) leads to significant morbidity/mortality worldwide. Defining critical research gaps (RG), their prioritisation and resolution, could improve patient outcomes. Design: RG analysis was conducted by a multidisciplinary panel of patients, clinicians and researchers (n=71). Eight working groups (WG) were constituted: discovery science; risk; prevention; early diagnosis and screening; pathology; curative treatment; stage IV disease; and living with and beyond CRC. A series of discussions led to development of draft papers by each WG, which were evaluated by a 20-strong patient panel. A final list of RGs and research recommendations (RR) was endorsed by all participants. Results: Fifteen critical RGs are summarised below: RG1: Lack of realistic models that recapitulate tumour/tumour micro/macroenvironment; RG2: Insufficient evidence on precise contributions of genetic/environmental/lifestyle factors to CRC risk; RG3: Pressing need for prevention trials; RG4: Lack of integration of different prevention approaches; RG5: Lack of optimal strategies for CRC screening; RG6: Lack of effective triage systems for invasive investigations; RG7: Imprecise pathological assessment of CRC; RG8: Lack of qualified personnel in genomics, data sciences and digital pathology; RG9: Inadequate assessment/communication of risk, benefit and uncertainty of treatment choices; RG10: Need for novel technologies/interventions to improve curative outcomes; RG11: Lack of approaches that recognise molecular interplay between metastasising tumours and their microenvironment; RG12: Lack of reliable biomarkers to guide stage IV treatment; RG13: Need to increase understanding of health related quality of life (HRQOL) and promote residual symptom resolution; RG14: Lack of coordination of CRC research/funding; RG15: Lack of effective communication between relevant stakeholders. Conclusion: Prioritising research activity and funding could have a significant impact on reducing CRC disease burden over the next 5 years.

History

Citation

Gut, 67 (1), pp. 179-193

Author affiliation

/Organisation/COLLEGE OF LIFE SCIENCES/School of Medicine/Cancer Research Centre

Version

  • VoR (Version of Record)

Published in

Gut

Publisher

BMJ Publishing Group

issn

0017-5749

eissn

1468-3288

Acceptance date

2017-10-25

Copyright date

2018

Available date

2018-04-30

Publisher version

http://gut.bmj.com/content/67/1/179

Language

en

Usage metrics

    University of Leicester Publications

    Categories

    No categories selected

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC