Open Access

German second-opinion network for testicular cancer: Sealing the leaky pipe between evidence and clinical practice

  • Authors:
    • Friedemann Zengerling
    • Michael Hartmann
    • Axel Heidenreich
    • Susanne Krege
    • Peter Albers
    • Alexander Karl
    • Lothar Weissbach
    • Walter Wagner
    • Jens Bedke
    • Margitta Retz
    • Hans U. Schmelz
    • Sabine Kliesch
    • Markus Kuczyk
    • Eva Winter
    • Tobias Pottek
    • Klaus-Peter Dieckmann
    • Andres Jan Schrader
    • Mark Schrader
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: April 24, 2014     https://doi.org/10.3892/or.2014.3153
  • Pages: 2477-2481
  • Copyright: © Zengerling et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License [CC BY_NC 3.0].

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

In 2006, the German Testicular Cancer Study Group initiated an extensive evidence-based national second-opinion network to improve the care of testicular cancer patients. The primary aims were to reflect the current state of testicular cancer treatment in Germany and to analyze the project's effect on the quality of care delivered to testicular cancer patients. A freely available internet-based platform was developed for the exchange of data between the urologists seeking advice and the 31 second-opinion givers. After providing all data relevant to the primary treatment decision, urologists received a second opinion on their therapy plan within <48 h. Endpoints were congruence between the first and second opinion, conformity of applied therapy with the corresponding recommendation and progression-free survival rate of the introduced patients. Significance was determined by two-sided Pearson's χ2 test. A total of 1,284 second-opinion requests were submitted from November 2006 to October 2011, and 926 of these cases were eligible for further analysis. A discrepancy was found between first and second opinion in 39.5% of the cases. Discrepant second opinions led to less extensive treatment in 28.1% and to more extensive treatment in 15.6%. Patients treated within the framework of the second-opinion project had an overall 2-year progression-free survival rate of 90.4%. Approximately every 6th second opinion led to a relevant change in therapy. Despite the lack of financial incentives, data from every 8th testicular cancer patient in Germany were submitted to second-opinion centers. Second-opinion centers can help to improve the implementation of evidence into clinical practice.

References

1 

Glasziou P and Haynes B: The paths from research to improved health outcomes. Evid Based Nurs. 8:36–38. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

2 

Rawlins MD: NICE work - providing guidance to the British National Health Service. N Engl J Med. 351:1383–1385. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

3 

Raine R, Sanderson C and Black N: Developing clinical guidelines: a challenge to current methods. BMJ. 331:631–633. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

4 

McNeil BJ: Shattuck Lecture - Hidden barriers to improvement in the quality of care. N Engl J Med. 345:1612–1620. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

5 

Julian DG: Translation of clinical trials into clinical practice. J Intern Med. 255:309–316. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

6 

Schrader M, Weissbach L, Hartmann M, et al: Burden or relief: do second-opinion centers influence the quality of care delivered to patients with testicular germ cell cancer? Eur Urol. 57:867–872. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

7 

ZMZ-Ärzte-Projekt Zweitmeinung Hodentumor. http://zm-hodentumor.de/urisimplehttp://zm-hodentumor.de/. (In German).

8 

Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R, et al: European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part I. Eur Urol. 53:478–496. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar

9 

Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R, et al: European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG): part II. Eur Urol. 53:497–513. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar

10 

Vlayen J, Vrijens F, Devriese S, Beirens K, Van Eycken E and Stordeur S: Quality indicators for testicular cancer: a population-based study. Eur J Cancer. 48:1133–1140. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

11 

Robert Koch-Institut und die Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e.V. (Hrsg). Krebs in Deutschland 2007/2008. 8. Ausgabe. Journal. 2012.(in German).

12 

Schrader AJ, Ohlmann CH, Rossmanith S, Hofmann R and Heidenreich A: Impact of evidence-based interdisciplinary guidelines on testis cancer management. Cancer. 106:313–319. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar

13 

Yu HY, Madison RA, Setodji CM and Saigal CS: Quality of surveillance for stage I testis cancer in the community. J Clin Oncol. 27:4327–4332. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

14 

Moynihan C, Norman AR, Barbachano Y, et al: Prospective study of factors predicting adherence to medical advice in men with testicular cancer. J Clin Oncol. 27:2144–2150. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

15 

Berrino F, De Angelis R, Sant M, et al: Survival for eight major cancers and all cancers combined for European adults diagnosed in 1995–99 results of the EUROCARE-4 study. Lancet Oncol. 8:773–783. 2007.PubMed/NCBI

16 

Rosen A, Jayram G, Drazer M and Eggener SE: Global trends in testicular cancer incidence and mortality. Eur Urol. 60:374–379. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

Related Articles

Journal Cover

June 2014
Volume 31 Issue 6

Print ISSN: 1021-335X
Online ISSN:1791-2431

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
APA
Zengerling, F., Hartmann, M., Heidenreich, A., Krege, S., Albers, P., Karl, A. ... Schrader, M. (2014). German second-opinion network for testicular cancer: Sealing the leaky pipe between evidence and clinical practice. Oncology Reports, 31, 2477-2481. https://doi.org/10.3892/or.2014.3153
MLA
Zengerling, F., Hartmann, M., Heidenreich, A., Krege, S., Albers, P., Karl, A., Weissbach, L., Wagner, W., Bedke, J., Retz, M., Schmelz, H. U., Kliesch, S., Kuczyk, M., Winter, E., Pottek, T., Dieckmann, K., Schrader, A. J., Schrader, M."German second-opinion network for testicular cancer: Sealing the leaky pipe between evidence and clinical practice". Oncology Reports 31.6 (2014): 2477-2481.
Chicago
Zengerling, F., Hartmann, M., Heidenreich, A., Krege, S., Albers, P., Karl, A., Weissbach, L., Wagner, W., Bedke, J., Retz, M., Schmelz, H. U., Kliesch, S., Kuczyk, M., Winter, E., Pottek, T., Dieckmann, K., Schrader, A. J., Schrader, M."German second-opinion network for testicular cancer: Sealing the leaky pipe between evidence and clinical practice". Oncology Reports 31, no. 6 (2014): 2477-2481. https://doi.org/10.3892/or.2014.3153