Michele Masucci

Mr. Michele Masucci

MTC, LIME, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
24 February 2022 in Nature Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DTDavid Tamborero
David Tamborero
RDRodrigo Dienstmann
Rodrigo Dienstmann
MRMaan Haj Rachid
Maan Haj Rachid
JBJorrit Boekel
Jorrit Boekel
ALAdria Lopez-Fernandez
Adria Lopez-Fernandez
JLJanne Lehtiö
Janne Lehtiö
There is a growing need for systems that efficiently support the work of medical teams at the precision-oncology point of care. Here, we present the implementation of the Molecular Tumor Board Portal (MTBP), an academic clinical decision support system developed under the umbrella of Cancer Core Europe that creates a unified legal, scientific and technological platform to share and harness next-generation sequencing data. Automating the interpretation and reporting of sequencing results decrease the need for time-consuming manual procedures that are prone to errors. The adoption of an expert-agreed process to systematically link tumor molecular profiles with clinical actions promotes consistent decision-making and structured data capture across the connected centers. The use of information-rich patient reports with interactive content facilitates collaborative discussion of complex cases during virtual molecular tumor board meetings. Overall, streamlined digital systems like the MTBP are crucial to better address the challenges brought by precision oncology and accelerate the use of emerging biomarkers.

1 December 2014 in Radiotherapy and Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
TSTomas Skripcak
Tomas Skripcak
CBClaus Belka
Claus Belka
WBWalter Bosch
Walter Bosch
CBCarsten Brink
Carsten Brink
TBThomas Brunner
Thomas Brunner
MBMichael Baumann
Michael Baumann
Disconnected cancer research data management and lack of information exchange about planned and ongoing research are complicating the utilisation of internationally collected medical information for improving cancer patient care. Rapidly collecting/pooling data can accelerate translational research in radiation therapy and oncology. The exchange of study data is one of the fundamental principles behind data aggregation and data mining. The possibilities of reproducing the original study results, performing further analyses on existing research data to generate new hypotheses or developing computational models to support medical decisions (e.g. risk/benefit analysis of treatment options) represent just a fraction of the potential benefits of medical data-pooling. Distributed machine learning and knowledge exchange from federated databases can be considered as one beyond other attractive approaches for knowledge generation within "Big Data". Data interoperability between research institutions should be the major concern behind a wider collaboration. Information captured in electronic patient records (EPRs) and study case report forms (eCRFs), linked together with medical imaging and treatment planning data, are deemed to be fundamental elements for large multi-centre studies in the field of radiation therapy and oncology. To fully utilise the captured medical information, the study data have to be more than just an electronic version of a traditional (un-modifiable) paper CRF. Challenges that have to be addressed are data interoperability, utilisation of standards, data quality and privacy concerns, data ownership, rights to publish, data pooling architecture and storage. This paper discusses a framework for conceptual packages of ideas focused on a strategic development for international research data exchange in the field of radiation therapy and oncology.

6 July 2020 in Nature Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DTDavid Tamborero
David Tamborero
RDRodrigo Dienstmann
Rodrigo Dienstmann
MRMaan Haj Rachid
Maan Haj Rachid
JBJorrit Boekel
Jorrit Boekel
RBRichard Baird
Richard Baird
JLJanne Lehtiö
Janne Lehtiö

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Michele MasucciMichele Masucci
Michele Masucci
CKClaes Karlsson
Claes Karlsson
LBLennart Blomqvist
Lennart Blomqvist
IEIngemar Ernberg
Ingemar Ernberg
The shift towards personalized cancer medicine (PCM) represents a significant transformation in cancer care, emphasizing tailored treatments based on the genetic understanding of cancer at the cellular level. This review draws on recent literature to explore key factors influencing PCM implementation, highlighting the role of innovative leadership, interdisciplinary collaboration, and coordinated funding and regulatory strategies. Success in PCM relies on overcoming challenges such as integrating diverse medical disciplines, securing sustainable investment for shared infrastructures, and navigating complex regulatory landscapes. Effective leadership is crucial for fostering a culture of innovation and teamwork, essential for translating complex biological insights into personalized treatment strategies. The transition to PCM necessitates not only organizational adaptation but also the development of new professional roles and training programs, underscoring the need for a multidisciplinary approach and the importance of team science in overcoming the limitations of traditional medical paradigms. The conclusion underscores that PCM’s success hinges on creating collaborative environments that support innovation, adaptability, and shared vision among all stakeholders involved in cancer care.

15 April 2024 in Preprints.org
Verified
Preprint
Open access
PDF file
Michele MasucciMichele Masucci
Michele Masucci
IEIngemar Ernberg
Ingemar Ernberg
CKClaes Karlsson
Claes Karlsson
LBLennart Blomqvist
Lennart Blomqvist
The shift towards Personalized Cancer Medicine (PCM) represents a significant transformation in cancer care, emphasizing tailored treatments based on genetic understanding of cancer at the cellular level. This review draws on recent literature to explore key factors influencing PCM implementation, highlighting the role of innovative leadership, interdisciplinary collaboration, and coordinated funding and regulatory strategies. Success in PCM relies on overcoming challenges such as integrating diverse medical disciplines, securing sustainable investment for shared infrastructures, and navigating complex regulatory landscapes. Effective leadership is crucial for fostering a culture of innovation and teamwork, essential for translating complex biological insights into personalized treatment strategies. The transition to PCM necessitates not only organizational adaptation but also the development of new professional roles and training programs, underscoring the need for a multidisciplinary approach and the importance of team science in overcoming the limitations of traditional medical paradigms. The conclusion underscores that PCM's success hinges on creating collaborative environments that support innovation, adaptability, and shared vision among all stakeholders involved in cancer care.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Michele MasucciMichele Masucci
Michele Masucci
JPJenny Alexandra Del Villar Perez
Jenny Alexandra Del Villar Perez
PMPamela Mazzocato
Pamela Mazzocato
IEIngemar Ernberg
Ingemar Ernberg
MBMats Brommels
Mats Brommels
Background: Personalized cancer medicine (PCM) tailors cancer treatments based on individual genetic profiles, enabling more precise and effective therapies. Despite its potential, integrating PCM into clinical practice remains challenging because of organizational and systemic barriers. This study examined the factors influencing PCM implementation at a major cancer center in Stockholm, Sweden. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 16 medical professionals and management staff from Karolinska University Hospital and Karolinska Institutet. Content analysis was used to identify key themes related to PCM implementation. This study followed the established Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research guidelines to ensure methodological rigor and transparency. Results: Informants framed PCM as both a technological innovation and a patient-centered approach. However, significant barriers to implementation were identified, including organizational inertia, fragmented funding models, and ethical challenges related to access and equity. Structural silos between academic and healthcare institutions complicate integration. Key facilitators include leadership commitment, cross-sectoral collaboration, and a supportive policy environment. Participants emphasized the need for integrated infrastructure, real-time data-sharing mechanisms, and interdisciplinary training programs to support PCM. Conclusions: Successful PCM implementation requires overcoming entrenched organizational and systemic barriers through a multi-stakeholder approach involving healthcare providers, researchers, policymakers, and patient advocates. The findings underscore the necessity of a “third-form organization” to mediate between academia and clinical care. Addressing these challenges requires adaptive governance models, evidence-based policy reforms, and sustainable funding frameworks. Future research should explore comparative contexts to enhance the scalability and generalizability of PCM integration strategies.