Cervical cancer (CC) incidence in Estonia is the third highest in Europe, even though an organised nation-wide screening program has been in place since 2006. The aim of the study was to analyse the incidence and survival of CC in Estonia, focusing on age, morphology and stage at diagnosis. Data from Estonian Cancer Registry were used to analyse age-standardized (world) and age-specific incidence for 1968–2014 rates. Joinpoint regression was used to estimate the annual percentage change (APC) for incidence trends. Age-period-cohort model was used to summarise time trends in terms of cohort and period effects. Relative survival ratios (RSR) were calculated for cases diagnosed in 1995–2014. Union for International Cancer Control version 7 of the TNM classification for malignant tumours was used to categorise stage. The age-standardized incidence of CC increased since 1980s at a rate of 0.8% per year. A significant increase was seen for all age groups except for 70+. The incidence of squamous cell carcinoma mimicked the overall trend, while adenocarcinoma showed increase since mid-1990s (APC 6.7). Age-period-cohort modelling showed strong cohort effects with the lowest risk for birth-cohorts born around 1940 and significantly increasing risks for successive cohorts born thereafter. No period effects were seen. The proportion of stage IV cases increased from 13% in 2005–2009 to 18% in 2010–2014. A significant increase was seen in the overall 5-year RSR from 1995 to 1999 to 2010–2014 (58% vs 66%). In 2010–2014, the 5-year RSRs ranged from 89% in women aged 15–39 to 41% in age group 70+. For stages I to IV, the respective RSRs were 98, 74, 57 and 22%. The inadequate uptake and insufficient quality of the Pap-smear based screening program has not brought along a decline in the incidence of CC in Estonia. Stage distribution has shifted towards later stages. New approaches are needed to prevent CC in Estonia.

Background: In the two European Union (EU)-funded projects, PCM4EU (Personalized Cancer Medicine for all EU citizens) and PRIME-ROSE (Precision Cancer Medicine Repurposing System Using Pragmatic Clinical Trials), we aim to facilitate implementation of precision cancer medicine (PCM) in Europe by leveraging the experience from ongoing national initiatives that have already been particularly successful. Patients and methods: PCM4EU and PRIME-ROSE gather 17 and 24 partners, respectively, from 19 European countries. The projects are based on a network of Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP)-like clinical trials that are currently ongoing or soon to start in 11 different countries, and with more trials expected to be established soon. The main aims of both the projects are to improve implementation pathways from molecular diagnostics to treatment, and reimbursement of diagnostics and tumour-tailored therapies to provide examples of best practices for PCM in Europe. Results: PCM4EU and PRIME-ROSE were launched in January and July 2023, respectively. Educational materials, including a podcast series, are already available from the PCM4EU website (http://www.pcm4eu.eu). The first reports, including an overview of requirements for the reimbursement systems in participating countries and a guide on patient involvement, are expected to be published in 2024. Conclusion: European collaboration can facilitate the implementation of PCM and thereby provide affordable and equitable access to precision diagnostics and matched therapies for more patients. ble from the PCM4EU website (http://www.pcm4eu.eu). The first reports, including an overview of requirements for the reimbursement systems in participating countries and a guide on patient involvement, are expected to be published in 2024. Conclusion: European collaboration can facilitate the implementation of PCM and thereby provide affordable and equitable access to precision diagnostics and matched therapies for more patients.

Background/Objectives: Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) have been extensively studied and are increasingly applied in healthcare. One of the most studied and developed areas is predictive medicine for breast cancer, but there is no wider consensus on the indications for the clinical use of PRSs for breast cancer. This current guidance endeavours to articulate the scientific evidence underpinning the clinical utility of PRSs in stratifying breast cancer risk, with a particular emphasis on clinical application. Methods: This guidance has been prepared by a group of experts who have been active in breast cancer PRS research and development, combining a review of the evidence base with expert opinion for indications for clinical use. Results: Based on data from various studies and existing breast cancer prevention and screening services, the indications for clinical use of breast cancer PRSs can be divided into the following scenarios: (1) Management of cancer-free women with a family history of cancer; (2) individual personalised breast cancer prevention and screening in healthcare services; and (3) breast cancer screening programs for more personalised screening. Conclusions: The integration of PRSs into clinical practice enables healthcare providers to deliver more accurate risk assessments, personalised prevention strategies, and optimised screening programmes, thereby improving patient outcomes and enhancing the effectiveness of breast cancer care. PRS testing represents a novel component in clinical breast cancer risk assessment, supporting a personalised, risk-based approach to breast cancer prevention and screening.

This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ODX, a novel, cytotoxic, bone-targeting drug candidate, in castration-resistant prostate cancer bone metastatic disease. Patients with progressive disease were randomised to ten cycles of ODX, intravenous infusion Q2W (3, 6, and 9 mg/kg, respectively). The primary objective was to assess the relative change from baseline in bone alkaline phosphatase (B-ALP) and serum-aminoterminal-propeptide of Type I procollagen (S-P1NP) at 12 weeks. The inclusion criteria selected were broad, and a double-blind design was used to ensure objective recruitment of patients for the assessment of efficacy. None of the patients received bone-protecting agents during the ODX treatment period. Fifty-five 21,20 and 14) patients were randomised to ODX (3, 6 and 9 mg/kg), respectively. The lower number of patients in arm 3 was due to too low a recruitment rate towards the end of the study. The median treatment time were 14, 13 and 14 weeks, respectively. The decrease in B-ALP at 12 weeks in study arms 3, 6 and 9 mg/kg was seen in 6/15 (40%), 8/12 (67%) and 5/12 (42%) patients, respectively, whereas the corresponding numbers for P1NP were 8/15 (53%), 8/12 (67%), and 4/12 (33%), respectively. The median decrease in B-ALP and P1NP at 12 weeks for study arms 3, 6 and 9 mg/kg were 37%, 14% and 43%, respectively, and 51%, 40% and 64%, respectively. The decrease in serum C-terminal telopeptide at 12 weeks was seen in the vast majority of patients and in about one-third of patients in bone scan index. ODX was well tolerated, and no drug-related serious adverse events occurred. There were no significant differences between study arms regarding efficacy and safety. ODX was well tolerated and demonstrated inhibitory effects on markers related to the vicious cycle in bone at all three doses. The reduction in metastatic burden, assessed with bone scan index, supports this finding. Studies with continued ODX treatment until disease progression are being planned (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02825628).

Background and purpose: As more interventional clinical trials in Precision Cancer Medicine (PCM) are introduced, molecular descriptions of tumours have led to multiple subtypes, even within common tumour types. Therefore, the main limitation of these trials is the small number of eligible patients to assess the clinical benefit. The PRIME-ROSE project addresses this limitation by pooling data from multiple European Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP)-like clinical trials, such that slowly accruing cohorts are accelerated. To achieve this task, a well-documented commonly approved procedure for data merging needs to be established. Patient/material and methods: Data sharing is achievable when there is an organisation that includes people from different disciplines who can navigate institutional and country-specific information and governance requirements. Furthermore, alignment of all the study procedures are needed before data are shared. Next, the process of merging data requires harmonisation and standardisation. Implementation of the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM) facilitates future data aggregation. Results: By aggregating data from European DRUP-like clinical trials, cohorts are completed that were unable to do so in stand-alone studies. Since initiation, the PRIME-ROSE project monitors over 300 cohorts across more than 20 treatments encompassing over 1,000 patients. At least 20 cohorts have progressed after interim analysis. Interpretation: Data sharing across European trials is feasible and enhances the advancements of PCM studies. The methodologies developed in the PRIME-ROSE project provide a foundation for future data integration efforts in PCM clinical trials, underscoring the viability of conducting robust trials in a global context.