Since the beginning of 2017, Chinese Journal of Cancer has published a series of important questions in cancer research and clinical oncology, which spark diverse thoughts, interesting communications, and potential collaborations among researchers all over the world. In this article, 8 more questions are presented as follows. Question 86. In which circumstances is good supportive care associated with a survival advantage in patients with cancer? Question 87. Can we develop animal models to mimic immunotherapy response of cancer patients? Question 88. What are the mechanisms underlying hepatitis B virus-associated non-hepatocellular cancers? Question 89. Can we more precisely target tumor metabolism by identifying individual patients who would benefit from the treatment? Question 90. What type of cranial irradiation-based prophylactic therapy combination can dramatically improve the survival of patients with extensive small-cell lung cancer? Question 91. How can postoperative radiotherapy prolong overall survival of the patients with resected pIIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer? Question 92. What are the key molecular events that drive oral leukoplakia or erythroplakia into oral cancer? Question 93. How could we track the chemotherapeutics-driven evolution of tumor genome in non-small cell lung cancer for more effective treatment?
Humans ; Medical Oncology ; education ; Neoplasms ; genetics ; Research

At the 4th Guangzhou International Symposium on Oncology, Rui-Hua Xu, Chao-Nan Qian, and Wei Zhang--the chairmen and editors of the Chinese Journal of Cancer--announced and presented awards to 14 authors in recognition of their outstanding contributions to the journal.
Awards and Prizes ; Biomedical Research ; standards ; Congresses as Topic ; Humans ; Medical Oncology ; standards ; Periodicals as Topic

The incidence of retroperitoneal tumor is low, and treatment is difficult.According to the recent updates of evidence-based medical evidence at home and abroad, the consensus on the standardized treatment of retroperitoneal tumors were discussed including examination and diagnosis , surgical treatment comprehensive treatment, nutrition, rehabilitation, and review and follow-up, etc.
Antineoplastic Agents ; administration & dosage ; adverse effects ; therapeutic use ; China ; Consensus ; Delivery of Health Care ; standards ; Humans ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Retroperitoneal Neoplasms ; diagnosis ; drug therapy ; pathology

Surgical innovation is an important part of surgical research and practice. The evaluation of surgical innovation through the stages is similar to those for drug development, but with important differences. The Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, and Long-term follow-up (IDEAL) Framework and Recommendations represent a new paradigm for the evaluation of surgical intervention and devices which was developed in 2009. The IDEAL is a five-stage framework involving the nature stages of surgical innovation, together with recommendations for surgical research pathway. The Framework and Recommendations were updated and published in 2019, which added a pre-IDEAL stage if necessary. The updated IDEAL also underlines the purpose, key question and ethical issues for each stage. In the first paper of IDEAL Framework and Recommendations series, we conducted a comprehensive introduction of IDEAL (e.g. the development, updates and application of IDEAL) to promote the dissemination and application of IDEAL in China.

Adherence to reporting guidelines contributes to report methodology and outcomes of research distinctly and transparently. There are some checklists with specific study types related to surgery on the EQUATOR Network’s website. However, the IDEAL framework focuses on stepwise evaluation of surgical innovation through all stages with some key elements, which those existing guidelines may not mention. This likely results in the inaccuracy in reporting in studies attempting to follow the IDEAL recommendations and suggests a pressing need for IDEAL reporting guidelines. Considering these limitations, the IDEAL developed the IDEAL reporting guidelines between October 2018 and May 2019. The paper aimed to provide interpretation of IDEAL reporting guideline, and promote its understanding and use among Chinese researchers.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop a comprehensive instrument for evaluating and ranking clinical practice guidelines, named Scientific, Transparent and Applicable Rankings tool (STAR), and test its reliability, validity, and usability. METHODS: This study set up a multidisciplinary working group including guideline methodologists, statisticians, journal editors, clinicians, and other experts. Scoping review, Delphi methods, and hierarchical analysis were used to develop the STAR tool. We evaluated the instrument's intrinsic and interrater reliability, content and criterion validity, and usability. RESULTS: STAR contained 39 items grouped into 11 domains. The mean intrinsic reliability of the domains, indicated by Cronbach's α coefficient, was 0.588 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.414, 0.762). Interrater reliability as assessed with Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.774 (95% CI: 0.740, 0.807) for methodological evaluators and 0.618 (95% CI: 0.587, 0.648) for clinical evaluators. The overall content validity index was 0.905. Pearson's r correlation for criterion validity was 0.885 (95% CI: 0.804, 0.932). The mean usability score of the items was 4.6 and the median time spent to evaluate each guideline was 20 min. CONCLUSION The instrument performed well in terms of reliability, validity, and efficiency, and can be used for comprehensively evaluating and ranking guidelines.
Reproducibility of Results ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Humans