4.2 Article

Collaboration between EORTC and JCOG-how to accelerate global clinical research partnership

Journal

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 47, Issue 2, Pages 164-169

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyw159

Keywords

EORTC; JCOG; ESSO; International clinical trial; Cancer research

Categories

Funding

  1. National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund [26-A-4]
  2. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development, AMED [16ck0106211h0001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The demand for international collaboration in cancer clinical trials has grown stronger to maximize efficiency, avoid duplication of effort and to achieve effective implementation of research results into medical practice. Infrastructures that could facilitate intercontinental collaboration not only between Europe and United States but also between Europe and Asia are urgently needed. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, one of the major cancer clinical research infrastructure in Europe, initiated collaboration with the Japan Clinical Oncology Group, the largest cancer research cooperative group in Japan. Their first pilot trial on unresectable colorectal liver metastasis will commence on fourth quarter of 2016. With similar goals and strategies as well as with similar structures, the two research organizations have a great potential for efficient collaboration that could deliver faster and global therapeutic improvement to cancer patients. However, international collaboration requires careful and structured approach to harmonize activities to ensure success. This article focuses on specific intercontinental differences and the necessary requirements to ensure a successful partnership between European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer and Japan Clinical Oncology Group. This could serve as a model to build more global international academic trials between the East and the West.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available