1. EUROCHIP-2 EUROCHIP-2 - The Action www.tumori.net/eurochip Public Health Program EUROPEAN COMMISSION: HEALTH & CONSUMER PROTECTION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL

2. EUROCHIP2: INEQUALITIES IN CANCER MANAGEMENT

3. The area of the disk is proportional to the Total National Health Expenditure ($ PPP) in the country $ PPP: Parity Purchasing Power per capita (US $) Sources: OECD 2002 for GDP and TNEH; EUROCARE-3 for survival Gross Domestic Product (1997) and 5-year- age- and cancer site- adjusted relative survival (women)

4. OUR INDICATIONS MUST REFER TO THE BEST STRATEGY FOR THE DIFFUSSION OF BEST PRACTICE

5. METHODS OF EUROCHIP-2 ACTIONS 1. Knowledge: finding data sources, improvement / standardisation of data collection 2. Choice: analyse data, compare data, find relations, find major deficiencies 3. Promotion: design, validate and finance initiatives to reduces cancer disparities These phases should be looked at as part of an iterative process

6. Steering Committee Working Team Operational work Panel of Experts Methodological Group Methodological aspects of the indicators GS: Groups of specialists a) Promotion of the action at national level or b) International domain level (prevention, cancer epidemiology, screeningcare&treatment,macro-indicators) GS GS care and treatment GS GSGS GS GS EUROCHIP : THE ORGANISATION Standardised methods for collecting, checking and validating the data proposed for each indicator Cancer network

7. AIMS OF EUROCHIP-2 1.Extending the collaboration of networks on cancer (new participating countries) 2.Establishing multidisciplinary working groups in each country (through help of willing and determined people) 3.Analysing the behaviour of various indicators in relation to their utility as determinants of clinical outcomes, possibly leading to modifications (continuous consensus conference) 4.Promoting at least one important ACTION in each country (to improve the system of cancer information and to support the fight against cancer – i.e. reduce disparities) 5.Establishing/strengthening a health information system in co- operation with other chronic disease networks as for common risk factor or morbidity indicators

8. MAIN GOALS OF THE EUROCHIP-2 NETWORK Organisation of national groups involving cancer experts, institutes and associations in all countries Members of the national groups must believe in the project and have to be motivated in their work These groups have to be multidisciplinary groups Members of the National Groups have to identify specific problems at national levels and then make proposals on health planning These proposals have to reach the maximum consensus possible in the country

9. PRESENT TASKS OF THE NATIONAL GROUPS To check the availability of the Eurochip indicators in own country (Eurochip Questionnaire) To promote data collection To use and analyse already available data To identify health system deficiencies at national level To propose actions against these deficiencies To reach the maximum consensus on actions

10. THE ROLES OF DOMAIN GROUPS THE ROLES OF DOMAIN GROUPS To test the present quality of EUROCHIP indicators To detect possible actions in their specific field To answer specific questions coming from national level (ALREADY STARTED: Care and Treatment Domain – Ian Kunkler, Prevention – Benedetto Terracini; to be activated Epidemiology, Screening, Macro-variable) To support actions related to their specific field EUROCHIP WORKING GROUP IS PREPARING THE INDICATOR/ACTION MATRIX

11. ACTIONS - e.g.: Poland Knowledge: Poland is involved in the EUROCARE studies Action: Application for funds in order to take part to Eurocare High Resolution Studies Choice: a) Poland has the lowest cancer survival in Europe b) Delay of cancer treatment and type of treatment used (Treatment Domain task: Standard Protocols for these Studies) Promotion Action: Health planning report suggesting the delay of treatment and non-modern treatment as cause of the lowest cancer survival in Europe

12. ACTIONS - e.g. (1): Switzerland Knowledge: Health surveys exist, yet with no questions on screening Action: Introducing questions on screening in the survey Choice: data are available, yet no specific analysis is carried out Action: To promote analysis and publication of the data (prevalence of risk factors) Promotion: Disparities in cancer information due to Canton health system Action: To promote the creation of a National Institute of Epidemiology

13. ACTIONS - e.g.(2): Switzerland Knowledge: There are no real data to evaluate cancer treatment, except for the Eurocare data in Geneva and Basel Action: To create a database analogous to Eurocare for all Swiss Cancer Registries Promotion: Disparities in fund and organisation Action: To guarantee the long-term work of all cancer registries NOW THE WORK IS AIMED TO REACH THE MAXIMUM CONSENSUS ON THESE ISSUES

14. EXAMPLES OF THE EUROCHIP-2 FUND USE The funds for partners have to be used only for personnel costs Uses for these funds could be: Organisation of the national group Involvement in the Eurochip pilot studies Collection of information on available data Analysis of available data Production of reports on cancer health planning Connection with health planners and political makers in order to promote actions