EAPM: Virtual cancer institute on the cards, EMA reform and infectious disease agency

Good afternoon and welcome, health colleagues, to the European Alliance for Personalised Medicine (EAPM) update – it is the last shout for the upcoming EAPM Slovenian EU Presidency conference (1 July), so don’t forget to register and download your agenda, writes EAPM Executive Director Dr. Denis Horgan.

EAPM Presidency conference a few days away...

The EAPM conference will act as a bridging event between the EU Presidencies of Portugal and Slovenia on Thursday 1 July.

We’ll be discussing, at some point during the day, most or all of what we’ll be talking about below. The conference is divided into sessions which cover the follows areas:   Session 1: Generating alignment in the regulation of Personalized Medicine: RWE and Citizen Trust; Session 2: Beating Prostate Cancer and Lung Cancer - The Role of the EU Beating Cancer: Updating EU Council Conclusions on Screening; Session 3: Health Literacy - Understanding Ownership and Privacy of Genetic Data and Session 4: Securing patient Access to Advanced Molecular Diagnostics.

Each session will comprise panel discussions as well as Q&A sessions to allow the best possible involvement of all participants, so now is the time to register here, and download your agenda here.

Virtual cancer institute proposed by Committee draft report 

As highlighted last Friday, the draft report from the European Parliament’s special cancer committee was made available last week.  Presently, this will be open to amendment from European politicians. 

One additional aspect which was included in the report was the proposal of creation of a “virtual European Cancer Institute” was made public today (29 June).  EAPM supports this. 

As discussed last week, the report, authored by France’s MEP Véronique Trillet-Lenoir (Renew Europe), reiterates many of the points and concerns raised in the Commission’s Beating Cancer Plan.

In the report, which aims at strengthening the EU’s response to the disease, Trillet-Lenoir suggests the creation of a virtual cancer institute. The aim of the organization would be to create a road map to co-ordinate “large-scale prevention campaigns and effective communication campaigns on health promotion in educational programmes.” 

The planned institute would also be responsible for connecting and helping to implement many of the elements introduced by the Commission Cancer Plan. For example, it could host the planned Knowledge Centre on Cancer. It could also help create best practices between European Reference Networks and Comprehensive cancer centers. The institute could also help with “identifying research priorities and possibly enable the development of a coordinated and efficient cancer research force in Europe.” 

Of course and as ever, the issue of budgeting is also tackled in the report with a call to member countries to put aside enough money to implement the Commission’s plan, as well as their own national-level cancer plans. “No more than 30 [percent] of Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan should be allocated to the implementation of the [National Cancer Control Programs]”.  A limited budget of €4 billion is set aside at the pan-EU level. 

Parliament's health committee OKs mandate change for infectious disease agency

The European Parliament’s health committee voted today (29 June) in favour of bolstering the mandate of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Sixty-seven MEPs voted in favour, eight against and one abstained, according to the health committee press service. 

Rights and wrongs during pandemic

Commission Vice President Margaritis Schinas spoke to MEPs in the health committee on Monday (28 June), detailing the Commission’s COVID-19 lessons learned document, concerning the rights and wrongs during the pandemic’s past 16 months. The overall lesson? The EU has “not taken health preparedness seriously enough before the pandemic”, Schinas said. 

Schinas didn’t hold back when he said the EU’s early response was “fragmented, ad hoc, temporary,” and measures “were patchy and unco-ordinated” at the EU level. He reminded MEPs of the export bans and personal protective equipment fights colouring the early days of the pandemic, which were an embarrassment for the EU. 

Schinas used the lessons learned to push for more health coordination at the EU level, arguing that only someone with “ill faith … would challenge” that things were better when countries worked together. Schinas drew a parallel to the 2008 financial crisis, which prompted the EU to establish the “banking union”, saying: “There again the EU action was decisive.” 10 different proposals in the lessons learned would help establish a similar health union.

The EPP’s Peter Liese blamed both the Greens and the Left for being wary of advance purchasing agreements for vaccines. He also pushed for more investment on manufacturing capacity, pointing to how the EU allowed exports “without any control” for too long. Michele Rivasi from the Greens, meanwhile, wanted more in the Commission’s communication on the vaccine delivery delays and the “fiasco” on joint purchasing of vaccines, as well as the transparency — or lack thereof — over their contracts and costs. 

WHO says Biased AI health tech could disadvantage poorer countries

While artificial intelligence has the potential to make healthcare more accessible and efficient, it also is vulnerable to the social, economic and systemic biases that have been entrenched in society for generations.

The truth is, humans choose the data that goes into an algorithm, which means these choices are still subject to unintentional biases that can negatively impact underrepresented groups. These biases can occur at any phase of AI development and deployment, whether it's using biased datasets to build an algorithm, or applying an algorithm in a different context than the one it was originally intended for. The most common source of bias is data that doesn't sufficiently represent the target population. 

This can have adverse implications for certain groups. For example, women and people of color are typically underrepresented in clinical trials. As others have pointed out, if algorithms analyzing skin images were trained on images of white patients, but are now applied more broadly, they could potentially miss malignant melanomas in people of colour.

Italian PM Draghi backs EMA reform 

“We need a reinforcement and reform of the EMA,” Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi has said. As for vaccines: “The controversy is that Sputnik failed to get EMA approval and probably never will. The Chinese vaccine is not enough to fight the epidemic.” 

“The epidemic is not over, we are not out yet. A few weeks ago the UK had more or less equal cases compared to France today. Today they are twenty times more likely, so the epidemic needs more determination, attention and awareness. 

“We need to keep the pressure on the swaps high and we continue to do them. It is very important to immediately identify the development of new variants and infections. We are deploying a lot more,” Draghi added. 

Draghi later responded to a question about how the announced EMA reform would work. “It’s very quick to say, but I’m raised this issue myself. There’s been a certain co-ordination. I hope that other agencies use it in other countries and think about the United States.

That is all from EAPM for now – enjoy the rest of your week, stay safe and well, and don’t forget, it’s your last chance to register for the EAPM Slovenian EU Presidency conference on 1 July here, and download your agenda here!

Share this article: