A Meta-Model of Chemotherapy Planning in the Multi-Hospital/Multi-Trial-Center-Environment of Pediatric Oncology

Summary

Objective: Chemotherapy planning in pediatric oncology is complex and time-consuming. The correctness of the calculation according to state-of-the-art research is crucial for curing the child. Computer-assistance can be of great value. The objective of our research was to work out a meta-model of chemotherapy planning based on the Unified Modeling Language (UML). The meta-model is used for the development of an application system which serves as a knowledge-acquisition tool for chemotherapy protocols in pediatric oncology as well as for providing protocol-based care.

Methods: We applied evolutionary prototyping, software re-engineering techniques and grounded theory, a qualitative method in social research. We repeated the following steps several times over the years: Based on a requirements analysis (i) a meta-model was developed or adapted, respectively (ii). The meta-model served as a basis for implementing evolutionary prototypes (iii). Further requirements were identified (i) from clinical use of the systems.

Results: We developed a comprehensive UML-based meta-model for chemotherapy planning in pediatric oncology (chemoMM). We implemented it and introduced evolutionary prototypes (CATIPO and DOSPO) in several medical centers. Systematic validation of the prototypes enabled us to derive a final meta-model which covers the requirements that have turned out to be necessary in clinical routine.

Conclusions: We have developed an application system that fits well into clinical routine of pediatric oncology in Germany. Validation results have shown that the implementation of the meta-model chemoMM can adequately support the knowledge acquisition process for protocol-based care.

Keywords

Chemotherapy planning - pediatric oncology - UML

^* current address: Novartis Pharma AG, Department Intelligent Integration of Information, Informatics and Knowledge Management at Novartis Research, Basel, Switzerland

^** current address: UMIT – University for Health Informatics and Technology Tyrol, Institute for Health Information Systems, Innsbruck, Austria

^*** current address: St. Annastift Children’s Hospital, Department of Pediatric Oncology, Hematology and Immunology, Ludwigshafen, Germany

^**** current address: gap GmbH, Mannheim, Germany

• References

• 1 Kaatsch P, Spix C, Michaelis J. Annual Report 2000: German Childhood Cancer Registry, Institute for Medical Biometry. Epidemiology and Informatics. University of Mainz; Germany: 2002
• 2 Henze G, Creutzig U, Herold R. The Medical Research Network Pediatric Oncology and Hematology. Onkologie 2001; 24 (S6) 169
• 3 Terracini B, Coebergh JW, Gatta G, Magnani C, Stiller C, Verdecchia A, Zappone A. Childhood cancer survival in Europe: an overview. Eur J Cancer 2001; 37 (06) 810-6.
• 4 Magnani C, Gatta G, Corazziari I, Kramarova E, Pastore G, Viscomi S, Stiller C. Childhood malignancies in the EUROCARE study: the database and the methods of survival analysis. Eur J Cancer 2001; 37 (06) 678-86.
• 5 Teich JM, Schmiz JL, O’Connell EM, Fanikos J, Marks PW, Shulman LN. An information system to improve the Safety and Efficiency of Chemotherapy Ordering. Proc AMIA Annu Fall Symp. 1996: 498-502.
• 6 Vimarlund V, Timpka T. Design participation as an insurance: risk-management and end-user participation in the development of information systems in healthcare organizations. Methods Inf Med 2002; 41 (01) 76-80.
• 7 Kuhn KA, Giuse DA. From hospital information systems to health information systems. Problems, challenges, perspectives. Methods Inf Med 2001; 40 (04) 275-87.
• 8 Beuscart-Zéphir MC, Anceaux F, Crinquette V, Renard JM. Integrating user’s activity modeling in the design and assessment of hospital electronic patient records: the example of anesthesia. Int J Med Inf 2001; 64 2-3 157-71.
• 9 Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, Illinois: Aldine Publishing Company; 1967
• 10 Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 2nd Edition. Newbury Park, California: Sage; 1998
• 11 OMG. Unified Modeling Language Specification 1.4. 2001. www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?formal/01-09-67 (08.08.2003)
• 12 Booch G, Rumbaugh J, Jacobson I. The Unified Modeling Language User Guide. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley; 1999
• 13 Creutzig U, Henze G. Leitlinien für die Diagnostik und Therapie in der Pädiatrischen Onkologie (Guidelines for diagnostics and therapy in pediatric oncology; in German). München: Zuckschwerdt; 2001
• 14 Sommerville I. Software Engineering. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley; 2000
• 15 Arnold RS. Software Reengineering. Los Alamitos, California: IEEE Computer Society; 1993
• 16 Kaatsch P, Haaf G, Michaelis J. Childhood malignancies in Germany – methods and results of a nationwide registry. Eur J Cancer 1995; 31 A (06) 993-9.
• 17 Berg M. Patient care information systems and health care work: a sociotechnical approach. Int J Med Inf 1999; 55 (02) 87-101.
• 18 Dadam P, Reichert M, Kuhn K. Clinical Workflows – The Killer Application for Process-oriented Information Systems? 4th Int’l Conf on Business Information Systems (BIS’2000). Poznan, Poland: 2000: 36-59.
• 19 Knaup P, Wiedemann T, Bachert A, Creutzig U, Haux R, Schilling F. Efficiency and Safety of Chemotherapy Plans for Children: CATIPO – a nationwide approach. Artif Intell Med 2002; 24 (03) 229-42.
• 20 EMEA (2002): ICH Topic E6 Guideline for Good Clinical Practice, Step 5 Consolidated Guideline 1.5.96. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. www.emea.eu.int/pdfs/human/ich/013595en.pdf (08.08.2003)
• 21 Hammond P, Sergot M. Computer Support for Protocol-based Treatment of Cancer. J Logic Programming 1996; 26 (02) 93-111.
• 22 Shortliffe EH. When decision support doesn’t support. Med Decis Making 1995; 15 (02) 187-8.
• 23 Stefanelli M. The socio-organizational age of artificial intelligence in medicine. Artif Intell Med 2001; 23 (01) 25-47.
• 24 Gutjahr P. Krebs bei Kindern und Jugendlichen – Klinik und Praxis der Pädiatrischen Onkologie, (childhood and adolescent cancer – clinic and practice of pediatric oncology; in German). 4th edition. Köln: Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag; 1999
• 25 Wiedemann T, Knaup P, Bachert A, Creutzig U, Haux R, Schilling F. Computer-aided Documentation and Therapy Planning in Pediatric Oncology. In Cesnik B, McCray AT, and J-R. S: Medinfo 1998. Proceedings of the Ninth World Congress on Medical Informatics. Amsterdam: IOS; 1998: 1306-9.
• 26 Merzweiler A, Knaup P, Weber R, Ehlerding H, Haux R, Wiedemann T. Recording clinical data – from a general set of record items to case report forms (CRF) for clinics. In Patel V, Rogers R, Haux R. Medinfo 2001. Proceedings of the 10th World Congress on Medical Informatics. Amsterdam: IOS; 2001: 653-7.
• 27 Knaup P, Harkener S, Ellsässer KH, Haux R, Wiedemann T. On the necessity of systematically planning clinical tumor documentation. Methods Inf Med 2001; 40 (02) 90-8.
• 28 Merzweiler A, Knaup P, Creutzig U, Ehlerding H, Haux R, Mludek V, Schilling FH, Weber R, Wiedemann T. Requirements and design aspects of a data model for a data dictionary in paediatric oncology. Stud Health Technol Inform 2000; 77: 696-700.
• 29 GPOH standardization committee (2002): Basisdatensatz der Pädiatrischen Onkologie (basic data set of pediatric oncology, in German). http://dospo.uni-hd.de/mv/BDS2-1.zip (08.08.2003)
• 30 NCI (1999): Common Toxicity Criteria Version 2.0. National Cancer Institute. http://ctep.cancer.gov/forms/CTCv20_4-30-992.pdf (08.08.2003)
• 31 NCI (1999): Common Toxicity Criteria Manual, Common Toxicity Criteria Version 2.0. National Cancer Institute. http://ctep.cancer.gov/forms/CTCManual_v4_10-4-99.pdf (08.08.2003)