Healthcare innovation has never been more prevalent than it is today. But these innovations are only very slowly being embedded into Europe\'s healthcare systems. There is a huge capacity here in the EU to improve the health and quality of life of all citizens, but the extent to which it is happening is far from optimal. What is ringing out like a bell is that there is a clear need for better focus from policy makers, as this article explains. A policy bridge is required and a conscious decision among the powers-that-be in Europe needs to find a way to harmonise multiple strands of activity and responsibility in the health arena. The end goal will be for the EU to more effectively integrate the incredible advances in science into healthcare systems, for the benefit of all patients.

The 2003 European Council recommendation urging the Member States to introduce or scale up breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening through an organized population-based approach has had a remarkable impact. We argue that the recommendation needs to be updated for at least two sets of reasons. First, some of the current clinical guidelines include new tests or protocols that were not available at the time of the Council document. Some have already been adopted by organized screening programs, such as newly defined age ranges for mammography screening, Human Papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening, fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and sigmoidoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. Second, the outcomes of randomized trials evaluating screening for lung and prostate cancer have been published recently and the balance between harms and benefits needs to be pragmatically assessed. In the European Union, research collaboration and networking to exchange and develop best practices should be regularly supported by the European Commission. Integration between primary and secondary preventive strategies through comprehensive approaches is necessary not only to maximize the reduction in cancer burden but also to control the rising trend of other noncommunicable diseases sharing the same risk factors.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes in non-European Union (EU)-28 Council of Europe member states as of December 2015.
METHODS: The mission of the Council of Europe is to protect and promote human rights in its 47 member countries. Its 19 non-EU member states are Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republika Srpska, Georgia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Republic of Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia, Switzerland, FYR of Macedonia, Turkey, and Ukraine (EU-19). The main data source were GLOBOCAN, IARC, WHO, EUCAN, NORDCAN, ENCR, volume X of the CI5, the ministerial and Public Health Agency websites of the individual countries, PubMed, EMBASE, registries of some websites and the www.cochranelibrary.com, Scopus, www.clinicaltrials.gov, www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu, Research gate, Google and data extracted from screening programme results.
RESULTS: Our results show that epidemiological data quality varies broadly between EU-28 and EU-19 countries. In terms of incidence, only 30% of EU-19 countries rank high in data quality as opposed to 86% of EU-28 states. The same applies to mortality data, since 52% of EU-19 countries as against all EU-28 countries are found in the high ranks. Assessment of the method of collection of incidence data showed that only 32% of EU-19 countries are found in the top three quality classes as against 89% of EU-28 countries. For the mortality data, 63% of EU-19 countries are found in the highest ranks as opposed to all EU-28 member states. Interestingly, comparison of neighbouring countries offering regional screening shows, for instance, that incidence and mortality rates are respectively 38.9 and 13.0 in Norway and 29.2 and 10.9 in Sweden, whereas in Finland, where a national organised programme is available, they are respectively 23.5 and 9.3.
CONCLUSIONS: Cancer screening should be viewed as a key health care tool, also because investing in screening protects the weakest in the population, decreases the social burden of cancer, and reduces all types of health care costs, including those for radical surgery, long-term hospitalisation, and chemotherapy.

Neutral Methacrylate Copolymer is a fully polymerised copolymer used in the pharmaceutical industry to permit pH-independent delayed release of active ingredients from oral dosage forms. This function has potential use with food supplements and this article describes available information on the safety of the substance. Oral administration of radiolabelled copolymer to rats resulted in the detection of chemically unchanged copolymer in the faeces, with negligible absorption. Safety studies revealed no adverse toxicity following repeated administration at doses of up to 2000 mg/kg bw/d in a sub-chronic study in rats or 250 mg/kg bw/d in a sub-chronic study in dogs. No reproductive toxicity occurred at up to 2000 mg/kg bw/d in rats or rabbits. The substance shows no evidence of genotoxicity, has low acute toxicity and no irritation or sensitisation potential. An ADI value of 20 mg/kg bw was concluded from two alternative approaches. Daily exposure from use in dietary supplements is estimated as up to 10.0 mg/kg bw in adults and 13.3 mg/kg bw in children. There would therefore appear to be no safety concerns under the intended conditions of use. The information provided is intended to support an evaluation that the substance may be \"generally recognized as safe\" (GRAS).