Beyond the Guidelines: The Grey Zones of the Management of Gastric Cancer. Consensus Statements from the Gastric Cancer Italian Network (GAIN).
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Management of gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains challenging, because of the heterogeneity in tumor biology within the upper gastrointestinal tract. Daily clinical practice is full of grey areas regarding the complexity of diagnostic, staging, and therapeutic procedures. The aim of this paper is to provide a guide for clinicians facing challenging situations in routine practice, taking a multidisciplinary consensus approach based on available literature.Methods
The GAIN (GAstric cancer Italian Network) group was established with the aims of reviewing literature evidence, discussing key issues in prevention, diagnosis, and management of gastric and GEJ adenocarcinoma, and offering a summary of statements. A Delphi consensus method was used to obtain opinions from the expert panel of specialists.Results
Forty-nine clinical questions were identified in six areas of interest: role of multidisciplinary team; risk factors; diagnosis; management of early gastric cancer and multimodal approach to localized gastric cancer; treatment of elderly patients with locally advanced resectable disease; and treatment of locally advanced and metastatic cancer.Conclusions
The statements presented may guide clinicians in practical management of this disease.
SUBMITTER: Fornaro L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8001719 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) are essential for evidence-based medicine. The purpose of this systematic review was to appraise the quality and reporting of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening CPGs and CSs. After prospective registration (Prospero no: CRD42021286156), a systematic review searched CRC guidances in duplicate without language restrictions in ten databases, 20 society websites, and grey literature from 2018 to 2021. We appraised quality with AGREE II (% of maximum score) and reporting with RIGHT (% of total 35 items) tools. Twenty-four CPGs and 5 CSs were analysed. The median overall quality and reporting were 54.0% (IQR 45.7-75.0) and 42.0% (IQR 31.4-68.6). The applicability had low quality (AGREE II score <50%) in 83% of guidances (24/29). Recommendations and conflict of interest were low-reported (RIGHT score <50%) in 62% guidances (18/29) and 69% (20/29). CPGs that deployed systematic reviews had better quality and reporting than CSs (AGREE: 68.5% vs. 35.5%; p = 0.001; RIGHT: 74.6% vs. 41.4%; p = 0.001). In summary, CRC screening CPGs and CSs achieved low quality and reporting. It is necessary a revision and an improvement of the current guidances. Their development should apply a robust methodology using proper guideline development tools to obtain high-quality evidence-based documents.
| S-EPMC9734419 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhen use of a single antiseizure medication (ASM) fails to induce seizure remission, add-on therapy is justified. Perampanel (PER) is approved in Europe as adjunctive therapy for focal, focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures and generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Aim of the study was to establish whether PER is suitable for first add-on use.MethodsA Delphi methodology was adopted to assess consensus on a list of 39 statements produced by an Expert Board of 5 epileptologists. Using an iterative process, statements were finalized by a Delphi Panel of 84 Italian pediatric and adult neurologists. Each statement was rated anonymously to determine level of agreement on a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was established as agreement by at least 80% of the panelists. The relevance of each statement was also assessed on a 3-point scale.ResultsConsensus was achieved for 37 statements. Characteristics of PER considered to justify its use as first add-on include evidence of a positive impact on quality of life based on long term retention data, efficacy, tolerability, and ease of use; no worsening of cognitive functions and sleep quality; a low potential for drug interactions; a unique mechanism of action. Potential unfavorable factors are the need for a relatively slow dose titration; the potential occurrence of behavioral adverse effects; lack of information on safety when used in pregnancy; limited access to plasma PER levels.ConclusionPerampanel has many features which justify its use as a first add-on. Choice of an ASM as first add-on should be tailored to individual characteristics.
| S-EPMC8549193 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) is a clinical malignant syndrome mainly originating from the appendix, with an incidence of 2-4 per million people. As a rare disease, an early and accurate diagnosis of PMP is difficult. It was not until the 1980s that the systematic study of this disease was started.Main bodyAs a result of clinical and basic research progress over the last 4 decades, a comprehensive strategy based on cytoreductive surgery (CRS) + hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been established and proved to be an effective treatment for PMP. Currently, CRS + HIPEC was recommended as the standard treatment for PMP worldwide. There are several consensuses on PMP management, playing an important role in the standardization of CRS + HIPEC. However, controversies exist among consensuses published worldwide. A systematic evaluation of PMP consensuses helps not only to standardize PMP treatment but also to identify existing controversies and point to possible solutions in the future. The controversy underlying the consensus and vice versa promotes the continuous refinement and updating of consensuses and continue to improve PMP management through a gradual and continuous process. In this traditional narrative review, we systemically evaluated the consensuses published by major national and international academic organizations, aiming to get a timely update on the treatment strategies of CRS + HIPEC on PMP.ConclusionCurrently, consensuses have been reached on the following aspects: pathological classification, terminology, preoperative evaluation, eligibility for surgical treatment, maximal tumor debulking, CRS technical details, and severe adverse event classification system. However, controversies still exist regarding the HIPEC regimen, systemic chemotherapy, and early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy.
| S-EPMC7881689 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccination against communicable diseases is crucial for disease prevention, but this practice poses challenges to healthcare professionals in patients with haemophilia. Poor knowledge of the vaccination requirements for these patients and safety concerns often result in vaccination delay or avoidance. In order to address this issue, a panel of 11 Italian haemophilia and immunization experts conducted a Delphi consensus process to identify the main concerns regarding the safe use of vaccines in patients with haemophilia. The consensus was based on a literature search of the available evidence, which was used by the experts to design 27 consensus statements. A group of clinicians then rated these statements using the 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). The main issues identified by the expert panel included vaccination schedule for haemophilic patients; protocol and optimal route of vaccine administration; vaccination of haemophilic patients with antibodies inhibiting coagulation factor VIII (inhibitors); and vaccination and risk of inhibitor development. This manuscript discusses these controversial areas in detail supported by the available literature evidence and provides evidence- and consensus-based recommendations. Overall, participants agreed on most statements, except those addressing the potential role of vaccination in inhibitor formation. Participants agreed that patients with haemophilia should receive vaccinations according to the institutional schedule for individuals without bleeding disorders; however, vaccination of patients with haemophilia requires comprehensive planning, taking into account disease severity, type and route of vaccination, and bleeding risk. Data also suggest vaccination timing does not need to take into consideration when the patient received factor VIII replacement.
| S-EPMC6850056 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesDespite the publication of hundreds of trials on gout and hyperuricemia, management of these conditions remains suboptimal. We aimed to assess the quality and consistency of guidance documents for gout and hyperuricemia.DesignSystematic review and quality assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation (AGREE) II methodology.Data sourcesPubMed and EMBASE (27 October 2016), two Chinese academic databases, eight guideline databases, and Google and Google scholar (July 2017).Eligibility criteriaWe included the latest version of international and national/regional clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements for diagnosis and/or treatment of hyperuricemia and gout, published in English or Chinese.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently screened searched items and extracted data. Four reviewers independently scored documents using AGREE II. Recommendations from all documents were tabulated and visualised in a coloured grid.ResultsTwenty-four guidance documents (16 clinical practice guidelines and 8 consensus statements) published between 2003 and 2017 were included. Included documents performed well in the domains of scope and purpose (median 85.4%, range 66.7%-100.0%) and clarity of presentation (median 79.2%, range 48.6%-98.6%), but unsatisfactory in applicability (median 10.9%, range 0.0%-66.7%) and editorial independence (median 28.1%, range 0.0%-83.3%). The 2017 British Society of Rheumatology guideline received the highest scores. Recommendations were concordant on the target serum uric acid level for long-term control, on some indications for urate-lowering therapy (ULT), and on the first-line drugs for ULT and for acute attack. Substantially inconsistent recommendations were provided for many items, especially for the timing of initiation of ULT and for treatment for asymptomatic hyperuricemia.ConclusionsMethodological quality needs improvement in guidance documents on gout and hyperuricemia. Evidence for certain clinical questions is lacking, despite numerous trials in this field. Promoting standard guidance development methods and synthesising high-quality clinical evidence are potential approaches to reduce recommendation inconsistencies.Prospero registration numberCRD42016046104.
| S-EPMC6720466 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The geographical location and differences in tumor biology significantly change the management of gastric cancer. The prevalence of gastric cancer ranks fifth and sixth among men and women, respectively, in Turkey. The international guidelines from the Eastern and Western countries fail to manage a considerable amount of inconclusive issues in the management of gastric cancer. The uncertainties lead to significant heterogeneities in clinical practice, lack of homogeneous data collection, and subsequently, diverse outcomes. The physicians who are professionally involved in the management of gastric cancer at two institutions in Istanbul, Turkey, organized a consensus meeting to address current problems and plan feasible, logical, measurable, and collective solutions in their clinical practice for this challenging disease. The evidence-based data and current guidelines were reviewed. The gray zones in the management of gastric cancer were determined in the first session of this consensus meeting. The second session was constructed to discuss, vote, and ratify the ultimate decisions. The identification of the T stage, the esophagogastric area, imaging algorithm for proper staging and follow-up, timing and patient selection for neoadjuvant treatment, and management of advanced and metastatic disease have been accepted as the major issues in the management of gastric cancer. The recommendations are presented with the percentage of supporting votes in the results section with related data.
| S-EPMC6629281 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 is a highly infectious disease, characterised by respiratory, physical and psychological dysfunctions. Rehabilitation could effectively alleviate the symptoms and promote recovery of the physical and mental health of patients with COVID-19. Recently, rehabilitation medical institutions have issued clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and expert consensus statements involving recommendations for rehabilitation assessments and rehabilitation therapies for COVID-19. This systematic review aims to assess the methodological quality and reporting quality of the guidance documents, evaluate the heterogeneity of the recommendations and summarise the recommendations with respect to rehabilitation assessments and rehabilitation therapies for COVID-19 to provide a quick reference for front-line clinicians, therapists and patients as well as reasonable suggestions for future guidelines.Methods and analysisThe electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), Wanfang Database and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and websites of governments or organisations (eg, National Guideline Clearinghouse, Guidelines International Network, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network and WHO) will be searched for eligible CPGs and expert consensus statements from inception to August 2022. CPGs and expert consensus statements published in Chinese or English and presenting recommendations for modern functional rehabilitation techniques and/or traditional Chinese medicine rehabilitation techniques for COVID-19 will be included. Reviews, interpretations, old versions of CPGs and expert consensus statements and those for the management of other diseases during the pandemic will be excluded. Two reviewers will independently review each article, extract data, appraise the methodological quality following the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II tool and assess the reporting quality with the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare statement. The Measurement Scale of Rate of Agreement will be used to evaluate the heterogeneity of the recommendations in different CPGs and expert consensus statements. Agreement between reviewers will be calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. We will also summarise the recommendations for rehabilitation in patients with COVID-19. The results will be narratively described and presented as tables or figures.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not needed for this systematic review because information from published documents will be used. The findings will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.Prospero registration numberCRD42020190761.
| S-EPMC9358617 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionGout and hyperuricaemia are major health issues and relevant guidance documents have been released by a variety of national and international organisations. However, these documents contain inconsistent recommendations with unclear quality profiles. We aim to conduct a systematic appraisal of the clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements pertaining to the diagnosis and treatment for hyperuricaemia and gout, and to summarise recommendations.MethodsWe will search PubMed, EMBASE and guideline databases to identify published clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements. We will search Google and Google Scholar for additional potentially eligible documents. The quality of included guidelines and consensus statements will be assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument and be presented as scores. We will also manually extract recommendations for clinical practice from all included documents.Ethics and disseminationThe results of this systematic review will be disseminated through relevant conferences and peer-reviewed journals.Protocol registration numberPROSPERO CRD42016046104.
| S-EPMC5623447 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Adult-onset Still's disease (AOSD) is a rare inflammatory condition characterized by fever, rash, and arthritis. Because of its rarity, clinical trials are inherently small and often uncontrolled. Our objective was to develop recommendations for the use of interleukin (IL)-1 inhibitors in the management of patients with AOSD, based on the best evidence and expert opinion. METHODS:A panel of 10 experts (9 rheumatologists and 1 pediatrician) was established. The first step was dedicated to a comprehensive literature review and development of statements. Two separate literature searches were performed on the MEDLINE (Pubmed), EMBASE, and BIOSIS databases through April 2018 to identify (1) differences and similarities between AOSD and pediatric Still's disease (systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis [SJIA]) and (2) the efficacy and safety of IL-1 inhibitors in AOSD treatment. In the second step, the statements were submitted in a Delphi process to a panel of 67 rheumatologists. Consensus threshold was set at 66%: positive, >?66% of voters selected scores 3 to 5; negative, >?66% of voters selected scores 1 or 2. In the third step, the voting results were analyzed, and the statements were finalized. RESULTS:Eleven statements were developed. Forty-six of 67 rheumatologists (72%) participated in the Delphi process. A positive consensus was reached after the first round of voting and was full (>?95%) on the majority of statements. A large consensus was achieved in considering AOSD and SJIA as the same disease. The use of anti-IL-1 therapies in refractory patients was considered quite safe and effective both as the first and as a subsequent line of biologic treatment, especially in systemic patients. Because of the lack of head-to-head comparisons, a different profile of efficacy among IL-1 inhibitors could not be established. There was a large consensus that failure of the first IL-1 inhibitor does not preclude response to another one. The lack of studies comparing early versus late treatment did not allow to draw conclusions; however, data from SJIA suggest a better response in early treatment. CONCLUSIONS:The Delphi method was used to develop recommendations that we hope will help clinicians in the management of patients with AOSD refractory to conventional therapies.
| S-EPMC6907145 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Selection of the optimal surgical and interventional therapies for advanced colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) requires multidisciplinary discussion of treatment strategies early in the trajectory of the individual patient's care. This paper reports on expert consensus on locoregional and interventional therapies for the treatment of advanced CRLM. Resection remains the reference treatment for patients with bilateral CRLM and synchronous presentation of primary and metastatic cancer. Patients with oligonodular bilateral CRLM may be candidates for one-stage multiple segmentectomies; two-stage resection with or without portal vein embolization may allow complete resection in patients with more advanced disease. After downsizing with preoperative systemic and/or regional therapy, curative-intent hepatectomy requires resection of all initial and currently known sites of disease; debulking procedures are not recommended. Many patients with synchronous primary disease and CRLM can safely undergo simultaneous resection of all disease. Staged resections should be considered for patients in whom the volume of the future liver remnant is anticipated to be marginal or inadequate, who have significant medical comorbid condition(s), or in whom extensive resections are required for the primary cancer and/or CRLM. Priority for liver-first or primary-first resection should depend on primary tumour-related symptoms or concern for the progression of marginally resectable CRLM during treatment of the primary disease. Chemotherapy delivered by hepatic arterial infusion represents a valid option in patients with liver-only disease, although it is best delivered in experienced centres. Ablation strategies are not recommended as first-line treatments for resectable CRLM alone or in combination with resection because of high local failure rates and limitations related to tumour size, multiplicity and intrahepatic location.
| S-EPMC3719918 | biostudies-literature