Dataset Information

Utility of prognostic genomic tests in breast cancer practice: The IMPAKT 2012 Working Group Consensus Statement.

ABSTRACT: We critically evaluated the available evidence on genomic tests in breast cancer to define their prognostic ability and likelihood to determine treatment benefit.Independent evaluation of six genomic tests [Oncotype Dx™, MammaPrint(®), Genomic Grade Index, PAM50 (ROR-S), Breast Cancer Index, and EndoPredict] was carried out by a panel of experts in three parameters: analytical validity, clinical validity, and clinical utility based on the principles of the EGAPP criteria. PANEL STATEMENTS: The majority of the working group members found the available evidence on the analytical and clinical validity of Oncotype Dx™ and MammaPrint(®) to be convincing. None of the genomic tests demonstrated robust evidence of clinical utility: it was not clear from the current evidence that modifying treatment decisions based on the results of a given genomic test could result in improving clinical outcome.The IMPAKT 2012 Working Group proposed the following recommendations: (i) a need to develop models that integrate clinicopathologic factors along with genomic tests; (ii) demonstration of clinical utility should be made in the context of a prospective randomized trial; and (iii) the creation of registries for patients who are subjected to genomic testing in the daily practice.

SUBMITTER: Azim HA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6267878 | biostudies-other | 2013 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Utility of prognostic genomic tests in breast cancer practice: The IMPAKT 2012 Working Group Consensus Statement.

Azim H A HA Michiels S S Zagouri F F Delaloge S S Filipits M M Namer M M Neven P P Symmans W F WF Thompson A A André F F Loi S S Swanton C C

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology 20130120 3

<h4>Background</h4>We critically evaluated the available evidence on genomic tests in breast cancer to define their prognostic ability and likelihood to determine treatment benefit.<h4>Design</h4>Independent evaluation of six genomic tests [Oncotype Dx™, MammaPrint(®), Genomic Grade Index, PAM50 (ROR-S), Breast Cancer Index, and EndoPredict] was carried out by a panel of experts in three parameters: analytical validity, clinical validity, and clinical utility based on the principles of the EGAPP ...[more]

PMID: 23337633

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundControversy exists regarding many aspects of decision making pertaining to same-day versus staged bilateral TKA (BTKAs), including patient selection, perioperative management decisions, and other important choices.Questions/purposesIn the absence of suitable randomized trials, we sought to determine areas of consensus among national experts on the following questions: (1) What are the comparative risks of same-day BTKAs compared with unilateral TKA (UTKA) and staged BTKAs? (2) Who should be considered an appropriate candidate for same-day BTKAs? (3) What constitutes appropriate workup and perioperative management for BTKAs? (4) What is the optimal time between procedures if same-day BTKAs are not deemed appropriate? (5) Are there orthopaedic or rehabilitation considerations for BTKAs that might outweigh medical contraindications?MethodsIn the setting of a consensus conference of national experts in orthopaedic surgery, anesthesiology, perioperative medicine, and epidemiology, the major questions surrounding same-day BTKAs were addressed by using an extensive literature review and the modified Delphi process. The process concluded with a meeting of participants and formulation of consensus statements.ResultsEighty-one percent of participants agreed that BTKAs are more invasive and complex procedures associated with increased risk for perioperative adverse events compared with UTKA in an unselected group of patients. The consensus group agreed that physicians and hospitals should consider using more restrictive patient selection criteria and exclude those with a modified cardiac risk index greater than 3 to mitigate the potentially increased risk. The majority of the group agreed that perioperative assessment and management should reflect the higher level of acuity of same-day BTKAs. Eighty-one percent of participants agreed that if a patient is not deemed a candidate for same-day BTKAs, a second TKA should be scheduled no sooner than 3 months after the first. The entire group agreed that when there is a conflict between the orthopaedic need and the medical adequacy of same-day BTKAs, the medical concern for the patient's safety should prevail over the orthopaedic need.ConclusionsExperts perceived that same-day BTKAs increase medical risk, and thus a systematic approach to the management of patients should be taken to minimize complications.

Project description:The European Society of Breast Radiology (EUSOBI) established an International Breast DWI working group. The working group consists of clinical breast MRI experts, MRI physicists, and representatives from large vendors of MRI equipment, invited based upon proven expertise in breast MRI and/or in particular breast DWI, representing 25 sites from 16 countries. The aims of the working group are (a) to promote the use of breast DWI into clinical practice by issuing consensus statements and initiate collaborative research where appropriate; (b) to define necessary standards and provide practical guidance for clinical application of breast DWI; (c) to develop a standardized and translatable multisite multivendor quality assurance protocol, especially for multisite research studies; (d) to find consensus on optimal methods for image processing/analysis, visualization, and interpretation; and (e) to work collaboratively with system vendors to improve breast DWI sequences. First consensus recommendations, presented in this paper, include acquisition parameters for standard breast DWI sequences including specifications of b values, fat saturation, spatial resolution, and repetition and echo times. To describe lesions in an objective way, levels of diffusion restriction/hindrance in the breast have been defined based on the published literature on breast DWI. The use of a small ROI placed on the darkest part of the lesion on the ADC map, avoiding necrotic, noisy or non-enhancing lesion voxels is currently recommended. The working group emphasizes the need for standardization and quality assurance before ADC thresholds are applied. The working group encourages further research in advanced diffusion techniques and tailored DWI strategies for specific indications. Key Points • The working group considers breast DWI an essential part of a multiparametric breast MRI protocol and encourages its use. • Basic requirements for routine clinical application of breast DWI are provided, including recommendations on b values, fat saturation, spatial resolution, and other sequence parameters. • Diffusion levels in breast lesions are defined based on meta-analysis data and methods to obtain a reliable ADC value are detailed.

Project description:BackgroundThe past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of cervical spine joint procedures including joint injections, nerve blocks and radiofrequency ablation to treat chronic neck pain, yet many aspects of the procedures remain controversial.MethodsIn August 2020, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the American Academy of Pain Medicine approved and charged the Cervical Joint Working Group to develop neck pain guidelines. Eighteen stakeholder societies were identified, and formal request-for-participation and member nomination letters were sent to those organizations. Participating entities selected panel members and an ad hoc steering committee selected preliminary questions, which were then revised by the full committee. Each question was assigned to a module composed of 4-5 members, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and the Committee Chairs on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee after revisions. We used a modified Delphi method whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chairs, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached. Before commencing, it was agreed that a recommendation would be noted with >50% agreement among committee members, but a consensus recommendation would require ≥75% agreement.ResultsTwenty questions were selected, with 100% consensus achieved in committee on 17 topics. Among participating organizations, 14 of 15 that voted approved or supported the guidelines en bloc, with 14 questions being approved with no dissensions or abstentions. Specific questions addressed included the value of clinical presentation and imaging in selecting patients for procedures, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for blocks, diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks and intra-articular joint injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for designating a block as positive, how many blocks should be performed before radiofrequency ablation, the orientation of electrodes, whether larger lesions translate into higher success rates, whether stimulation should be used before radiofrequency ablation, how best to mitigate complication risks, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and trials, and the indications for repeating radiofrequency ablation.ConclusionsCervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with medial branch blocks being more predictive than intra-articular injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of false-negatives (ie, lower overall success rate). Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.

Project description:Purpose and objectiveTo develop expert consensus statements on multiparametric dose prescriptions for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) aligning with ICRU report 91. These statements serve as a foundational step towards harmonizing current SBRT practices and refining dose prescription and documentation requirements for clinical trial designs.Materials and methodsBased on the results of a literature review by the working group, a two-tier Delphi consensus process was conducted among 24 physicians and physics experts from three European countries. The degree of consensus was predefined for overarching (OA) and organ-specific (OS) statements (≥ 80%, 60-79%, < 60% for high, intermediate, and poor consensus, respectively). Post-first round statements were refined in a live discussion for the second round of the Delphi process.ResultsExperts consented on a total of 14 OA and 17 OS statements regarding SBRT of primary and secondary lung, liver, pancreatic, adrenal, and kidney tumors regarding dose prescription, target coverage, and organ at risk dose limitations. Degree of consent was ≥ 80% in 79% and 41% of OA and OS statements, respectively, with higher consensus for lung compared to the upper abdomen. In round 2, the degree of consent was ≥ 80 to 100% for OA and 88% in OS statements. No consensus was reached for dose escalation to liver metastases after chemotherapy (47%) or single-fraction SBRT for kidney primaries (13%). In round 2, no statement had 60-79% consensus.ConclusionIn 29 of 31 statements a high consensus was achieved after a two-tier Delphi process and one statement (kidney) was clearly refused. The Delphi process was able to achieve a high degree of consensus for SBRT dose prescription. In summary, clear recommendations for both OA and OS could be defined. This contributes significantly to harmonization of SBRT practice and facilitates dose prescription and reporting in clinical trials investigating SBRT.

Dataset Information

Utility of prognostic genomic tests in breast cancer practice: The IMPAKT 2012 Working Group Consensus Statement.

Publications

Utility of prognostic genomic tests in breast cancer practice: The IMPAKT 2012 Working Group Consensus Statement.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets