Mismatch between evidence and related clinical recommendations about the treatment of advanced esophageal cancer patients with anticancer drugs: A critical historical review
Xavier Bonfill Cosp , Olga Savall-Esteve , Javier Bracchiglione , Carolina Requeijo , Marilina Santero , Appropriateness of Systemic Oncological Treatments for Advanced Cancer (ASTAC-Study) Research Group
{"title":"Mismatch between evidence and related clinical recommendations about the treatment of advanced esophageal cancer patients with anticancer drugs: A critical historical review","authors":"Xavier Bonfill Cosp , Olga Savall-Esteve , Javier Bracchiglione , Carolina Requeijo , Marilina Santero , Appropriateness of Systemic Oncological Treatments for Advanced Cancer (ASTAC-Study) Research Group","doi":"10.1016/j.jcpo.2025.100580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>to analyze the most robust research and recommendations that have informed the potential superiority of treatments with anticancer drugs over any type of supportive care for advanced esophageal cancer (EC).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a critical historical review. First, we identified randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from a previous scoping review conducted by our research group, ASTAC, updating the search strategy. Second, we searched for the most important and recognized international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in advanced EC. Finally, we performed a systematic document analysis to compare whether the recommendations proposed in the CPGs were supported by the previously identified relevant evidence.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified and assessed 15 RCTs and 11 CPGs from ESMO (eight), ASCO (two), and NICE (one) published over the last 40 years. There is a clear mismatch between these guidelines' recommendations and the available RCTs regarding the efficacy of anticancer drugs compared to best supportive care (BSC).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>There is a lack of consistent evidence to support the treatment of advanced EC patients with anticancer drugs, and a notable mismatch exists between the available evidence and the recommendations made by relevant CPGs. As a result, these guidelines may be biased in favoring the use of anticancer drugs over supportive care and in consequence it is advisable to be very prudent when proposing systemic treatments to patients with advanced EC. Further rigorous and independent research is needed to better evaluate the true benefits of anticancer treatments in advanced EC and to update the CPGs accordingly.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":38212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Policy","volume":"44 ","pages":"Article 100580"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213538325000244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
to analyze the most robust research and recommendations that have informed the potential superiority of treatments with anticancer drugs over any type of supportive care for advanced esophageal cancer (EC).
Methods
We conducted a critical historical review. First, we identified randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from a previous scoping review conducted by our research group, ASTAC, updating the search strategy. Second, we searched for the most important and recognized international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in advanced EC. Finally, we performed a systematic document analysis to compare whether the recommendations proposed in the CPGs were supported by the previously identified relevant evidence.
Results
We identified and assessed 15 RCTs and 11 CPGs from ESMO (eight), ASCO (two), and NICE (one) published over the last 40 years. There is a clear mismatch between these guidelines' recommendations and the available RCTs regarding the efficacy of anticancer drugs compared to best supportive care (BSC).
Conclusion
There is a lack of consistent evidence to support the treatment of advanced EC patients with anticancer drugs, and a notable mismatch exists between the available evidence and the recommendations made by relevant CPGs. As a result, these guidelines may be biased in favoring the use of anticancer drugs over supportive care and in consequence it is advisable to be very prudent when proposing systemic treatments to patients with advanced EC. Further rigorous and independent research is needed to better evaluate the true benefits of anticancer treatments in advanced EC and to update the CPGs accordingly.