ACR适宜性标准®-肛门癌。

Theodore S Hong, Jennifer L Pretz, Joseph M Herman, May Abdel-Wahab, Nilofer Azad, A William Blackstock, Prajnan Das, Karyn A Goodman, Salma K Jabbour, William E Jones, Andre A Konski, Albert C Koong, Miguel Rodriguez-Bigas, William Small, Charles R Thomas, Jennifer Zook, W Warren Suh
{"title":"ACR适宜性标准®-肛门癌。","authors":"Theodore S Hong,&nbsp;Jennifer L Pretz,&nbsp;Joseph M Herman,&nbsp;May Abdel-Wahab,&nbsp;Nilofer Azad,&nbsp;A William Blackstock,&nbsp;Prajnan Das,&nbsp;Karyn A Goodman,&nbsp;Salma K Jabbour,&nbsp;William E Jones,&nbsp;Andre A Konski,&nbsp;Albert C Koong,&nbsp;Miguel Rodriguez-Bigas,&nbsp;William Small,&nbsp;Charles R Thomas,&nbsp;Jennifer Zook,&nbsp;W Warren Suh","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The management of anal cancer is driven by randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials. However, trials may present conflicting conclusions. Furthermore, different clinical situations may not be addressed in certain trials because of eligibility inclusion criteria. Although prospective studies point to the use of definitive 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin C-based chemoradiation as a standard, some areas remain that are not well defined. In particular, management of very early stage disease, radiation dose, and the use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy remain unaddressed by phase III studies. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. </p>","PeriodicalId":12695,"journal":{"name":"Gastrointestinal cancer research : GCR","volume":"7 1","pages":"4-14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3924766/pdf/gcr4.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ACR Appropriateness Criteria®-Anal Cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Theodore S Hong,&nbsp;Jennifer L Pretz,&nbsp;Joseph M Herman,&nbsp;May Abdel-Wahab,&nbsp;Nilofer Azad,&nbsp;A William Blackstock,&nbsp;Prajnan Das,&nbsp;Karyn A Goodman,&nbsp;Salma K Jabbour,&nbsp;William E Jones,&nbsp;Andre A Konski,&nbsp;Albert C Koong,&nbsp;Miguel Rodriguez-Bigas,&nbsp;William Small,&nbsp;Charles R Thomas,&nbsp;Jennifer Zook,&nbsp;W Warren Suh\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The management of anal cancer is driven by randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials. However, trials may present conflicting conclusions. Furthermore, different clinical situations may not be addressed in certain trials because of eligibility inclusion criteria. Although prospective studies point to the use of definitive 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin C-based chemoradiation as a standard, some areas remain that are not well defined. In particular, management of very early stage disease, radiation dose, and the use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy remain unaddressed by phase III studies. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12695,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gastrointestinal cancer research : GCR\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"4-14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3924766/pdf/gcr4.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gastrointestinal cancer research : GCR\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastrointestinal cancer research : GCR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

肛门癌的治疗是由随机和非随机临床试验驱动的。然而,试验可能会得出相互矛盾的结论。此外,由于入选标准的不同,某些试验可能无法处理不同的临床情况。虽然前瞻性研究指出,使用明确的5-氟尿嘧啶和丝裂霉素c为基础的放化疗作为标准,但仍有一些领域没有得到很好的界定。特别是,非常早期疾病的管理、辐射剂量和调强放射治疗的使用仍未在III期研究中得到解决。美国放射学会(ACR)适当性标准®是针对特定临床条件的循证指南,每两年由多学科专家小组审查一次。指南的制定和审查包括对来自同行评议期刊的当前医学文献的广泛分析,并应用一种完善的共识方法(修正德尔菲法)来评估专家组对成像和治疗程序的适当性。在证据缺乏或不确定的情况下,专家意见可用于推荐成像或治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
ACR Appropriateness Criteria®-Anal Cancer.

The management of anal cancer is driven by randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials. However, trials may present conflicting conclusions. Furthermore, different clinical situations may not be addressed in certain trials because of eligibility inclusion criteria. Although prospective studies point to the use of definitive 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin C-based chemoradiation as a standard, some areas remain that are not well defined. In particular, management of very early stage disease, radiation dose, and the use of intensity-modulated radiation therapy remain unaddressed by phase III studies. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信