{"title":"摘要2635:当代胶质母细胞瘤治疗临床实践指南:一项国际调查","authors":"A. L. McLean, J. Walter","doi":"10.1158/1538-7445.AM2021-2635","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Clinical practice guidelines are systematically developed statements to assist clinician and patient decisions about appropriate healthcare for specific clinical circumstances. In some cases, guidelines are utilized by health policymakers and insurers in determining coverage and reimbursement policies. Little is known about the global status of guideline development and implementation for the management of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) or about the incorporation of novel therapies such as tumor treating fields (TTFields) into these guidelines. Methods: A comprehensive systematic review of published guidelines and consensus statements from national and international bodies such as health ministries and specialty societies, covering North, Central and South America, Europe, the Middle East, Africa and the Asia-Pacific region was performed. In addition, key stakeholders were surveyed to identify country-specific guidance and practice patterns, with a specific focus on guideline contemporariness and reference to TTFields. Results: The vast majority of countries worldwide do not have national guidelines for GBM management. Three multinational guidelines were identified, from SNO/EANO, ESMO and Germany-Austria-Switzerland. In addition, 18 national guidelines from 16 countries were identified, with some countries having multiple national guidelines in place (USA, Germany, Brazil). In over half of cases, the national guidelines had not been updated within the past three years. 10/18 national guidelines and 2/3 multinational guidelines mentioned TTFields. A minority of guidelines had an explicit expiry or revision date. Conclusions: An array of consensus guidelines and recommendations have been published to facilitate clinical decision-making in GBM. However, substantive differences exist between these guidelines regarding their contemporariness and revision process. Three years after the publication of a seminal randomized controlled trial (Stupp et al., 2017) attesting to the efficacy of TTFields in newly diagnosed GBM, little over half of published national guidelines mention the therapy, let alone recommend it. While guidelines naturally reflect local clinical, administrative and health-economic concerns, unwarranted variation in the production, quality, content and implementation of guidelines has potential implications for the quality of care. Ideally, guidelines should be updated dynamically when new evidence indicates a need for a substantive change in the guideline based on a priori criteria. An ongoing revision process for guidelines, perhaps with shorter validity periods or a more flexible approach, may facilitate more expedient adoption of novel therapies in clinical practice guidelines and in practice. Citation Format: Aaron Lawson McLean, Jan Walter. Contemporary clinical practice guidelines for the management of glioblastoma: an international survey [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr 2635.","PeriodicalId":21579,"journal":{"name":"Science and Health Policy","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abstract 2635: Contemporary clinical practice guidelines for the management of glioblastoma: an international survey\",\"authors\":\"A. L. McLean, J. Walter\",\"doi\":\"10.1158/1538-7445.AM2021-2635\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Clinical practice guidelines are systematically developed statements to assist clinician and patient decisions about appropriate healthcare for specific clinical circumstances. In some cases, guidelines are utilized by health policymakers and insurers in determining coverage and reimbursement policies. Little is known about the global status of guideline development and implementation for the management of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) or about the incorporation of novel therapies such as tumor treating fields (TTFields) into these guidelines. Methods: A comprehensive systematic review of published guidelines and consensus statements from national and international bodies such as health ministries and specialty societies, covering North, Central and South America, Europe, the Middle East, Africa and the Asia-Pacific region was performed. In addition, key stakeholders were surveyed to identify country-specific guidance and practice patterns, with a specific focus on guideline contemporariness and reference to TTFields. Results: The vast majority of countries worldwide do not have national guidelines for GBM management. Three multinational guidelines were identified, from SNO/EANO, ESMO and Germany-Austria-Switzerland. In addition, 18 national guidelines from 16 countries were identified, with some countries having multiple national guidelines in place (USA, Germany, Brazil). In over half of cases, the national guidelines had not been updated within the past three years. 10/18 national guidelines and 2/3 multinational guidelines mentioned TTFields. A minority of guidelines had an explicit expiry or revision date. Conclusions: An array of consensus guidelines and recommendations have been published to facilitate clinical decision-making in GBM. However, substantive differences exist between these guidelines regarding their contemporariness and revision process. Three years after the publication of a seminal randomized controlled trial (Stupp et al., 2017) attesting to the efficacy of TTFields in newly diagnosed GBM, little over half of published national guidelines mention the therapy, let alone recommend it. While guidelines naturally reflect local clinical, administrative and health-economic concerns, unwarranted variation in the production, quality, content and implementation of guidelines has potential implications for the quality of care. Ideally, guidelines should be updated dynamically when new evidence indicates a need for a substantive change in the guideline based on a priori criteria. An ongoing revision process for guidelines, perhaps with shorter validity periods or a more flexible approach, may facilitate more expedient adoption of novel therapies in clinical practice guidelines and in practice. Citation Format: Aaron Lawson McLean, Jan Walter. Contemporary clinical practice guidelines for the management of glioblastoma: an international survey [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr 2635.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21579,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science and Health Policy\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science and Health Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.AM2021-2635\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.AM2021-2635","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
简介:临床实践指南是系统开发的声明,以协助临床医生和病人决定适当的医疗保健具体的临床情况。在某些情况下,卫生政策制定者和保险公司利用准则来确定承保范围和报销政策。关于多形性胶质母细胞瘤(GBM)治疗指南制定和实施的全球状况,以及将肿瘤治疗领域(TTFields)等新疗法纳入这些指南的情况,我们知之甚少。方法:对国家和国际机构(如卫生部和专业学会)发表的指南和共识声明进行全面系统的回顾,涵盖北美、中美洲和南美洲、欧洲、中东、非洲和亚太地区。此外,对主要利益相关者进行了调查,以确定具体国家的指导和实践模式,特别关注指南的时代性和对TTFields的参考。结果:世界上绝大多数国家没有GBM管理的国家指南。从SNO/EANO、ESMO和德国-奥地利-瑞士确定了三个多国准则。此外,还确定了来自16个国家的18项国家指南,其中一些国家制定了多项国家指南(美国、德国、巴西)。在超过一半的案例中,国家指南在过去三年内没有更新。10/18的国家指南和2/3的跨国指南提到了TTFields。少数指导方针有明确的到期或修订日期。结论:一系列共识指南和建议已经发表,以促进GBM的临床决策。然而,这些准则之间在其时代性和修订过程方面存在实质性差异。一项开创性的随机对照试验(Stupp et al., 2017)证实了TTFields对新诊断的GBM的疗效,三年后,超过一半的已发表的国家指南提到了这种疗法,更不用说推荐了。虽然准则自然反映了当地临床、行政和卫生经济方面的关切,但在准则的编制、质量、内容和执行方面毫无根据的变化可能对护理质量产生影响。理想情况下,当新的证据表明需要根据先验标准对指南进行实质性修改时,指南应该动态更新。正在进行的指南修订过程,可能具有更短的有效期或更灵活的方法,可能有助于在临床实践指南和实践中更方便地采用新疗法。引用格式:Aaron Lawson McLean, Jan Walter。当代胶质母细胞瘤治疗临床实践指南:一项国际调查[摘要]。见:美国癌症研究协会2021年年会论文集;2021年4月10日至15日和5月17日至21日。费城(PA): AACR;癌症杂志,2021;81(13 -增刊):2635。
Abstract 2635: Contemporary clinical practice guidelines for the management of glioblastoma: an international survey
Introduction: Clinical practice guidelines are systematically developed statements to assist clinician and patient decisions about appropriate healthcare for specific clinical circumstances. In some cases, guidelines are utilized by health policymakers and insurers in determining coverage and reimbursement policies. Little is known about the global status of guideline development and implementation for the management of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) or about the incorporation of novel therapies such as tumor treating fields (TTFields) into these guidelines. Methods: A comprehensive systematic review of published guidelines and consensus statements from national and international bodies such as health ministries and specialty societies, covering North, Central and South America, Europe, the Middle East, Africa and the Asia-Pacific region was performed. In addition, key stakeholders were surveyed to identify country-specific guidance and practice patterns, with a specific focus on guideline contemporariness and reference to TTFields. Results: The vast majority of countries worldwide do not have national guidelines for GBM management. Three multinational guidelines were identified, from SNO/EANO, ESMO and Germany-Austria-Switzerland. In addition, 18 national guidelines from 16 countries were identified, with some countries having multiple national guidelines in place (USA, Germany, Brazil). In over half of cases, the national guidelines had not been updated within the past three years. 10/18 national guidelines and 2/3 multinational guidelines mentioned TTFields. A minority of guidelines had an explicit expiry or revision date. Conclusions: An array of consensus guidelines and recommendations have been published to facilitate clinical decision-making in GBM. However, substantive differences exist between these guidelines regarding their contemporariness and revision process. Three years after the publication of a seminal randomized controlled trial (Stupp et al., 2017) attesting to the efficacy of TTFields in newly diagnosed GBM, little over half of published national guidelines mention the therapy, let alone recommend it. While guidelines naturally reflect local clinical, administrative and health-economic concerns, unwarranted variation in the production, quality, content and implementation of guidelines has potential implications for the quality of care. Ideally, guidelines should be updated dynamically when new evidence indicates a need for a substantive change in the guideline based on a priori criteria. An ongoing revision process for guidelines, perhaps with shorter validity periods or a more flexible approach, may facilitate more expedient adoption of novel therapies in clinical practice guidelines and in practice. Citation Format: Aaron Lawson McLean, Jan Walter. Contemporary clinical practice guidelines for the management of glioblastoma: an international survey [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr 2635.