Breast cancer treatment in clinical practice compared to best evidence and practice guidelines

There is sparse evidence on community practice patterns in treating women with breast cancer. This study compared care of women with breast cancer with evidence from meta-analyses and US National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) clinical guidelines. Records of 4395 women with breast cancer were abstracted from practices of 19 surgeon oncologists in six specialty practices in the Philadelphia region during 1995-1999. Patients were followed through December 2001. Low-frequency data were obtained on all patients. All other data were from a random sample of 464 women, minimum of 50 patients per practice. Actual care provided was compared to NCCN guidelines and results of meta-analyses. Fewer than half the women received treatments reflecting meta-analysis results or NCCN guidelines, by disease stage/TNM status. Adherence to either standard varied from 0% for LCIS to 87% for stages IIA or IIB node positive. There are multiple interactive reasons for low adherence to guidelines or meta-analyses results, including insufficient health system supports to clinicians, inadequate organisation and delivery systems and ineffective continuing medical education. The paucity of written information from patient records on physician/patient interactions limits the understanding of treatment decisions.     

Updated clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of mucositis

Considerable progress in research and clinical application has been made since the original guidelines for managing mucositis in cancer patients were published in 2004, and the first active drug for the prevention and treatment of this condition has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration and other regulatory agencies in Europe and Australia. These changes necessitate an updated review of the literature and guidelines. Panel members reviewed the biomedical literature on mucositis published in English between January 2002 and May 2005 and reached a consensus based on the criteria of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Changes in the guidelines included recommendations for the use of palifermin for oral mucositis associated with stem cell transplantation, amifostine for radiation proctitis, and cryotherapy for mucositis associated with high-dose melphalan. Recommendations against specific practices were introduced: Systemic glutamine was not recommended for the prevention of gastrointestinal mucositis, and sucralfate and antimicrobial lozenges were not recommended for radiation-induced oral mucositis. Furthermore, new guidelines suggested that granulocyte-macrophage-colony stimulating factor mouthwashes not be used for oral mucositis prevention in the transplantation population. Advances in mucositis treatment and research have been complemented by an increased rate of publication on mucosal injury in cancer. However, additional and sustained efforts will be required to gain a fuller understanding of the pathobiology, impact on overall patient status, optimal therapeutic strategies, and improved educational programs for health professionals, patients, and caregivers. These efforts are likely to have significant clinical and economic impact on the treatment of cancer patients. Cancer 2007;109:820-31. (c) 2007 American Cancer Society.     

The changing landscape of cancer care – the impact of psychosocial clinical practice guidelines

The International Psycho‐Oncology Society (IPOS) has championed the need for quality care to incorporate attention to the psychosocial concerns of cancer patients. Widespread international endorsement of distress as the ‘6th vital sign’ is a major step towards improving access to psychosocial care and reducing the isolation and stigma experienced by many affected by cancer. However, the integration of psychosocial care into routine clinical practice also requires active multidisciplinary engagement, and demonstration that evidence‐based psychosocial interventions are effective and feasible to deliver in practice. Clinical practice guidelines are valuable in this context. Typically, they provide a synthesis and evaluation of existing evidence, critically appraised by stakeholders and clinicians, presented in a way which allows for translation of research evidence into practice. Such guidelines are also tools for informing and educating those who do not have psychosocial expertise, potentially increasing the status of psycho‐oncology. This paper describes the background to the development of psychosocial clinical practice guidelines in Australia as a means of understanding the factors that can underpin the evolution of attitudes and integration of psychosocial care in oncology, and considers the current status of psychosocial care in Australia and internationally, including challenges for the future. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The impact of socioeconomic status on access to cancer clinical trials

Cancer clinical trials enable the development of novel agents for the potential benefit of cancer patients. Enrolment in a trial offers patients the chance of superior efficacy coupled to the risk of unanticipated toxicity. For trial results to be generalisable, the data need to be collected in patients'' representative of the general cancer population. Socioeconomic deprivation is associated with poor cancer outcomes. In the developed world, the gap between the most and least deprived is widening. This mini-review explores the evidence regarding socioeconomics and access to cancer trials, highlighting the underrepresentation of deprived patients, and exploring reasons for this disparity.     

The impact of FDA and EMEA guidelines on drug development in relation to Phase 0 trials

An increase in the number of identified therapeutic cancer targets achieved through recent biomedical research has resulted in the generation of a large number of molecules that need to be tested further. Current development of (anticancer) drugs is a rather inefficient process that for an average new molecule takes around 10-15 years. It is also a challenging process as it is associated with high costs and a low rate of approval. It is known that less than 10% of new molecular entities entering clinical Phase I testing progress beyond the investigational programme and reach the market; this probability is even lower for anticancer agents. In 2003, the US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) declared the urgent need for new toolkits to improve the critical development path that leads from scientific discovery to the patient. In this scenario, Phase 0 (zero) trials should allow an early evaluation in humans of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of test compounds through administration of sub-pharmacological doses and for a short time period to a low number of humans. Typically, Phase 0 studies have no therapeutic or diagnostic intent. Owing to the low doses administered and the low risk of toxicity, shorter preclinical packages to support these studies are required. Phase 0 trials have been proposed to help in making an early selection of promising candidates for further evaluation in Phase I-III trials, providing a potentially useful instrument for drug discovery, particularly in the field of oncology. Phase 0 studies are expected to reduce costs of drug development, and to limit the preclinical in vitro and in vivo testing and the time period of drug development. However, there are also concerns about the utility and feasibility of Phase 0 studies. In January 2006, guidelines on exploratory investigational new drug studies in humans have been published by the US FDA, and currently a Phase 0 programme is ongoing at the National Cancer Institute to evaluate the impact (feasibility and utility) of Phase 0 studies on drug development. In Europe, a Position Paper produced by the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA) in 2004 raised the possibility of a reduced preclinical safety package to support early microdose clinical studies, and, as announced by a recent Concept Paper on medicinal products published by the committee for medicinal products for human use of the EMEA, EMEA's guidelines on Phase 0 studies are expected shortly. The true impact of Phase 0 studies on the drug development process as well as on the safety needs to be carefully explored.     

The impact of cancer treatment guidelines on actual practice in Italian general hospitals: the case of ovarian cancer

Over the past ten years the Italian National Research Council (C.N.R.) has carried out an educational program based on the preparation and dissemination of guidelines to facilitate delivery in community hospitals of the most up-to-date care to patients with ovarian cancer. In 1988 an assessment was begun to determine (a) whether the guidelines reached the target physician population; (b) whether they were accepted by those they reached, and (c) whether treatment patterns thereafter conformed to the guidelines. Overall results of this evaluation provide no evidence of clinically relevant effects of the program. The guidelines were not widely disseminated: only 44% of responders were aware of them. Moreover, analysis of practice patterns showed serious deficiencies in diagnostic procedure and surgical staging (information on grading and residual tumour was available only in 30% and 45% of cases, respectively, and only 10% of the patients had random biopsies as part of their surgical staging). The only observation supporting some effect of this educational intervention in terms of knowledge modification was of certain therapeutic preferences among those aware of the guidelines. This finding, however, is highly susceptible to confounding by other factors (e.g. physicians' greater expertise, spillover effect of the program) not entirely avoidable in an observational study. We conclude that any assessment of procedures based on dissemination of information must include a careful analysis of the method of dissemination. The availability of clinically applicable information must also be realistically appraised before the guidelines approach can be accepted as the most effective.     

Anal cancer: ESMO-ESSO-ESTRO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis,treatment and follow-up

Squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is a rare cancer but its incidence is increasing throughout the world, and is particularly high in the human immunodeficiency virus positive (HIV+) population. A multidisciplinary approach is mandatory (involving radiation therapists, medical oncologists, surgeons, radiologists and pathologists). SCCA usually spreads in a loco-regional manner within and outside the anal canal. Lymph node involvement at diagnosis is observed in 30%–40% of cases while systemic spread is uncommon with distant extrapelvic metastases recorded in 5%–8% at onset, and rates of metastatic progression after primary treatment between 10 and 20%. SCCA is strongly associated with human papilloma virus (HPV, types 16–18) infection. The primary aim of treatment is to achieve cure with loco-regional control and preservation of anal function, with the best possible quality of life. Treatment dramatically differs from adenocarcinomas of the lower rectum. Combinations of 5FU-based chemoradiation and other cytotoxic agents (mitomycin C) have been established as the standard of care, leading to complete tumour regression in 80%–90% of patients with locoregional failures in the region of 15%. There is an accepted role for surgical salvage. Assessment and treatment should be carried out in specialised centres treating a high number of patients as early as possible in the clinical diagnosis. To date, the limited evidence from only 6 randomised trials [1,2,3,4,5,6,7], the rarity of the cancer, and the different behaviour/natural history depending on the predominant site of origin, (the anal margin, anal canal or above the dentate line) provide scanty direction for any individual oncologist. Here we aim to provide guidelines which can assist medical, radiation and surgical oncologists in the practical management of this unusual cancer.     

The impact of clinical guidelines on surgical management in patients with thyroid cancer

Aims: Thyroid cancer is an uncommon but highly curable disease if treated optimally. The aim of this study was to determine whether clinical guidelines introduced locally at the beginning of 1999 were associated with better surgical outcome, using radioiodine uptake as a surrogate measure of completeness of thyroidectomy.Materials and methods: We reviewed the medical records of all patients with thyroid cancer referred to a cancer centre (n=176) 3 years before and 3 years after the introduction of guidelines. The uptake of radioiodine in the thyroid bed after thyroidectomy and before radioiodine ablation was used to assess the completeness of primary surgical treatment.Results: The number of new cases referred to our centre increased from 80 in the 1996–1998 period to 94 during 1999–2001. This was largely because of an excess of papillary thyroid cancers. Documentation in the medical records of the pathological primary tumour size improved from 47.5% to 80.8% following the introduction of guidelines. A significant reduction in radioiodine uptake in the thyroid bed was observed following the introduction of guidelines (5.03%±6.82 (SD) vs 2.75%±5.10 (SD); P=0.005). Linear regression analysis of clinical variables indicated that the year of surgery was the only significant factor influencing radioiodine uptake in the thyroid bed (P=0.014). Twelve hospitals within the Northern Cancer Network carried out thyroid surgery for thyroid cancer in the pre-guideline era compared with seven hospitals in the post-guideline era. Surgeons who were members of the regional multidisciplinary thyroid cancer team operated on 35% of cases in the 1996–1998 period and 56.4% in the 1999–2001 period (P<0.01).Conclusions: The introduction of clinical guidelines in 1999 was associated with a reduction in the size of thyroid remnant after primary surgical treatment. This was accompanied by fewer hospitals undertaking thyroid surgery and more patients being operated on by surgeons who were members of the thyroid cancer multidisciplinary team.     

美国NCCN 2006年恶性黑色素瘤诊治规范

介绍2006年美国癌症综合网络(National Cancer Comprehensive Network,NCCN)恶性黑色素瘤(MM)诊治规范,以及对原发不同分期及复发MM提出了基于不同级别循证医学证据的诊断和治疗方案。     

美国NCCN 2006年恶性黑色素瘤诊治规范

介绍2006年美国癌症综合网络（National Cancer Comprehensive Network，NCCN）恶性黑色素瘤（MM）诊治规范，以及对原发不同分期及复发MM提出了基于不同级别循证医学证据的诊断和治疗方案。     

SEOM clinical guidelines for using molecular markers in clinical practice

Nowadays, treatment selection for most types of cancers is based on anatomical, histological and clinical criteria, which are defined by the selection criteria used in registration phase III trials. However, different cancers present distinct molecular features, so the current approach results in a lack of specificity of cancer therapy, which is associated with decreased efficacy and unnecessary toxicities and costs. Molecular diagnostics has proved able to predict the efficacy of selected targeted therapies. This allows the selection of specific treatments for different types of cancer, increasing their efficiency. Even though the number of treatments for solid tumours that can be selected based on molecular diagnostic tools is limited, much effort is being put into the identification of new biomarkers. This guideline reviews molecular diagnostic biomarkers that allow selection of specific therapies that have obtained regulatory approval as treatment of solid tumours.