Multidisciplinary Decision-Making-ITAlian Consensus After Two Years of Real Practice on the Management of Severe Uncontrolled CRSwNP by Biologics (ITACA Study).
Eugenio De Corso, Carlotta Pipolo, Marco Caminati, Elena Cantone, Veronica Seccia, Lorenzo Cecchi, Eustachio Nettis, Massimiliano Garzaro, Giancarlo Ottaviano, Matteo Gelardi, Carlo Cavaliere, Enrico Heffler, Fabio Pagella, Ernesto Pasquini, Matteo Trimarchi, Stefania Gallo, Ignazio La Mantia, Sara Torretta, Davide Mattavelli, Cristiano Caruso, Andrea Matucci, Alessandra Vultaggio, Gianluca Bellocchi, Matteo Alicandri Ciufelli, Passali Fm, Gianenrico Senna
{"title":"Multidisciplinary Decision-Making-ITAlian Consensus After Two Years of Real Practice on the Management of Severe Uncontrolled CRSwNP by Biologics (ITACA Study).","authors":"Eugenio De Corso, Carlotta Pipolo, Marco Caminati, Elena Cantone, Veronica Seccia, Lorenzo Cecchi, Eustachio Nettis, Massimiliano Garzaro, Giancarlo Ottaviano, Matteo Gelardi, Carlo Cavaliere, Enrico Heffler, Fabio Pagella, Ernesto Pasquini, Matteo Trimarchi, Stefania Gallo, Ignazio La Mantia, Sara Torretta, Davide Mattavelli, Cristiano Caruso, Andrea Matucci, Alessandra Vultaggio, Gianluca Bellocchi, Matteo Alicandri Ciufelli, Passali Fm, Gianenrico Senna","doi":"10.1007/s11882-024-01135-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>We aimed to reach an Italian multidisciplinary consensus on some crucial aspects of treatment decision making in CRSwNP, following 2 years of clinical experience in order to support specialists in the management of CRSwNP in clinical practice. We addressed issues relating to therapeutic decision-making and shared criteria for the treatment choice, as well as appropriate timing and criteria for evaluating treatment response, and highlighted the need for repeated multidisciplinary assessments.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>A national survey has been conducted recently to understand how rhinology practice has changed in Italy with the advent of biologics and how this affects patients with uncontrolled, severe CRSwNP. Despite the many published consensus documents, practical recommendations, and protocols on the use of biologics in CRSwNP, heterogenous behaviors in practice are still observed mainly conditioned by the novelty of the topic. The consensus procedure followed a modified Delphi approach. The scientific board included 18 otorhinolaryngologists and 8 allergists, who selected the 4 main topics to be addressed and developed overall 20 statements. Consensus on these statements was sought by a larger group of 48 additional experts, through two rounds of voting, the first web-based, the second in presence with discussion and possible refinement of the statements. The statements reaching an average score ≥ 7 at the second voting round were approved. Five statements were proposed for each of the following topics: baseline evaluation of patients eligible for biologic therapy; choice between different therapeutic options; assessment of the response to biologic treatment; multidisciplinary management. At the first voting round, 19 out of the 20 statements reached a mean score ≥ 7. Following the discussion and a few consequent amendments, at the second round of voting all the 20 statements were approved.</p>","PeriodicalId":55198,"journal":{"name":"Current Allergy and Asthma Reports","volume":" ","pages":"143-154"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Allergy and Asthma Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11882-024-01135-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose of review: We aimed to reach an Italian multidisciplinary consensus on some crucial aspects of treatment decision making in CRSwNP, following 2 years of clinical experience in order to support specialists in the management of CRSwNP in clinical practice. We addressed issues relating to therapeutic decision-making and shared criteria for the treatment choice, as well as appropriate timing and criteria for evaluating treatment response, and highlighted the need for repeated multidisciplinary assessments.
Recent findings: A national survey has been conducted recently to understand how rhinology practice has changed in Italy with the advent of biologics and how this affects patients with uncontrolled, severe CRSwNP. Despite the many published consensus documents, practical recommendations, and protocols on the use of biologics in CRSwNP, heterogenous behaviors in practice are still observed mainly conditioned by the novelty of the topic. The consensus procedure followed a modified Delphi approach. The scientific board included 18 otorhinolaryngologists and 8 allergists, who selected the 4 main topics to be addressed and developed overall 20 statements. Consensus on these statements was sought by a larger group of 48 additional experts, through two rounds of voting, the first web-based, the second in presence with discussion and possible refinement of the statements. The statements reaching an average score ≥ 7 at the second voting round were approved. Five statements were proposed for each of the following topics: baseline evaluation of patients eligible for biologic therapy; choice between different therapeutic options; assessment of the response to biologic treatment; multidisciplinary management. At the first voting round, 19 out of the 20 statements reached a mean score ≥ 7. Following the discussion and a few consequent amendments, at the second round of voting all the 20 statements were approved.
期刊介绍:
The aim of Current Allergy and Asthma Reports is to systematically provide the views of highly selected experts on current advances in the fields of allergy and asthma and highlight the most important papers recently published. All reviews are intended to facilitate the understanding of new advances in science for better diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of allergy and asthma.
We accomplish this aim by appointing international experts in major subject areas across the discipline to review select topics emphasizing recent developments and highlighting important new papers and emerging concepts. We also provide commentaries from well-known figures in the field, and an Editorial Board of internationally diverse members suggests topics of special interest to their country/region and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research. Over a one- to two-year period, readers are updated on all the major advances in allergy and asthma.