Assessing neoadjuvant therapy recommendations in 19 national and international guidelines for rectal cancer.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Techniques in Coloproctology Pub Date : 2024-08-05 DOI:10.1007/s10151-024-02969-5
Pawel Mroczkowski, Selim Atay, Richard Viebahn
{"title":"Assessing neoadjuvant therapy recommendations in 19 national and international guidelines for rectal cancer.","authors":"Pawel Mroczkowski, Selim Atay, Richard Viebahn","doi":"10.1007/s10151-024-02969-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> Treatment guidelines belong to the most authoritative sources of evidence-based medicine and are widely implemented by health-care providers. Rectal cancer with an annual incidence of over 730,000 new cases and nearly 340,000 deaths worldwide, remains a significant therapeutic challenge. The total mesorectal excision (TME) leads to a dramatic improvement of local control. The addition of neoadjuvant treatment has been proposed to offer further advancement. However, this addition results in significant functional impairment and a decline in the quality of life.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review critically assesses whether the recommendation for neoadjuvant treatment in current international guidelines is substantiated. A comprehensive search was conducted in July 2022 in PubMed resulting in 988 papers published in English between 2012 and 2022. After exclusions and proofs 19 documents remained for further analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 19 guidelines considered in this review, 11 do not recommend upfront surgery, and 12 do not address the issue of functional impairment following multimodal treatment. The recommendation for neoadjuvant therapy relies on outdated references, lacking differentiated strategies based on current utilisation of MRI staging; numerous guidelines recommend neoadjuvant treatment also to subgroups of patients, who may not need this therapy. Also statements regarding conflicts of interest are often not presented.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>An immediate and imperative step is warranted to align the recommendations with the latest available evidence, thereby affording rectal cancer patients a commensurate standard of care. A meticulous assessment of the guideline formulation process has the potential to avert heterogeneity in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"28 1","pages":"94"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11300497/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-024-02969-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background:  Treatment guidelines belong to the most authoritative sources of evidence-based medicine and are widely implemented by health-care providers. Rectal cancer with an annual incidence of over 730,000 new cases and nearly 340,000 deaths worldwide, remains a significant therapeutic challenge. The total mesorectal excision (TME) leads to a dramatic improvement of local control. The addition of neoadjuvant treatment has been proposed to offer further advancement. However, this addition results in significant functional impairment and a decline in the quality of life.

Methods: This review critically assesses whether the recommendation for neoadjuvant treatment in current international guidelines is substantiated. A comprehensive search was conducted in July 2022 in PubMed resulting in 988 papers published in English between 2012 and 2022. After exclusions and proofs 19 documents remained for further analysis.

Results: Of the 19 guidelines considered in this review, 11 do not recommend upfront surgery, and 12 do not address the issue of functional impairment following multimodal treatment. The recommendation for neoadjuvant therapy relies on outdated references, lacking differentiated strategies based on current utilisation of MRI staging; numerous guidelines recommend neoadjuvant treatment also to subgroups of patients, who may not need this therapy. Also statements regarding conflicts of interest are often not presented.

Conclusions: An immediate and imperative step is warranted to align the recommendations with the latest available evidence, thereby affording rectal cancer patients a commensurate standard of care. A meticulous assessment of the guideline formulation process has the potential to avert heterogeneity in the future.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估19个国家和国际直肠癌指南中的新辅助治疗建议。
背景: 治疗指南是循证医学最权威的来源,被医疗服务提供者广泛采用。直肠癌在全球每年新发病例超过 730,000 例,死亡病例近 340,000 例,仍然是一项重大的治疗挑战。全直肠系膜切除术(TME)可显著提高局部控制率。有人建议增加新辅助治疗,以进一步提高疗效。然而,增加新辅助治疗会导致严重的功能障碍和生活质量下降:本综述严格评估了当前国际指南中关于新辅助治疗的建议是否成立。2022年7月,我们在PubMed上进行了一次全面检索,共检索到2012年至2022年间发表的988篇英文论文。经过排除和校对,剩下19篇文献供进一步分析:在本综述所考虑的 19 份指南中,11 份不建议进行前期手术,12 份未涉及多模式治疗后的功能障碍问题。关于新辅助治疗的建议依赖于过时的参考文献,缺乏基于当前磁共振成像分期应用的差异化策略;许多指南还建议对亚组患者进行新辅助治疗,而这些患者可能并不需要这种治疗。此外,有关利益冲突的声明也往往没有提出:结论:应立即采取必要措施,使指南建议与最新证据保持一致,从而为直肠癌患者提供相应的治疗标准。对指南制定过程的细致评估有可能在未来避免异质性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Techniques in Coloproctology
Techniques in Coloproctology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Techniques in Coloproctology is an international journal fully devoted to diagnostic and operative procedures carried out in the management of colorectal diseases. Imaging, clinical physiology, laparoscopy, open abdominal surgery and proctoperineology are the main topics covered by the journal. Reviews, original articles, technical notes and short communications with many detailed illustrations render this publication indispensable for coloproctologists and related specialists. Both surgeons and gastroenterologists are represented on the distinguished Editorial Board, together with pathologists, radiologists and basic scientists from all over the world. The journal is strongly recommended to those who wish to be updated on recent developments in the field, and improve the standards of their work. Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication no. 86-23 revised 1985) were followed as were applicable national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals). The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. Authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill such requirements.
期刊最新文献
Laparoscopic left colectomy with complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation (video). Predictors of perioperative morbidity in elderly patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection. Combined versus conventional approaches in laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy: a retrospective analysis. Best clinical practice recommendations for the management of symptomatic hemorrhoids via laser hemorrhoidoplasty: the LHP recommendations. Preoperative anorectal manometry as a predictor of function after ileal pouch anal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1