美国皮肤鳞状细胞癌和基底细胞癌治疗指南对比分析

IF 1.2 Q3 DERMATOLOGY Journal of Skin Cancer Pub Date : 2024-02-09 DOI:10.1155/2024/3859066
Amit Mittal, Bharat B. Mittal
{"title":"美国皮肤鳞状细胞癌和基底细胞癌治疗指南对比分析","authors":"Amit Mittal, Bharat B. Mittal","doi":"10.1155/2024/3859066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background This study presents a comparative analysis of recently published guidelines to manage cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) and cutaneous basal cell carcinoma (cBCC) within the United States (US). Methods A PubMed database search was performed for the time period between June 1, 2016, and December 1, 2022. A comprehensive comparison was performed in the following clinical interest areas: staging and risk stratification, management of primary tumor and regional nodes with curative intent, and palliative treatment. Results Guidelines from 3 organizations were analyzed: the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO). The guidelines used different methodologies to grade evidence, making comparison difficult. There was agreement that surgery is the preferred treatment for curative cBCC and cSCC. For patients ineligible for surgery, there was a consensus to recommend definitive radiation. AAD and NCCN recommended consideration of other topical modalities in selected low-risk cBCC. Postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) was uniformly recommended in patients with positive margins that could not be cleared with surgery and in patients with nerve invasion. The definition and extent of nerve invasion varied. All guidelines recommended surgery as the primary treatment in patients with lymph node metastases in a curative setting. The criteria used for PORT varied; NCCN and ASTRO used lymph node size, number of nodes, and extracapsular extension for recommending PORT. Both NCCN and ASTRO recommend consideration of systemic treatment along with PORT in patients with extracapsular extension. Conclusion: US guidelines provide contemporary and complementary information on the management of cBCC and cSCC. There are opportunities for research, particularly in the areas of staging, indications for adjuvant treatment in curative settings, extent of nerve invasion and prognosis, and the role of systemic treatments in curative and palliative settings.","PeriodicalId":17172,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Skin Cancer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of US Guidelines for the Management of Cutaneous Squamous Cell and Basal Cell Carcinoma\",\"authors\":\"Amit Mittal, Bharat B. Mittal\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2024/3859066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background This study presents a comparative analysis of recently published guidelines to manage cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) and cutaneous basal cell carcinoma (cBCC) within the United States (US). Methods A PubMed database search was performed for the time period between June 1, 2016, and December 1, 2022. A comprehensive comparison was performed in the following clinical interest areas: staging and risk stratification, management of primary tumor and regional nodes with curative intent, and palliative treatment. Results Guidelines from 3 organizations were analyzed: the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO). The guidelines used different methodologies to grade evidence, making comparison difficult. There was agreement that surgery is the preferred treatment for curative cBCC and cSCC. For patients ineligible for surgery, there was a consensus to recommend definitive radiation. AAD and NCCN recommended consideration of other topical modalities in selected low-risk cBCC. Postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) was uniformly recommended in patients with positive margins that could not be cleared with surgery and in patients with nerve invasion. The definition and extent of nerve invasion varied. All guidelines recommended surgery as the primary treatment in patients with lymph node metastases in a curative setting. The criteria used for PORT varied; NCCN and ASTRO used lymph node size, number of nodes, and extracapsular extension for recommending PORT. Both NCCN and ASTRO recommend consideration of systemic treatment along with PORT in patients with extracapsular extension. Conclusion: US guidelines provide contemporary and complementary information on the management of cBCC and cSCC. There are opportunities for research, particularly in the areas of staging, indications for adjuvant treatment in curative settings, extent of nerve invasion and prognosis, and the role of systemic treatments in curative and palliative settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17172,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Skin Cancer\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Skin Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/3859066\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Skin Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/3859066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 本研究对美国最近发布的皮肤鳞状细胞癌(cSCC)和皮肤基底细胞癌(cBCC)管理指南进行了比较分析。方法 对2016年6月1日至2022年12月1日期间的PubMed数据库进行了检索。对以下临床领域进行了全面比较:分期和风险分层、原发肿瘤和区域结节的根治性治疗以及姑息治疗。结果 分析了 3 个组织的指南:美国皮肤病学会 (AAD)、美国国立综合癌症网络 (NCCN) 和美国放射肿瘤学会 (ASTRO)。这些指南采用不同的方法对证据进行分级,因此很难进行比较。大家一致认为,手术是治愈性 cBCC 和 cSCC 的首选治疗方法。对于不符合手术条件的患者,一致建议采用明确的放射治疗。AAD 和 NCCN 建议在选定的低风险 cBCC 患者中考虑其他局部治疗方式。对于手术无法清除阳性边缘的患者和有神经侵犯的患者,一致推荐术后放疗(PORT)。神经侵犯的定义和程度各不相同。所有指南都建议将手术作为治愈性淋巴结转移患者的主要治疗方法。用于 PORT 的标准各不相同;NCCN 和 ASTRO 采用淋巴结大小、数目和囊外扩展作为推荐 PORT 的标准。NCCN 和 ASTRO 都建议有囊外扩展的患者考虑在进行 PORT 的同时进行全身治疗。结论:美国指南为 cBCC 和 cSCC 的治疗提供了最新的补充信息。在分期、治愈性辅助治疗的适应症、神经侵犯的程度和预后以及全身治疗在治愈性和姑息性治疗中的作用等方面存在研究机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparative Analysis of US Guidelines for the Management of Cutaneous Squamous Cell and Basal Cell Carcinoma
Background This study presents a comparative analysis of recently published guidelines to manage cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) and cutaneous basal cell carcinoma (cBCC) within the United States (US). Methods A PubMed database search was performed for the time period between June 1, 2016, and December 1, 2022. A comprehensive comparison was performed in the following clinical interest areas: staging and risk stratification, management of primary tumor and regional nodes with curative intent, and palliative treatment. Results Guidelines from 3 organizations were analyzed: the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO). The guidelines used different methodologies to grade evidence, making comparison difficult. There was agreement that surgery is the preferred treatment for curative cBCC and cSCC. For patients ineligible for surgery, there was a consensus to recommend definitive radiation. AAD and NCCN recommended consideration of other topical modalities in selected low-risk cBCC. Postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) was uniformly recommended in patients with positive margins that could not be cleared with surgery and in patients with nerve invasion. The definition and extent of nerve invasion varied. All guidelines recommended surgery as the primary treatment in patients with lymph node metastases in a curative setting. The criteria used for PORT varied; NCCN and ASTRO used lymph node size, number of nodes, and extracapsular extension for recommending PORT. Both NCCN and ASTRO recommend consideration of systemic treatment along with PORT in patients with extracapsular extension. Conclusion: US guidelines provide contemporary and complementary information on the management of cBCC and cSCC. There are opportunities for research, particularly in the areas of staging, indications for adjuvant treatment in curative settings, extent of nerve invasion and prognosis, and the role of systemic treatments in curative and palliative settings.
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
Journal of Skin Cancer
Journal of Skin Cancer DERMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
18.20%
发文量
12
审稿时长
21 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Skin Cancer is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes clinical and translational research on the detection, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of skin malignancies. The journal encourages the submission of original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies related to pathology, prognostic indicators and biomarkers, novel therapies, as well as drug sensitivity and resistance.
期刊最新文献
Analysis of the Stockholm Public Health Cohort: Exploring How Ultraviolet Radiation and Other Factors Associate with Skin Cancer. Beyond the Scalpel: Advancing Strategic Approaches and Targeted Therapies in Nonexcisable Melanomas. Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice toward Skin Cancer among Patients of Dermatology Clinics and Medical Students/General Practitioners. Comparative Analysis of US Guidelines for the Management of Cutaneous Squamous Cell and Basal Cell Carcinoma Comparative Analysis of US Guidelines for the Management of Cutaneous Squamous Cell and Basal Cell Carcinoma
×
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