Heterogeneity in cancer guidelines: Should we eradicate or tolerate?

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 19, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 2067-2078

  Pentheroudakis, G ^a   Stahel, R ^b   Hansen, H ^c   Pavlidis, N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^c FINSEN LABORATORY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Cancer; Clinical practice; Guidelines; Oncology

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER GRADING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; MEDICAL SOCIETY; ONCOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TUMOR VOLUME;

EID: 56749132011     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdn418     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Committee to Advise the Public Health Service on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Institute at Medicine. Field MJ, Lohr KN (eds): Clinical Practice Guidelines: Directions for a New Program. Washington, DC: National Academy Press 1990.
2. Wollersheim H, Burgens J, Grol R. Clinical guidelines to improve patent care. Neth J Med 2005; 63: 188-192.
3. Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A et al. Clinical guidelines: Potential benefits, limitations, and harm of clinical guidelines. BMJ 1999; 318: 527-530.
4. Smith TJ, Hilnner BE. Ensuring quality cancer care by the use of clinical practice guidelines and critical pathways. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 2886-2897.
5. Ray-Coquard I, Philip T, de Laroche G et al. A controlled "before-after" study: Impact of a clinical guidelines programme and regional cancer network organisation on medical practice. Br J Cancer 2002; 86: 313-321.
6. Shiffman RN, Shekelle P, Overhage M et al. Standardising reporting of clinical practice guidelines: A proposal from the conference on guideline standardisation. Ann Intern Med 2003; 139: 493-498.
7. AGREE Collaboration. Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines the AGREE project. Qual Sat Health Care 2003; 12: 18-23.
8. ADAPTE. Manual for Guideline Adaptation. ADAPTE Group 2007; www.adapte.org (31 May 2008, date last accessed).
9. GRADE Working Group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of. recommendations. BMJ 2004; 328: 1490-1497.
10. SIGN 50. A Guideline Developer's Handbook. Edinburgh: Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network 2004; www.sign.ac,uk/guidelines/ fulltext/50/index.html (31 May 2008, date last accessed).
11. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The Guidelines Manual. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence 2007 www.nice.org.uk.
12. Woolf SH, Di Guiseppi CG, Atkins D, Kamerow DB. Developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines: Lessons learned by the US Preventive Services Task Force. Annu Rev Public Health 1996; 17: 511-538.
13. Pavlidis N. Towards a convenient way to practice medical oncology. Ann Oncol 2007; 18 (Suppl 2): Ii3-ii4.
14. Fervers B, Philip T, Haugh M et al. Clinical practice guidelines in Europe: Time for European co-operation for cancer guidelines. Lancet Oncol 2003; 4: 139-140.
15. Eisinger F, Geller G, Burke W, Holtzman NA. Cultural basis for differences between US and French clinical recommendations for women at increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer. Lancet 1999; 353: 191-200.
16. Fervers B, Burgers JS, Haugh MC et al. Predictors of high quality clinical practice guidelines: Examples in oncology. Int J Qual Health Care 2005; 17: 123-132.
17. Murphy MK, Black NA, Lamping DL et al. Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technology Assessment 1998; 2: 1-88.
18. Browman GP, Levine MN, Mohide EA et al. The practice guidelines development cycle: A conceptual tool for practice guidelines development and implementation. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 402-512.
19. Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH et al. the Methods Work Group, Third US Preventive Services Task Force. Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force. A review of the process. Am J Prev Med 2001; 20 (3 Suppl): 21-35.
20. Ebell MH, Siwek J, Weiss BD et al. Simplifying the language of evidence to improve patient care. Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT): A patient-centered approach to grading evidence in the medical literature. J Fam Pract 2004; 53: 111-120.
21. Choudhry NK, Stelfox HT, Desky AS. Relationships between authors of clinical practice guidelines and the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA 2002; 287: 612-617.
22. American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline Procedures Manual (December 2006) Espert Panel Version 20 Alexandria VA: ASCO www asco om (31 May 2008, date last accessed).
23. Eccles M, Mason J. How to develop cost-conscious guildelines. Health Technol Assess 2001; 5: 1-69.
24. Shekelle PG, Ortiz E, Rhodes S et al. Validity of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality clinical practice guidelines: How quickly do guidelines become outdated? JAMA 2001; 286: 1461-1467.
25. Fervers B, Philip T, Browman GP. Critical appraisal of the MCR of the European Society for Medical Oncology: Challenges for a European framework for the development of clinical practice guidelines. Ann Oncol 2002; 13: 1507-1510.
26. Mother D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet 1999; 354: 1896-1900.
27. Vigna-Taglianti F, Vineis P, Liberati A, Faggiano F. Quality of systematic reviews used in guidelines for oncology practice. Ann Oncol 2006; 17: 691-701.
28. Surbone A. Cultural aspects of communication in cancer care. Support Care Cancer 2008; 16: 235-240. doi: 10.1007/s00520-007-0366-0.
29. Ward E, Halpern M, Schrag N et al. Association of insurance with cancer care utilisation and outcomes. CA Cancer J Clin 2008; 58: 9-31.
30. Norheim OF. High-cost therapy. Ethical principles of allocation of scarce resources. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 1992; 112: 3115-3118.
31. World Health Organisation. Science and technology for health promotion in developing countries. WHO Chron 1979; 33: 399-406.