Literature DB >> 25818651

Discrepancies between ESMO and NCCN breast cancer guidelines: An appraisal.

Flora Zagouri1, Paraskevi Liakou2, Rupert Bartsch3, Fedro A Peccatori4, Alexandra Tsigginou5, Constantine Dimitrakakis6, George C Zografos2, Meletios-Athanassios Dimopoulos1, H A Azim7.   

Abstract

An ever growing number of medical organizations, societies, working groups and governmental agencies issue algorithms i.e. guidelines, of decision making flowcharts in diagnosis and treatment in a variety of diseases. In the field of evidence-based diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer, a large number of guidelines are available both from medical associations and national health departments. Among the most appreciated and utilized comprehensive guides is the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Breast Cancer Guidelines and from the other side of the Atlantic the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines in Breast Cancer. Although there is much concordance between the guidelines from these two organizations, it is intriguing to locate their discrepancies also. The aim of this report is to present a number of different points between ESMO and NCCN in the whole spectrum of breast cancer management, from prevention and diagnosis to treatment and follow up. This systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines using a predefined search strategy and summarizes in detail, the differences between ESMO and NCCN guidelines regarding genetic risk evaluation and screening, surgery, chemotherapy, endocrine treatment, targeted biological agents, radiotherapy, pregnancy and fertility and follow-up.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adjuvant; Breast cancer; ESMO; Guidelines; Metastatic; NCCN

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25818651     DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2015.02.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast        ISSN: 0960-9776            Impact factor:   4.380


  11 in total

1.  P-cadherin: a useful biomarker for axillary-based breast cancer decisions in the clinical practice.

Authors:  André Filipe Vieira; Maria Rita Dionísio; Madalena Gomes; Jorge F Cameselle-Teijeiro; Manuela Lacerda; Isabel Amendoeira; Fernando Schmitt; Joana Paredes
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2017-01-13       Impact factor: 7.842

2.  PD-L1 mediated the differentiation of tumor-infiltrating CD19+ B lymphocytes and T cells in Invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Honggeng Guan; Yang Lan; Yuqiu Wan; Qin Wang; Cheng Wang; Longjiang Xu; Yongjing Chen; Wenting Liu; Xueguang Zhang; Yecheng Li; Yongping Gu; Zemin Wang; Fang Xie
Journal:  Oncoimmunology       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 8.110

3.  European edition of the NCCN clinical practice guidelines: relevance of the translation and adaptation into Spanish.

Authors:  V Guillem; C Camps; A Carrato; E Díaz-Rubio; P Gascón
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2016-09-07       Impact factor: 3.405

Review 4.  Clinical and Biological Aspects of Disseminated Tumor Cells and Dormancy in Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Alexander Ring; Maria Spataro; Andreas Wicki; Nicola Aceto
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2022-06-28

5.  Comparison of plan optimization for single and dual volumetric-modulated arc therapy versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy during post-mastectomy regional irradiation.

Authors:  Li-Rong Zhao; Yi-Bing Zhou; Jian-Guo Sun
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 2.967

6.  Computational prediction of multidisciplinary team decision-making for adjuvant breast cancer drug therapies: a machine learning approach.

Authors:  Frank P Y Lin; Adrian Pokorny; Christina Teng; Rachel Dear; Richard J Epstein
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 4.430

7.  Impact of breast cancer awareness month on detection of breast cancer in a private hospital.

Authors:  Onder Karabay; Mustafa Hasbahceci; Huseyin Kadioglu
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 1.671

8.  Broad consensus on the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer: results from a survey of Spanish medical oncologists.

Authors:  Pedro Sánchez-Rovira; Pilar Zamora; Javier Salvador-Bofill; Serafín Morales; Noelia Martínez-Jáñez; Eduardo Martínez-de-Dueñas; Ana Lluch; José Juan Illarramendi; Patricia Gómez-Pardo; Joaquín Gavilá Gregori; Andrés García-Palomo; Jesús García-Mata; Yolanda Fernández; Sonia Del Barco; Ana de Juan; Eva Ciruelos; José Ignacio Chacón; Lourdes Calvo; Agustí Barnadas; Joan Albanell
Journal:  J Drug Assess       Date:  2019-04-08

9.  Population prevalence of individuals meeting criteria for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer testing.

Authors:  Samantha Greenberg; Saundra S Buys; Sandra L Edwards; Whitney Espinel; Alison Fraser; Amanda Gammon; Brent Hafen; Kimberly A Herget; Wendy Kohlmann; Camille Roundy; Carol Sweeney
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2019-09-18       Impact factor: 4.452

10.  A hierarchical prognostic model for risk stratification in patients with early breast cancer according to 18 F-fludeoxyglucose uptake and clinicopathological parameters.

Authors:  Jongtae Cha; Hyung Seok Park; Dongwoo Kim; Hyun Jeong Kim; Min Jung Kim; Young Up Cho; Mijin Yun
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 4.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.