Nabil F Saba1, Joseph K Salama2, Jonathan J Beitler3, Paul M Busse4, Jay S Cooper5, Christopher U Jones6, Shlomo Koyfman7, Harry Quon8, John A Ridge9, Farzan Siddiqui10, Francis Worden11, Min Yao12, Sue S Yom13. 1. Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2. Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 3. Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. 4. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Maimonides Cancer Center, Brooklyn, New York. 6. Radiological Associates of Sacramento, Sacramento, California. 7. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 8. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. 9. Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, American College of Surgeons. 10. Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan. 11. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, American Society of Clinical Oncology. 12. University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio. 13. University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) presents mostly with locally advanced disease and is treated with multimodal therapy; however, consensus is lacking for different clinical scenarios. METHODS: The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. RESULTS: The ACR Expert Panel on Radiation Oncology - Head and Neck Cancer developed consensus recommendations for guiding management of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. CONCLUSION: Multidisciplinary evaluation is essential to guiding the optimal use of surgery, radiation, and systemic therapy in this disease.
BACKGROUND:Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) presents mostly with locally advanced disease and is treated with multimodal therapy; however, consensus is lacking for different clinical scenarios. METHODS: The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. RESULTS: The ACR Expert Panel on Radiation Oncology - Head and Neck Cancer developed consensus recommendations for guiding management of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. CONCLUSION: Multidisciplinary evaluation is essential to guiding the optimal use of surgery, radiation, and systemic therapy in this disease.
Keywords:
Appropriateness criteria for nasopharyngeal cancer; cancer of the nasopharynx; nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC); squamous cell carcinoma of the nasopharynx