Literature DB >> 33968700

Systematic appraisal of guidelines for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer.

Xin-Jie Liu1, Ting Yang1, Xin Shi2, Bing-He Xiao1, Li-Ya An1, Su-Yun Zheng2, Yu-Xing Qi1, Da-Li Sun1.   

Abstract

This review aimed at assessing current guidelines' methodological quality systematically for pancreatic cancer's diagnosis and to reveal the heterogeneity of the recommendations among the evaluated guidelines. A systematic search was conducted to find the latest guidelines for pancreatic cancer's diagnosis. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to assess the qualified guidelines' feature. We extracted the main recommendations for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer from the guidelines and performed a heterogeneity evaluation. The highest-level evidence that supported these recommendations was further extracted and analysed. Nine guidelines for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer were included in this study. Four of the guidelines had an overall score of more than 60% and thus are recommended for clinical use. Further analysis of the heterogeneity of the main recommendations for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer in the guidelines revealed that the recommendations vary greatly among the different guidelines. The main reasons for the great differences include the neglect of symptoms and signs, great differences in the items involved in recommendations for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, inconsistent recommendations for some indicators (carbohydrate antigen 19-9 and ERCP), the unreasonable citation of evidence, and the failure of some recommendations to provide evidence supporting the recommendations. For most recommendations, there was a low level of evidence and a dearth of high-quality study evidence. Recommendations for pancreatic cancer diagnosis have been significantly inconsistent over the past five years. The quality of the guidelines for diagnosing pancreatic cancer also varies. The improvement by the guideline creators of the factors that contribute to the differences mentioned above will be a shortcut to update the guidelines for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. 2021 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  AGREE II; Pancreatic cancer; diagnosis; guidelines; systematic review

Year:  2021        PMID: 33968700      PMCID: PMC8102215          DOI: 10.21037/gs-20-676

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gland Surg        ISSN: 2227-684X


  21 in total

Review 1.  Pancreatic cancer: French clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up (SNFGE, FFCD, GERCOR, UNICANCER, SFCD, SFED, SFRO, ACHBT, AFC).

Authors:  Cindy Neuzillet; Sébastien Gaujoux; Nicolas Williet; Jean-Baptiste Bachet; Lucile Bauguion; Laurianne Colson Durand; Thierry Conroy; Laetitia Dahan; Marine Gilabert; Florence Huguet; Lysiane Marthey; Julie Meilleroux; Louis de Mestier; Bertrand Napoléon; Fabienne Portales; Antonio Sa Cunha; Lilian Schwarz; Julien Taieb; Benoist Chibaudel; Olivier Bouché; Pascal Hammel
Journal:  Dig Liver Dis       Date:  2018-08-18       Impact factor: 4.088

2.  Cancer antigens 19-9 and 125 in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic mass lesions.

Authors:  Grzegorz Cwik; Grzegorz Wallner; Tomasz Skoczylas; Aleksander Ciechanski; Krzysztof Zinkiewicz
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2006-10

3.  Diagnosis and patient management of intraductal papillary-mucinous tumor of the pancreas by using peroral pancreatoscopy and intraductal ultrasonography.

Authors:  Taro Hara; Taketo Yamaguchi; Takeshi Ishihara; Toshio Tsuyuguchi; Fukuo Kondo; Kazuki Kato; Takehide Asano; Hiromitsu Saisho
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 4.  Quality assessment of cancer cachexia clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  Wang-Qin Shen; Liang Yao; Xiao-Qin Wang; Yan Hu; Zhao-Xiang Bian
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rev       Date:  2018-07-18       Impact factor: 12.111

5.  EUS-FNA is superior to ERCP-based tissue sampling in suspected malignant biliary obstruction: results of a prospective, single-blind, comparative study.

Authors:  Frank Weilert; Yasser M Bhat; Kenneth F Binmoeller; Steve Kane; Ian M Jaffee; Richard E Shaw; Rees Cameron; Yusuke Hashimoto; Janak N Shah
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Masato Matsuyama; Hiroshi Ishii; Kensuke Kuraoka; Seigo Yukisawa; Akiyoshi Kasuga; Masato Ozaka; Sho Suzuki; Kouichi Takano; Yuko Sugiyama; Takao Itoi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Cancer statistics, 2016.

Authors:  Rebecca L Siegel; Kimberly D Miller; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 508.702

Review 8.  TTD consensus document on the diagnosis and management of exocrine pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  M Benavides; A Abad; I Ales; A Carrato; E Díaz Rubio; J Gallego; J García-Foncillas; C Grávalos; B Laquente; C Pericay; F Rivera; J Tabernero; E Aranda
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2014-04-12       Impact factor: 3.405

9.  Risk of malignancy in resected cystic tumors of the pancreas < or =3 cm in size: is it safe to observe asymptomatic patients? A multi-institutional report.

Authors:  C J Lee; J Scheiman; M A Anderson; O J Hines; H A Reber; J Farrell; M L Kochman; P J Foley; J Drebin; Y S Oh; G Ginsberg; N Ahmad; N B Merchant; J Isbell; A A Parikh; J B Stokes; T Bauer; R B Adams; D M Simeone
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2007-11-27       Impact factor: 3.452

10.  Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation.

Authors:  Larissa Shamseer; David Moher; Mike Clarke; Davina Ghersi; Alessandro Liberati; Mark Petticrew; Paul Shekelle; Lesley A Stewart
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2015-01-02
View more
  1 in total

1.  Levels of Evidence Supporting United States Guidelines in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Treatment.

Authors:  Anna Pellat; Isabelle Boutron; Romain Coriat; Philippe Ravaud
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-22       Impact factor: 6.575

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.