ABSTRACT
Since we published the "IV Brazilian Consensus on Rhinitis", in2017, several advances have been achieved and have enabled a further understanding of the different aspects of "Rhinitis". This new guideline, developed jointly by ASBAI, SBP and SBORL, represents a relevant milestone in the updated and integrated management of the different forms of the disease, and it aims to unify evidence-based approaches to improve the diagnosis and treatment of this common and often underestimated condition. The document covers a wide range of topics, including clear definitions of the different phenotypes and endotypes of rhinitis, risk factors, updated diagnostic criteria, and recommended methods for clinical and laboratory investigation. We stress the importance of detailed clinical history and objective assessment, as well as tools for control and assessing severity tools an accurate diagnostic approach to the disease. Regarding treatment, it emphasizes the treatment customization, considering the severity of symptoms, the presence of comorbidities and the impact on the patient's quality of life. We discuss different drug treatment, in addition to non-pharmacological measures, such as environmental control and specific immunotherapy; and the possible role of immunobiological agents. Furthermore, the consensus addresses issues related to patient education, prevention and management of special situations, such as rhinitis in children, in pregnant women and in the elderly. In short, the "V Brazilian Consensus on Rhinitis" represents a comprehensive and updated guide for healthcare professionals involved in the diagnosis and management of rhinitis, aiming to improve patients' quality of life through an integrated and evidence-based approach.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Current treatment for chronic kidney disease (CKD) focuses on improving manifestations and delaying progression. Nutritional approaches play a crucial role in CKD management, and various supplements have become available. Ketoanalogues of amino acids (KAs), calcium citrate, and inulin have been proposed as suitable supplements, yet their widespread use has been limited due to insufficient evidence. This study aimed to generate general guidance statements on the appropriateness of these supplements through a RAND/UCLA consensus process. METHODS: A RAND/UCLA consensus panel was convened to evaluate the appropriateness of these supplements in different clinical scenarios. In this study, we present a subgroup analysis focusing on a panel of eleven clinical nephrologists from among the experts. RESULTS: Supplementation of low-protein diets (LPDs) and very low-protein diets (VLPDs) with KA was considered appropriate to reduce manifestations and delay CKD outcomes, supplementation with calcium citrate is considered appropriate to reduce CKD manifestations, and supplementation with inulin is considered appropriate to delay CKD outcomes and manage comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a combination of clinical experience and scientific evidence, the panel reached a consensus that KA supplementation of LPD and VLPD, calcium citrate, and inulin are appropriate in patients with CKD across various scenarios.
Subject(s)
Amino Acids , Calcium Citrate , Consensus , Diet, Protein-Restricted , Dietary Supplements , Inulin , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/diet therapy , Humans , Inulin/administration & dosage , Amino Acids/administration & dosage , Diet, Protein-Restricted/methods , Calcium Citrate/administration & dosage , Calcium Citrate/therapeutic useABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A recent Lancet commission called for more research on palliative care in low- and middle-income (LMIC) countries such as Colombia. A research priority setting approach has been recommended by The Global Forum for Health Research to address the huge gap in research output between LMIC and high-income countries, with influential health service bodies recommending the active involvement of non-research expert stakeholders in establishing research priorities to address service user needs. METHOD: Priority setting partnership (PSP) following the four stages of the James Lind Alliance methodology; establishing the partnership, identifying evidence uncertainties, refining questions and uncertainties, and prioritization. Data from MS forms were analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 33 stakeholders attended an online PSP workshop and completed the Mentimeter exercise in Microsoft Teams. A total of 48 attended the subsequent in person prioritisation exercise in urban Bogota (n = 22) and rural Popayan (n = 25). The stakeholders were a diverse group of health professionals (physicians, medical students, nurses, dentists, physiotherapists, nutritionist, occupational and speech therapists), financial and administrative staff and patients with life-limiting illness and caregivers. Top research priorities included patient and caregiver needs, service provider education and training, and better integration of palliative care with cancer and non-cancer services. The key challenges included a lack of interest in palliative care research, along with funding, time and resource constraints. Key solutions included collaboration across disciplines and settings, highlighting benefits of palliative research to help secure adequate resources, and multicentre, mixed method research, with patient involvement from the research development stage. CONCLUSION: The findings of this PSP should be disseminated among palliative care associations worldwide to inform international multicentre studies, and among governmental and nongovernmental organisations that promote research in Colombia. A focus on patient and family caregiver palliative care needs in Colombia should be prioritised.
Subject(s)
Palliative Care , Humans , Palliative Care/methods , Palliative Care/standards , Palliative Care/trends , Colombia , Research/trends , Health Priorities/trendsABSTRACT
Introduction and objective: The approach to patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has evolved over time with the advent of new therapies and multimodal strategies. The objective of this consensus of experts is to generate national recommendations for the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic high-grade OEC, defined as stages III and IV of the "The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification at the time of diagnosis to base on the literature review that included international evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Material and methods: Eleven panelists (oncologists and gynecological oncologists) answered 8 questions about the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic ovarian epithelial carcinoma. The panelists were chosen for their academic profile and influence in national health institutions. Guidelines from the "ESMO Standardized Operating Procedures Consensus Conference" were used to develop the consensus. It was agreed that the level of agreement to accept a recommendation should be ≥ 80%. The document was peer reviewed. Results: Eight general recommendations are made, which are presented into five domains. Some of these recommendations are subdivided into specific recommendations. Initial treatment Recommendation 1.1 Complete primary cytoreduction (PCS) surgery is suggested as the initial therapy of choice for patients with high-grade or metastatic EOC, which should ideally be carried out in centers with experience, followed by adjuvant therapy. 1.2 Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreduction surgery (ICS) is suggested in those who are unlikely to achieve a complete cytoreduction in PCS either due to unresectable metastatic disease or who present unresectability criteria (imaging, laparoscopic and/or by laparotomy) and that have been defined by a gynecological oncologist and patients with poor functional status and comorbidities according to the criteria of the multidisciplinary team (clinical oncology, gynecological oncology, radiology, etc.). Recommendation 2. In patients with high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), in stage III locally advanced or metastatic, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and achieved a complete or partial response (cytoreduction with tumor residue < 2.5 mm), the use of Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) could be considered as an alternative to standard platinum-based adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy during interval cytoreductive surgery, after discussion in a multidisciplinary tumor board, at a center experienced in treating this type of patients. Use of genetic testing. Recommendation 3. It is suggested at the time of diagnosis to offer molecular genetic testing to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC regardless of family history. Recommendation 4. It is suggested to offer genetic counseling, by qualified personnel, to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC who are ordered genetic testing. Recommendation 5. It is suggested that all patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade EOC undergo a germ panel that includes the Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes 1/2 genes (BRCA 1/2) and the other susceptibility genes according to with institutional protocols and the availability of genetic testing panels; If it is negative, then somatic testing should be performed that includes the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status, regardless of family history. Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation 6. 6.1. It is suggested that all patients with advanced stage III/IV EOC, with PSC of (0-2), got adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy as standard treatment within six weeks after Prc. It is suggested paclitaxel/carboplatin. Recommendation 6.2. It is suggested to use standard chemotherapy base on platinum plus Bevacizumab as adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with high-risk disease (EOC stage IV or stage III with suboptimal tumor cytoreduction), following by bevacizumab as maintenance. The use of bevacizumab as maintenance therapy is not recommended if bevacizumab was not included in the first line of treatment. We suggested the dose used in GOG-0218 and ICON7 trials. Recommendation 6.3 It is suggested combined intravenous/intraperitoneal chemotherapy only for selected patients, with optimal cytoreduction (residual lesions < 1 cm), especially those without residual disease (R0) and who are evaluated in a multidisciplinary meeting. It is not considered standard treatment. Recommendation 6.4. 6.4.1 It is suggested to use Poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors such as olaparib or niraparib as maintenance after receiving first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinumbased chemotherapy and obtained complete response/partial response (CR/PR), 6.4.2 It is suggested to use olaparib alone or in combination with bevacizumab or niraparib in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.3 It is suggested to use niraparibin patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.4 It is suggested to use bevacizumab or olaparib plus bevacizumab in patients with EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown (HRD positive) who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and obtained CR/PR. Treatment of disease relapse Recommendation 7. Secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy is suggested for selected patients with high-grade advanced EOC in first relapse, platinum-sensitive (platinum-free interval ≥ 6 months), positive "Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie AGO" score or "I-model" positive (< 4.7) with a potential resection to R0 in centers with access to optimal surgical and postoperative support. Note: Platinum-free interval and AGO score have only been developed as positive predictors of complete resection and not to exclude patients from surgery. Recommendation 8. 8.1 For patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC platinum-sensitive, the following is suggested: Platinum-based combination chemotherapy: carboplatin/liposomal doxorubicin or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel or carboplatin/docetaxel or carboplatin/gemcitabine) for six cycles. If combination therapy is not tolerated, give carboplatin or cisplatin alone. Combination chemotherapy (carboplatin/gemcitabine or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/doxorubicin liposomal) plus bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab as maintenance (until progression or toxicity). Recommendation 8.2 For patients with relapsed advanced high-grade EOC platinum-resistant, it is suggested: Sequential treatment with chemotherapy, preferably with a non-platinum single agent (weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or docetaxel or oral etoposide or gemcitabine or trabectidine or, topotecan). Weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan could be administrate with or without bevacizumab. Other agents are considered potentially active (capecitabine, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, pemetrexed, vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide) could be recommended for later lines. Hormone receptor-positive patients who do not tolerate or have no response to cytotoxic regimens may receive hormone therapy with tamoxifen or other agents, including aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and letrozole) or leuprolide acetate, or megestrol acetate. Patients with a performance score ≥ 3 should be considered only for best supportive care. Recommendation 8.3 Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors: It is suggested in patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 (positive, negative or unknown) who have received two or more lines of platinum-based chemotherapy and have achieved CR/PR, use olaparib, niraparib or rucaparib. Niraparib could be useful in BRCA 1/2 +/-/unknown patients, as rucaparib, however, the latter does not yet have approval from the regulatory office in Colombia. Conclusions: It is expected that the recommendations issued in this consensus will contribute to improving clinical care, oncological impact, and quality of life of these women.
Introducción y objetivo: el abordaje de pacientes con cáncer epitelial de ovario (CEO) de alto grado avanzado o metastásico ha ido evolucionando a través del tiempo con el advenimiento de nuevas terapias y estrategias multimodales. El objetivo de este consenso de expertos es generar recomendaciones nacionales para el perfilamiento y manejo del CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico, definido como estadios III y IV de la clasificación de la Federación Internacional de Ginecología y Obstetricia (FIGO) al momento del diagnóstico, a partir de la revisión de la literatura que incluyó guías de práctica clínica (GPC) internacionales basadas en la evidencia. Materiales y métodos: once panelistas (oncólogos y ginecólogos oncólogos) respondieron ocho preguntas sobre el perfilamiento y manejo del carcinoma epitelial de ovario avanzado o metastásico. Los panelistas fueron escogidos por su perfil académico e influencia en instituciones de salud nacionales. Para el desarrollo del consenso se utilizaron los lineamientos de la "Conferencia de consenso de procedimientos operativos estandarizados de ESMO". Se definió que el nivel de acuerdo para aceptar una recomendación debía ser ≥ 80%. El documento fue revisado por pares. Resultados: Se hacen 8 recomendaciones generales, presentadas en cinco dominios; algunas de ellas se subdividen en recomendaciones específicas. Tratamiento inicial Recomendación 1 1.1. Como terapia inicial de elección para pacientes con CEO de alto grado o metastásico se sugiere la cirugía de citorreducción primaria (Cpr) completa que, idealmente, debe realizarse en centros con experiencia, seguida de terapia adyuvante. 1.2. Se sugiere quimioterapia neoadyuvante seguida de cirugía de citorreducción de intervalo (Cint) en quienes sea improbable alcanzar una citorreducción completa en la Cpr, bien sea por enfermedad metastásica no resecable o que presenten criterios de irresecabilidad (imagenológicos, laparoscópicos o por laparotomía) que hayan sido definidos por un ginecólogo oncólogo. También en pacientes con un pobre estado funcional y comorbilidades de acuerdo con el criterio del equipo multidisciplinario (oncología clínica, ginecología oncológica, radiología, etc.). Recomendación 2. En pacientes con CEO de alto grado, en estadio III localmente avanzado o metastásico, que recibieron quimioterapia neoadyuvante y alcanzaron respuesta completa o parcial (citorreducción con residuo tumoral < 2,5 mm), se podría evaluar el uso de la quimioterapia intraperitoneal hipertérmica (Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy - HIPEC) como alternativa a la quimioterapia IV adyuvante estándar basada en platinos durante la Cint, previa discusión en junta multidisciplinaria, en un centro de experiencia en este tipo de pacientes. Uso de pruebas genéticas Recomendación 3. Al momento del diagnóstico, se sugiere ofrecer testeo molecular genético a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico, independientemente de la historia familiar. Recomendación 4. Se sugiere ofrecer asesoramiento genético, por parte de personal calificado, a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico a quien se le ordene un testeo genético. Recomendación 5. Se sugiere que a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico se le realice panel germinal que incluya los genes de susceptibilidad al cáncer de mama 1/2 (BRCA 1/2) y los otros genes de susceptibilidad de acuerdo con los protocolos institucionales y la disponibilidad de paneles de testeo genético; si es negativo entonces se debería realizar testeo somático que incluya el estatus de deficiencia de la recombinación homóloga (homologous recombination deficiency - HRD), independientemente de la historia familiar. Terapia adyuvante Recomendación 6 6.1. Se sugiere que a toda paciente con CEO estadios III/IV avanzado o metastásico, con estatus de desempeño (performance score care - PSC) de 0-2 se le administre como tratamiento estándar quimioterapia intravenosa (IV) adyuvante dentro de las seis semanas posteriores a la Cpr. Se sugiere administrar paclitaxel/carboplatino. 6.2. Se sugiere utilizar quimioterapia estándar basada en platino más bevacizumab como adyuvancia en pacientes con enfermedad de alto riesgo (CEO estadios IV o III con citorreducción tumoral subóptima), continuando con bevacizumab como mantenimiento. No se recomienda el uso de bevacizumab como terapia de mantenimiento si no se incluyó en la primera línea de tratamiento. Se sugiere seguir los esquemas de los estudios Gynecologic Oncology Group Study (GOG-0218) e International Collaborative Ovarian Neoplasm (ICON7). 6.3. Se sugiere la quimioterapia combinada IV/intraperitoneal (IP) solo para pacientes seleccionadas, con una citorreducción óptima (lesiones residuales < 1 cm), en especial aquellas sin enfermedad residual (R0) y que sean evaluadas en junta multidisciplinaria. La quimioterapia combinada IV/IP no se considera como tratamiento estándar. 6.4. 6.4.1. Se sugiere utilizar inhibidores de poli(ADP-ribosa) polimerasa (PARP) tales como olaparib o niraparib como mantenimiento después de recibir una primera línea de quimioterapia en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 positivo que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino y obtuvieron respuesta completa/respuesta parcial (RC/RP). 6.4.2. Se sugiere utilizar olaparib solo o en combinación con bevacizumab o niraparib en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 positivo que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino más bevacizumab y obtuvieron RC/RP. 6.4.3. Se sugiere utilizar niraparib en pacientes con CEO estadio III/IV BRCA1/2 negativo o desconocido que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino y obtuvieron RC/RP. 6.4.4. Se sugiere utilizar bevacizumab u olaparib más bevacizumab en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 negativo o desconocido (HRD positivo) que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino más bevacizumab y obtuvieron RC/RP. Tratamiento de la recaída de la enfermedad Recomendación 7. Se sugiere la realización de la cirugía de citorreducción secundaria (Csec), seguida de quimioterapia, a pacientes seleccionadas con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en primera recaída, platino-sensibles (intervalo libre de platinos ≥ 6 meses), puntuación Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO) positiva o Integrate model (I-Model) positivo (< 4,7), y con una potencial resección a R0, en centros con acceso a soporte quirúrgico y posoperatorio óptimo. Nota: el intervalo libre de tratamiento con platinos y la puntuación AGO solo se han desarrollado como predictores positivos de resección completa y no para excluir a las pacientes de la cirugía. Recomendación 8 8.1. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída platino-sensibles se sugiere: Quimioterapia combinada basada en platino: carboplatino/doxorrubicina liposomal o carboplatino/paclitaxel o carboplatino/ nab-paclitaxel o carboplatino/docetaxel o carboplatino/gemcitabina, por seis ciclos. Si no se tolera la terapia combinada, dar carboplatino o cisplatino solo. Quimioterapia combinada: carboplatino/gemcitabina o carboplatino/paclitaxel o carboplatino/doxorubicina liposomal, más bevacizumab, seguida de bevacizumab como mantenimiento (hasta progresión o toxicidad). 8.2. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída, platino-resistentes, se sugiere: Tratamiento secuencial con quimioterapia, preferiblemente con un agente único que no sea un platino (paclitaxel semanal o doxorrubicina liposomal pegilada o docetaxel o etopósido oral o gemcitabina o trabectidina o topotecan). El paclitaxel semanal o la doxorrubicina liposomal pegilada o el topotecan pueden ser administrados con o sin bevacizumab. Existen otros agentes que se consideran potencialmente act ivos (capecitabina, ciclofosfamida, ifosfamida, irinotecán, oxaliplatino, pemetrexed, vinorelbina, ciclofosfamida), que se podrían recomendar para líneas posteriores. Las pacientes con receptores hormonales positivos que no toleran o no tienen respuesta a los regímenes citotóxicos pueden recibir terapia hormonal con tamoxifeno u otros agentes, incluidos los inhibidores de la aromatasa (anastrozol y letrozol) o acetato de leuprolide o acetato de megestrol. Pacientes con PSC ≥ 3 deberían ser consideradas solo para el mejor cuidado de soporte. 8.3. Terapia de mantenimiento con inhibidores PARP. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 (positivo, negativo o desconocido), que hayan recibido dos o más líneas de quimioterapia basada en platino y hayan alcanzado RC/RP, se sugiere utilizar olaparib, niraparib o rucaparib. El niraparib podría ser útil en pacientes BRCA 1/2 +/-/desconocido, al igual que el rucaparib, sin embargo, este último no tiene aún aprobación del ente regulador en Colombia. Conclusiones: se espera que las recomendaciones emitidas en este consenso contribuyan a mejorar la atención clínica, el impacto oncológico y la calidad de vida de estas mujeres.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial , Evidence-Based Medicine , Ovarian Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Ovarian Neoplasms/therapy , Ovarian Neoplasms/pathology , Ovarian Neoplasms/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial/therapy , Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial/pathology , Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial/diagnosis , Neoplasm Grading , Neoplasm Staging , Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures/methods , Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial/therapy , Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial/pathology , Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial/diagnosis , Consensus , Combined Modality TherapyABSTRACT
Objective: The Cancer Genome Atlas research program (TCGA) developed the molecular classification for endometrial cancer with prognostic and therapeutic utility, which was replaced by the ProMisE (Proactive Molecular Risk Classifier for Endometrial Cancer) classification by consensus and international guidelines due to its high cost. This article aims to present national recommendations from an expert consensus that allows unification and implementation of the molecular classification for women with endometrial cancer nationwide, with a rational use of resources and technology. Methods: Consensus of 36 experts in clinical oncology, oncological gynecology, pathology, and genetics, with clinical practice in the national territory. The leader group performed a literature review and structuring of questions rated 1 to 9 points. A modified nominal group technique was used. There was a face-to-face meeting with master presentations, deliberative dialogue, and Google Forms (Google LLC, Mountain View, CA, USA) questionnaire voting with analysis and discussion of responses. The non-consensual responses led to a second round of voting. The final manuscript was finally prepared and revised. Results: Seven recommendations were formulated integrating the panelist responses based on evidence, but adjusted to the Colombian context and reality. Recommendation 1. The molecular classification is recommended in all the endometrial cancers using the immunohistochemistry markers as subrogated results from the molecular profile initially proposed in the TCGA classification. Recommendation 2. The sequential test strategy is recommended, starting with the immunohistochemistry markers (p53, MLH1, MSH 2, MSH6, PMS2) simultaneously in all the patients, defining to request POLE (DNA polymerase epsilon) (if available) according to the risk classification based on the surgical piece. Recommendation 3. It is recommended, that the gynecologist oncologist should be the one to request the POLE (if available) according to the final pathology report. This test must be requested for all endometrial cancers stage I-II, except in low risk (stage IA low grade endometrioid histology without linfovascular invasion normal p53) and, stages III-IV without residual disease, without affecting the request of subrogated immunohistochemistry molecular markers upon histology. The consensus proposes that the POLE is requested after the immunohistochemistry and according to the categories in the risk classification established by the 2020 ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines. Recommendation 4. It is recommended to perform immunohistochemistry for hormonal receptors for all women with endometrial cancer and the HER2 in patients with p53abn, simultaneously with the others immunohistochemistry markers. Recommendation 5. It is recommended to perform the immunohistochemistry markers (p53, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 y PMS2) in an initial endometrial biopsy or curettage when the specimen is adequate and available. In case the initial immunohistochemistry is inconclusive, or there are histological discrepancies between the initial and definitive pathology, it is recommended to repeat the molecular profile in the surgical pathology. The immunohistochemistry markers must be reported in the pathology report according to the CAP (College of American Pathologists) recommendations, independently of the type of sample. Recommendation 6. It is recommended to perform MLH1 promoter methylation testing in patients who exhibit loss of expression of MLH1 in immunohistochemistry whether it is accompanied or not with loss of expression of PMS2. All the patients with deficient MMR (mismatch repair), should be sent for genetic counseling to rule out Lynch syndrome. Recommendation 7. It is recommended to consider the molecular classification in addition to the classical histopathological criteria when making adjuvant judgments, as incorporated by the classification of prognostic groups of the 2020 ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines. Conclusions: It is necessary to implement the molecular classification of endometrial cancer in clinical practice in accordance to the Colombian context, due to its prognostic and probably predictive value. This will enable the characterization of the Colombian population in order to offer individualized guided treatments. This is an academic and nonregulatory document.
Objetivos: el programa Cancer Genome Atlas Research (TCGA) desarrolló la clasificación molecular para cáncer endometrial con utilidad pronóstica y terapéutica, la cual ha sido reemplazada por consensos y guías internacionales por la clasificación ProMisE (Proactive Molecular Risk Classifier for Endometrial Cancer) debido a su alto costo. El objetivo de este artículo es presentar recomendaciones a nivel nacional derivadas de un consenso de expertos que permitan unificar e implementar la clasificación molecular para mujeres con cáncer endometrial, mediante un uso racional de recursos y tecnología. Materiales y métodos: consenso de 36 expertos en oncología clínica, ginecología oncológica, patología y genética con práctica clínica en el territorio nacional. El grupo líder realizó una revisión de la literatura y estructuración de preguntas calificadas de 1 a 9 puntos. Se utilizó la técnica de grupo nominal modificada. Se efectuaron reuniones presenciales con presentaciones magistrales, diálogo deliberativo y votación de cuestionario Google Forms (Google LLC, Mountain View, CA, USA) con análisis y discusión de respuestas. Las respuestas no consensuadas se llevaron a una segunda ronda de votación. Finalmente, se elaboró y revisó el manuscrito final. Resultados: se formularon siete recomendaciones integrando las respuestas de las panelistas basadas en evidencia, pero ajustadas al contexto y a la realidad colombiana. Recomendación 1. Se recomienda realizar la clasificación molecular en todos los carcinomas endometriales utilizando los marcadores de inmunohistoquímica como resultados subrogados del perfil molecular inicialmente propuesto en la clasificación del TCGA. Recomendación 2. Se recomienda la estrategia secuencial de testeo iniciando por los marcadores de inmunohistoquímica (p53, MLH1, MSH 2, MSH6, PMS2) simultáneamente en todas las pacientes, y definir la solicitud del POLE (polimerasa épsilon del DNA) (si se encuentra disponible) de forma diferida de acuerdo con la clasificación de riesgo basado en la pieza quirúrgica. Recomendación 3. Se recomienda que sea el ginecólogo oncólogo quien solicite el POLE (si se encuentra disponible) de acuerdo con el reporte de patología definitivo. Esta prueba se debe solicitar a todos los cánceres endometriales de estadio I-II, excepto los de bajo riesgo (estadio IA endometrioide de bajo grado sin invasión linfovascular p53 normal) y estadio III-IV sin enfermedad residual, sin afectar la solicitud de los marcadores moleculares subrogados por inmunohistoquímica de acuerdo con la histología. El consenso propone que la solicitud del POLE se realice posterior a la inmunohistoquímica y de acuerdo con la clasificación del riesgo según las categorías establecidas por la guía ESGO/ESTRO/ESP del 2020. Recomendación 4. Se recomienda realizar simultáneamente con los otros marcadores de inmunohistoquímica la prueba para receptores hormonales en todas las pacientes con cáncer endometrial y el HER2 en pacientes con p53abn. Recomendación 5. Se recomienda que los marcadores de inmunohistoquímica (p53, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 y PMS2) se realicen en la biopsia/legrado endometrial inicial cuando la muestra es adecuada y está disponible. En caso de inmunohistoquímica inicial no concluyente, o discrepancias histológicas entre la patología inicial y definitiva, se recomienda repetir el perfil molecular en la patología quirúrgica. Los marcadores de inmunohistoquímica deben reportarse en el informe de patología de acuerdo con las recomendaciones del CAP (College of American Pathologists), independientemente del tipo de muestra. Recomendación 6. Se recomienda realizar estudio de metilación de promotor de MLH1 en pacientes con pérdida de expresión de MLH1 en la inmunohistoquímica, acompañado o no de pérdida de expresión de PMS2. Todas las pacientes con déficit de MMR (mismatch repair), deben ser enviadas a genética para descartar síndrome de Lynch. Recomendación 7. Se recomienda tener en cuenta la clasificación molecular, además de los criterios histopatológicos clásicos para la toma de decisiones de adyuvancia, tal como los incorpora la clasificación de los grupos pronósticos de la guía ESGO/ ESTRO/ESP del 2020. Conclusiones: es necesario implementar la clasificación molecular de cáncer de endometrio en la práctica clínica acorde al contexto colombiano, dado su valor pronóstico y posiblemente predictivo. Esto permitirá la caracterización de la población colombiana para ofrecer tratamientos guiados de manera individualizada. Se trata de un documento académico y no regulatorio.
Subject(s)
Endometrial Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Endometrial Neoplasms/diagnosis , Endometrial Neoplasms/pathology , Endometrial Neoplasms/genetics , Colombia , Prognosis , Consensus , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/standards , Biomarkers, TumorABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Management of the patient with cirrhosis of the liver that requires surgical treatment has been relatively unexplored. In Mexico, there is currently no formal stance or expert recommendations to guide clinical decision-making in this context. AIMS: The present position paper reviews the existing evidence on risks, prognoses, precautions, special care, and specific management or procedures for patients with cirrhosis that require surgical interventions or invasive procedures. Our aim is to provide recommendations by an expert panel, based on the best published evidence, and consequently ensure timely, quality, efficient, and low-risk care for this specific group of patients. RESULTS: Twenty-seven recommendations were developed that address preoperative considerations, intraoperative settings, and postoperative follow-up and care. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment and care of patients with cirrhosis that require major surgical or invasive procedures should be overseen by a multidisciplinary team that includes the anesthesiologist, hepatologist, gastroenterologist, and clinical nutritionist. With respect to decompensated patients, a nephrology specialist may be required, given that kidney function is also a parameter involved in the prognosis of these patients.
Subject(s)
Liver Cirrhosis , Perioperative Care , Humans , Liver Cirrhosis/complications , Liver Cirrhosis/surgery , Perioperative Care/methods , Perioperative Care/standards , Mexico , Postoperative Complications/prevention & controlABSTRACT
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of cancer-related deaths globally. While treatment advancements have improved survival rates, primarily through targeted therapies based on KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations, personalized treatment strategies for CRC remain limited. Immunotherapy, mainly immune checkpoint blockade, has shown efficacy in various cancers but is effective in only a small subset of patients with CRC with deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) proteins or high microsatellite instability (MSI). Recent research has challenged the notion that CRC is immunologically inert, revealing subsets with high immunogenicity and diverse lymphocytic infiltration. Identifying precise biomarkers beyond dMMR and MSI is crucial to expanding immunotherapy benefits. Hence, exploration has extended to various biomarker sources, such as the tumor microenvironment, genomic markers, and gut microbiota. Recent studies have introduced a novel classification system, consensus molecular subtypes, that aids in identifying patients with CRC with an immunogenic profile. These findings underscore the necessity of moving beyond single biomarkers and toward a comprehensive understanding of the immunological landscape in CRC, facilitating the development of more effective, personalized therapies.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Immunotherapy , Humans , Colorectal Neoplasms/immunology , Colorectal Neoplasms/therapy , Colorectal Neoplasms/genetics , Immunotherapy/methods , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Tumor Microenvironment/immunology , Microsatellite InstabilityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare neuroendocrine skin cancer with poor 5-year survival rates. Surgery and radiation are the current first-line treatments for local and nodal disease. OBJECTIVES: The Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology developed this document aiming to guide the surgical oncology role in multimodal MCC management. METHODS: The consensus was established in three rounds of online discussion, achieving consensus on specific topics including diagnosis, staging, treatment, and follow-up. RESULTS: Patients suspected of having MCC should undergo immunohistochemical examination and preferably undergo pathology review by a dermatopathologist. Initial staging should be performed with dermatologic and nodal physical examination, combined with complementary imaging. Whole-body imaging, preferably with positron emission tomography (PET) or computed tomography (CT) scans, are recommended. Due to the need for multidisciplinary approaches, we recommend that all cases should be discussed in tumor boards and referred to other specialties as soon as possible, reducing potential treatment delays. We recommend that all patients with clinical stage I or II may undergo local excision associated with sentinel lymph node biopsy. The decision on margin size should consider time to recovery, patient's comorbidities, and risk factors. Patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes or the presence of risk factors should undergo postoperative radiation therapy at the primary site. Exclusive radiation is a viable option for patients with low performance. Patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy should undergo nodal radiation therapy or lymphadenectomy. In patients with nodal clinical disease, in addition to primary tumor treatment, nodal radiation therapy and/or lymphadenectomy are recommended. Patients with advanced disease should preferably be enrolled in clinical trials and discussed in multidisciplinary meetings. The role of surgery and radiation therapy in the metastatic/advanced setting should be discussed individually and always in tumor boards. CONCLUSION: This document aims to standardize a protocol for initial assessment and treatment for Merkel cell carcinoma, optimizing oncologic outcomes in middle-income countries such as Brazil.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Obesity and gender play a critical role in shaping the outcomes of COVID-19 disease. These two factors have a dynamic relationship with each other, as well as other risk factors, which hinders interpretation of how they influence severity and disease progression. This work aimed to study differences in COVID-19 disease outcomes through analysis of risk profiles stratified by gender and obesity status. Methods: This study employed an unsupervised clustering analysis, using Mexico's national COVID-19 hospitalization dataset, which contains demographic information and health outcomes of patients hospitalized due to COVID-19. Patients were segmented into four groups by obesity and gender, with participants' attributes and clinical outcome data described for each. Then, Consensus and PAM clustering methods were used to identify distinct risk profiles based on underlying patient characteristics. Risk profile discovery was completed on 70% of records, with the remaining 30% available for validation. Results: Data from 88,536 hospitalized patients were analyzed. Obesity, regardless of gender, was linked with higher odds of hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, pneumonia, and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admissions. Men tended to have higher frequencies of ICU admissions and pneumonia and higher mortality rates than women. Within each of the four analysis groups (divided based on gender and obesity status), clustering analyses identified four to five distinct risk profiles. For example, among women with obesity, there were four profiles; those with a hypertensive profile were more likely to have pneumonia, and those with a diabetic profile were most likely to be admitted to the ICU. Conclusion: Our analysis emphasizes the complex interplay between obesity, gender, and health outcomes in COVID-19 hospitalizations. The identified risk profiles highlight the need for personalized treatment strategies for COVID-19 patients and can assist in planning for patterns of deterioration in future waves of SARS-CoV-2 virus transmission. This research underscores the importance of tackling obesity as a major public health concern, given its interplay with many other health conditions, including infectious diseases such as COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospitalization , Obesity , Unsupervised Machine Learning , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Male , Female , Obesity/epidemiology , Mexico/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , Adult , Sex Factors , Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Cluster AnalysisABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To establish recommendations through the consensus of a Latin American experts panel on the use of the flash glucose monitoring system (fCGM) in people living with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) regarding the benefits and challenges of using the fCGM. METHODS: An executive committee of experts was created, comprised by a panel of fifteen physicians, including endocrinologists and internal medicine physicians, with expertise in management of adult patients with T2DM. The experts were from various countries: Colombia, Chile, Peru, Mexico, Argentina, and Brazil. The modified Delphi method was used, considering a consensus level of at least 80% of the participants. A seventeen-item instrument was developed to establish recommendations on the use of fCGM in patients with T2DM in Latin American. RESULTS: The number of glucose scans recommended per day with the fCGM for patients managed with oral antidiabetic drugs or basal insulin was a median of 6 scans per day, and for those managed with multiple insulin doses, a median of 10 scans per day was recommended. Additionally, a holistic and individualized management approach was recommended, taking into account new treatment directions and identifying patients who would benefit from the use of the fCGM. CONCLUSION: Continuous use of the fCGM is recommended for people living with T2DM, regardless of their type of treatment. These metrics must be evaluated individually for each patient profile.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Crohn's disease (CD) is a subtype of chronic and incurable inflammatory bowel disease. It can affect the entire gastrointestinal tract and its etiology is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this consensus was to establish the most relevant aspects related to definitions, diagnosis, follow-up, medical treatment, and surgical treatment of Crohn's disease in Mexico. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Mexican specialists in the areas of gastroenterology and inflammatory bowel disease were summoned. The consensus was divided into five modules, with 69 statements. Applying the Delphi panel method, the pre-meeting questions were sent to the participants, to be edited and weighted. At the face-to-face meeting, all the selected articles were shown, underlining their level of clinical evidence; all the statements were discussed, and a final vote was carried out, determining the percentage of agreement for each statement. RESULTS: The first Mexican consensus on Crohn's disease was produced, in which recommendations for definitions, classifications, diagnostic aspects, follow-up, medical treatment, and surgical treatment were established. CONCLUSIONS: Updated recommendations are provided that focus on definitions, classifications, diagnostic criteria, follow-up, and guidelines for conventional medical treatment, biologic therapy, and small molecule treatment, as well as surgical management.
Subject(s)
Crohn Disease , Crohn Disease/therapy , Crohn Disease/diagnosis , Humans , Mexico , Delphi Technique , ConsensusABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Renal cell carcinoma is an aggressive disease with a high mortality rate. Management has drastically changed with the new era of immunotherapy, and novel strategies are being developed; however, identifying systemic treatments is still challenging. This paper presents an update of the expert panel consensus from the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group on advanced renal cell carcinoma management in Brazil. METHODS: A panel of 34 oncologists and experts in renal cell carcinoma discussed and voted on the best options for managing advanced disease in Brazil, including systemic treatment of early and metastatic renal cell carcinoma as well as nonclear cell tumours. The results were compared with the literature and graded according to the level of evidence. RESULTS: Adjuvant treatments benefit patients with a high risk of recurrence after surgery, and the agents used are pembrolizumab and sunitinib, with a preference for pembrolizumab. Neoadjuvant treatment is exceptional, even in initially unresectable cases. First-line treatment is mainly based on tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); the choice of treatment is based on the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMCD) risk score. Patients at favourable risk receive ICIs in combination with TKIs. Patients classified as intermediate or poor risk receive ICIs, without preference for ICI + ICIs or ICI + TKIs. Data on nonclear cell renal cancer treatment are limited. Active surveillance has a place in treating favourable-risk patients. Either denosumab or zoledronic acid can be used for treating metastatic bone disease. CONCLUSION: Immunotherapy and targeted therapy are the standards of care for advanced disease. The utilization and sequencing of these therapeutic agents hinge upon individual risk scores and responses to previous treatments. This consensus reflects a commitment to informed decision-making, drawn from professional expertise and evidence in the medical literature.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Renal Cell , Kidney Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/pathology , Kidney Neoplasms/drug therapy , Kidney Neoplasms/pathology , Latin America , Consensus , SunitinibABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Recent advances in the treatment of locally advanced NSCLC have led to changes in the standard of care for this disease. For the selection of the best approach strategy for each patient, it is necessary the homogenization of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, as well as the promotion of the evaluation of patients by a multidisciplinary oncology team. OBJECTIVE: Development of an expert consensus document with suggestions for the approach and treatment of locally advanced NSCLC leaded by Spanish Lung Cancer Group GECP. METHODS: Between March and July 2023, a panel of 28 experts was formed. Using a mixed technique (Delphi/nominal group) under the guidance of a coordinating group, consensus was reached in 4 phases: 1. Literature review and definition of discussion topics 2. First round of voting 3. Communicating the results and second round of voting 4. Definition of conclusions in nominal group meeting. Responses were consolidated using medians and interquartile ranges. The threshold for agreement was defined as 85% of the votes. RESULTS: New and controversial situations regarding the diagnosis and management of locally advanced NSCLC were analyzed and reconciled based on evidence and clinical experience. Discussion issues included: molecular diagnosis and biomarkers, radiologic and surgical diagnosis, mediastinal staging, role of the multidisciplinary thoracic committee, neoadjuvant treatment indications, evaluation of response to neoadjuvant treatment, postoperative evaluation, and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus clinical suggestions were generated on the most relevant scenarios such as diagnosis, staging and treatment of locally advanced lung cancer, which will serve to support decision-making in daily practice.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Consensus , Lung Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/therapy , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/pathology , Lung Neoplasms/therapy , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Spain , Patient Care Team , Delphi Technique , Neoplasm StagingABSTRACT
Introduction: COPD is the third cause of death globally and in Argentina COPD has a prevalence of 14.5%, but the management of patients in real life is unknown. The objectives of this work were: a) To know the opinions of pulmonologists in Argentina who manage patients with COPD in different aspects of daily practice. b) Compare our findings with specialists from Spain and c) Consider our results to plan future directives in the management of COPD in our country. Material and methods: 89 pulmonologists from Argentina, experts in COPD, participated in a Delphi consensus, who responded to a survey with five domains. a) Adherence to treatment, b) Control of COPD, c) Treatable features, d) Inhalation devices and e) Accessibility to therapeutic resources. Results: After two rounds of questions, total consensus was achieved in 77.6% of the statements and discriminating by domain: Treatment adherence: 5/9 (55.5%). COPD control: 10/14 (71.4%). Treatable traits: 6/6 (100%). Inhalation devices: 10/14 (71.4%) and Accessibility to treatment: 6/6 (100%). In most of the affirmations, the results were similar to those obtained by Spanish pulmonologists. Conclusions: Pulmonologists from Argentina manage COPD patients in a similar way and with minimal differences with our Spanish colleagues. It became evident that, in daily practice, there are factors that negatively impact access to the indicated treatments. Our work could serve as a starting point to improve this situation.
ABSTRACT
resumen está disponible en el texto completo
ABSTRACT Objective: The Cancer Genome Atlas research program (TCGA) developed the molecular classification for endometrial cancer with prognostic and therapeutic utility, which was replaced by the ProMisE (Proactive Molecular Risk Classifier for Endometrial Cancer) classification by consensus and international guidelines due to its high cost. This article aims to present national recommendations from an expert consensus that allows unification and implementation of the molecular classification for women with endometrial cancer nationwide, with a rational use of resources and technology. Methods: Consensus of 36 experts in clinical oncology, oncological gynecology, pathology, and genetics, with clinical practice in the national territory. The leader group performed a literature review and structuring of questions rated 1 to 9 points. A modified nominal group technique was used. There was a face-to-face meeting with master presentations, deliberative dialogue, and Google Forms (Google LLC, Mountain View, CA, USA) questionnaire voting with analysis and discussion of responses. The non-consensual responses led to a second round of voting. The final manuscript was finally prepared and revised. Results: Seven recommendations were formulated integrating the panelist responses based on evidence, but adjusted to the Colombian context and reality. Recommendation 1. The molecular classification is recommended in all the endometrial cancers using the immunohistochemistry markers as subrogated results from the molecular profile initially proposed in the TCGA classification. Recommendation 2. The sequential test strategy is recommended, starting with the immunohistochemistry markers (p53, MLH1, MSH 2, MSH6, PMS2) simultaneously in all the patients, defining to request POLE (DNA polymerase epsilon) (if available) according to the risk classification based on the surgical piece. Recommendation 3. It is recommended, that the gynecologist oncologist should be the one to request the POLE (if available) according to the final pathology report. This test must be requested for all endometrial cancers stage I-II, except in low risk (stage IA low grade endometrioid histology without linfovascular invasion normal p53) and, stages III-IV without residual disease, without affecting the request of subrogated immunohistochemistry molecular markers upon histology. The consensus proposes that the POLE is requested after the immunohistochemistry and according to the categories in the risk classification established by the 2020 ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines. Recommendation 4. It is recommended to perform immunohistochemistry for hormonal receptors for all women with endometrial cancer and the HER2 in patients with p53abn, simultaneously with the others immunohistochemistry markers. Recommendation 5. It is recommended to perform the immunohistochemistry markers (p53, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 y PMS2) in an initial endometrial biopsy or curettage when the specimen is adequate and available. In case the initial immunohistochemistry is inconclusive, or there are histological discrepancies between the initial and definitive pathology, it is recommended to repeat the molecular profile in the surgical pathology. The immunohistochemistry markers must be reported in the pathology report according to the CAP (College of American Pathologists) recommendations, independently of the type of sample. Recommendation 6. It is recommended to perform MLH1 promoter methylation testing in patients who exhibit loss of expression of MLH1 in immunohistochemistry whether it is accompanied or not with loss of expression of PMS2. All the patients with deficient MMR (mismatch repair), should be sent for genetic counseling to rule out Lynch syndrome. Recommendation 7. It is recommended to consider the molecular classification in addition to the classical histopathological criteria when making adjuvant judgments, as incorporated by the classification of prognostic groups of the 2020 ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines. Conclusions: It is necessary to implement the molecular classification of endometrial cancer in clinical practice in accordance to the Colombian context, due to its prognostic and probably predictive value. This will enable the characterization of the Colombian population in order to offer individualized guided treatments. This is an academic and non-regulatory document.
ABSTRACT
resumen está disponible en el texto completo
ABSTRACT Introduction and objective: The approach to patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has evolved over time with the advent of new therapies and multimodal strategies. The objective of this consensus of experts is to generate national recommendations for the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic high-grade OEC, defined as stages III and IV of the "The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification at the time of diagnosis to base on the literature review that included international evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Material and methods: Eleven panelists (oncologists and gynecological oncologists) answered 8 questions about the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic ovarian epithelial carcinoma. The panelists were chosen for their academic profile and influence in national health institutions. Guidelines from the "ESMO Standardized Operating Procedures Consensus Conference" were used to develop the consensus. It was agreed that the level of agreement to accept a recommendation should be ≥ 80%. The document was peer reviewed. Results: Eight general recommendations are made, which are presented into five domains. Some of these recommendations are subdivided into specific recommendations. Initial treatment Recommendation 1.1 Complete primary cytoreduction (PCS) surgery is suggested as the initial therapy of choice for patients with high-grade or metastatic EOC, which should ideally be carried out in centers with experience, followed by adjuvant therapy. 1.2 Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreduction surgery (ICS) is suggested in those who are unlikely to achieve a complete cytoreduction in PCS either due to unresectable metastatic disease or who present unresectability criteria (imaging, laparoscopic and/or by laparotomy) and that have been defined by a gynecological oncologist and patients with poor functional status and comorbidities according to the criteria of the multidisciplinary team (clinical oncology, gynecological oncology, radiology, etc.). Recommendation 2. In patients with high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), in stage III locally advanced or metastatic, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and achieved a complete or partial response (cytoreduction with tumor residue < 2.5 mm), the use of Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) could be considered as an alternative to standard platinum-based adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy during interval cytoreductive surgery, after discussion in a multidisciplinary tumor board, at a center experienced in treating this type of patients. Use of genetic testing. Recommendation 3. It is suggested at the time of diagnosis to offer molecular genetic testing to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC regardless of family history. Recommendation 4. It is suggested to offer genetic counseling, by qualified personnel, to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC who are ordered genetic testing. Recommendation 5. It is suggested that all patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade EOC undergo a germ panel that includes the Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes 1/2 genes (BRCA 1/2) and the other susceptibility genes according to with institutional protocols and the availability of genetic testing panels; If it is negative, then somatic testing should be performed that includes the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status, regardless of family history. Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation 6. 6.1. It is suggested that all patients with advanced stage III/IV EOC, with PSC of (0-2), got adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy as standard treatment within six weeks after Prc. It is suggested paclitaxel/carboplatin. Recommendation 6.2. It is suggested to use standard chemotherapy base on platinum plus Bevacizumab as adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with high-risk disease (EOC stage IV or stage III with suboptimal tumor cytoreduction), following by bevacizumab as maintenance. The use of bevacizumab as maintenance therapy is not recommended if bevacizumab was not included in the first line of treatment. We suggested the dose used in GOG-0218 and ICON7 trials. Recommendation 6.3 It is suggested combined intravenous/intraperitoneal chemotherapy only for selected patients, with optimal cytoreduction (residual lesions < 1 cm), especially those without residual disease (R0) and who are evaluated in a multidisciplinary meeting. It is not considered standard treatment. Recommendation 6.4. 6.4.1 It is suggested to use Poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors such as olaparib or niraparib as maintenance after receiving first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage III/ IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy and obtained complete response/ partial response (CR/PR), 6.4.2 It is suggested to use olaparib alone or in combination with bevacizumab or niraparib in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.3 It is suggested to use niraparibin patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy and achieved CR/PR, 6.4.4 It is suggested to use bevacizumab or olaparib plus bevacizumab in patients with EOC stage III/ IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown (HRD positive) who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and obtained CR/PR. Treatment of disease relapse Recommendation 7. Secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy is suggested for selected patients with high-grade advanced EOC in first relapse, platinum-sensitive (platinum-free interval ≥ 6 months), positive "Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie - AGO" score or "I-model" positive (< 4.7) with a potential resection to R0 in centers with access to optimal surgical and postoperative support. Note: Platinum-free interval and AGO score have only been developed as positive predictors of complete resection and not to exclude patients from surgery. Recommendation 8. 8.1 For patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC platinum-sensitive, the following is suggested: • Platinum-based combination chemotherapy: carboplatin/liposomal doxorubicin or carboplatin/ paclitaxel or carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel or carboplatin/docetaxel or carboplatin/gemcitabine) for six cycles. If combination therapy is not tolerated, give carboplatin or cisplatin alone. • Combination chemotherapy (carboplatin/ gemcitabine or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/doxorubicin liposomal) plus bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab as maintenance (until progression or toxicity). Recommendation 8.2 For patients with relapsed advanced high-grade EOC platinum-resistant, it is suggested: • Sequential treatment with chemotherapy, preferably with a non-platinum single agent (weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or docetaxel or oral etoposide or gemcitabine or trabectidine or, topotecan). Weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan could be administrate with or without bevacizumab. • Other agents are considered potentially active (capecitabine, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, pemetrexed, vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide) could be recommended for later lines. • Hormone receptor-positive patients who do not tolerate or have no response to cytotoxic regimens may receive hormone therapy with tamoxifen or other agents, including aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and letrozole) or leuprolide acetate, or megestrol acetate. • Patients with a performance score ≥ 3 should be considered only for best supportive care. Recommendation 8.3 Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors: It is suggested in patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 (positive, negative or unknown) who have received two or more lines of platinum-based chemotherapy and have achieved CR/PR, use olaparib, niraparib or rucaparib. Niraparib could be useful in BRCA ½ +/-/unknown patients, as rucaparib, however, the latter does not yet have approval from the regulatory office in Colombia. Conclusions: It is expected that the recommendations issued in this consensus will contribute to improving clinical care, oncological impact, and quality of life of these women.
ABSTRACT
New sleep technologies are being developed, refined and delivered at a fast pace. However, there are serious concerns about the validation and accuracy of new sleep-related technologies being made available, as many of them, especially consumer-sleep technologies, have not been tested in comparison with gold-standard methods or have been approved by health regulatory agencies. The importance of proper validation and performance evaluation of new sleep technologies has already been discussed in previous studies and some recommendations have already been published, but most of them do not employ standardized methodology and are not able to cover all aspects of new sleep technologies. The current protocol describes the methods of a Delphi consensus study to create guidelines for the development, performance evaluation and validation of new sleep devices and technologies. The resulting recommendations are not intended to be used as a quality assessment tool to evaluate individual articles, but rather to evaluate the overall procedures, studies and experiments performed to develop, evaluate performance and validate new technologies. We hope these guidelines can be helpful for researchers who work with new sleep technologies on the appraisal of their reliability and validation, for companies who are working on the development and refinement of new sleep technologies, and by regulatory agencies to evaluate new technologies that are looking for registration, approval or inclusion on health systems.
Subject(s)
Consensus , Delphi Technique , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Sleep/physiology , Guidelines as Topic/standardsABSTRACT
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a significant global health concern and major cause of hospitalization, particularly among infants and older adults. The clinical impact of RSV is well characterized in infants; however, in many countries, the burden and risk of RSV in older populations are overlooked. In Latin America, there are limited data on RSV epidemiology and disease management in older adults. Therefore, the impact of RSV in this region needs to be addressed. Here, current insights on RSV infections in older populations in Latin America, including those with underlying health conditions, are discussed. We also outline the key challenges limiting our understanding of the burden of RSV in Latin America in a worldwide context and propose an expert consensus to improve our understanding of the burden of RSV in the region. By so doing, we aim to ultimately improve disease management and outcomes of those at risk and to alleviate the impact on healthcare systems.A graphical plain language summary is available with this article.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Authors reported multiple definitions of e-oral health and related terms, and used several definitions interchangeably, like mhealth, teledentistry, teleoral medicine and telehealth. The International Association of Dental Research e-Oral Health Network (e-OHN) aimed to establish a consensus on terminology related to digital technologies used in oral healthcare. METHOD: The Crowdsourcing Delphi method used in this study comprised of four main stages. In the first stage, the task force created a list of terms and definitions around digital health technologies based on the literature and established a panel of experts. Inclusion criteria for the panellists were: to be actively involved in either research and/or working in e-oral health fields; and willing to participate in the consensus process. In the second stage, an email-based consultation was organized with the panel of experts to confirm an initial set of terms. In the third stage, consisted of: a) an online meeting where the list of terms was presented and refined; and b) a presentation at the 2022-IADR annual meeting. The fourth stage consisted of two rounds of feedback to solicit experts' opinion about the terminology and group discussion to reach consensus. A Delphi-questionnaire was sent online to all experts to independently assess a) the appropriateness of the terms, and b) the accompanying definitions, and vote on whether they agreed with them. In a second round, each expert received an individualised questionnaire, which presented the expert's own responses from the first round and the panellists' overall response (% agreement/disagreement) to each term. It was decided that 70% or higher agreement among experts on the terms and definitions would represent consensus. RESULTS: The study led to the identification of an initial set of 43 terms. The list of initial terms was refined to a core set of 37 terms. Initially, 34 experts took part in the consensus process about terms and definitions. From them, 27 experts completed the first rounds of consultations, and 15 the final round of consultations. All terms and definitions were confirmed via online voting (i.e., achieving above the agreed 70% threshold), which indicate their agreed recommendation for use in e-oral health research, dental public health, and clinical practice. CONCLUSION: This is the first study in oral health organised to achieve consensus in e-oral health terminology. This terminology is presented as a resource for interested parties. These terms were also conceptualised to suit with the new healthcare ecosystem and the place of e-oral health within it. The universal use of this terminology to label interventions in future research will increase the homogeneity of future studies including systematic reviews.
Subject(s)
Ecosystem , Oral Health , Humans , ConsensusABSTRACT
Cancer patients are at risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), its recurrence, but also at risk of bleeding while anticoagulated. In addition, cancer therapies have been associated to increased VTE risk. Guidelines for VTE treatment in cancer patients recommend low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) for the initial treatment, DOAC for VTE short-term treatment, and LMWH or DOAC for VTE long-term treatment. This consensus article arises from a collaboration between different Spanish experts on cancer-associated thrombosis. It aims to reach an agreement on a practical document of recommendations for action allowing the healthcare homogenization of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) patients in Spain considering not only what is known about VTE management in cancer patients but also what is done in Spanish hospitals in the clinical practice. The text summarizes the current knowledge and available evidence on the subject in Spain and provides a series of practical recommendations for CAT management and treatment algorithms to help clinicians to manage CAT over time.