ACR Appropriateness Criteria® definitive therapy for early-stage cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The definitive treatment of early-stage cervical cancer involves multidisciplinary decision making. This expert panel was convened to reach consensus on the selection of appropriate therapies based on patient and disease characteristics at presentation. METHODS: The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 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 where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or the treatment. RESULTS: Three clinical variants were developed to represent common scenarios in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. Group members reached consensus on the appropriateness of therapeutic options. This process yielded numerical ratings and descriptive commentary. CONCLUSIONS: This manuscript represents the consensus opinion of an expert panel based on a survey of all available medical literature. This manuscript may be used to inform the clinical decision making of physicians involved in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® role of adjuvant therapy in the management of early stage cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The use of adjuvant treatment(s) following initial hysterectomy and retroperitoneal nodal harvesting of patients with clinical stage I and II cervical carcinoma is (are) presently based on the pathological assessment of surgical specimens. This report sought to delineate further the clinical application of potential therapeutic interventions and associated follow-up investigations of this patient cohort. METHODS: The American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every two years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journal and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. RESULTS: From this process, 5 unique clinical variants were developed. These scenarios pertained to options of adjuvant radiation therapy and chemotherapy, methods of delivery of radiotherapy to optimize target volume coverage while simultaneously minimizing radiation exposure of adjacent healthy organs, and recommendations for patient follow-up care. Group members reached consensus of topic ratings in descending order of importance. A risk assessment breakdown was established to highlight the most likely indications for adjuvant treatment(s). CONCLUSION: This assembly by the ACR of physicians involved in the management of patients with early stage cervical cancer was able to describe appropriateness criteria to aid other practitioners in selecting reasonable implementation of postoperative therapies and subsequent surveillance studies. These guidelines await further validation and refinement by both current and future prospectively randomized clinical studies regarding this patient population.

Shifting the focus to practice quality improvement in radiation oncology.

To demonstrate how the American College of Radiology, Quality Research in Radiation Oncology (QRRO) process survey database can serve as an evidence base for assessing quality of care in radiation oncology. QRRO has drawn a stratified random sample of radiation oncology facilities in the USA and invited those facilities to participate in a Process Survey. Information from a prior QRRO Facilities Survey has been used along with data collected under the current National Process Survey to calculate national averages and make statistically valid inferences for national process measures for selected cancers in which radiation therapy plays a major role. These measures affect outcomes important to patients and providers and measure quality of care. QRRO's survey data provides national benchmark data for numerous quality indicators. The Process Survey is "fully qualified" as a Practice Quality Improvement project by the American Board of Radiology under its Maintenance of Certification requirements for radiation oncology and radiation physics.