Treatment of Small-Cell Lung Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Endorsement of the American College of Chest Physicians Guideline

PURPOSE: The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) produced an evidence-based guideline on treatment of patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Because of the relevance of this guideline to American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) membership, ASCO reviewed the guideline, applying a set of procedures and policies used to critically examine guidelines developed by other organizations. METHODS: The ACCP guideline on the treatment of SCLC was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Endorsement Panel updated the literature search, reviewed the content, and considered additional recommendations. RESULTS: The ASCO Endorsement Panel determined that the recommendations from the ACCP guideline, published in 2013, are clear, thorough, and based on current scientific evidence. ASCO endorses the ACCP guideline on the treatment of SCLC, with the addition of qualifying statements. RECOMMENDATIONS: Surgery is indicated for selected stage I SCLC. Limited-stage disease should be treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with good performance status. Thoracic radiotherapy should be administered early in the course of treatment, preferably beginning with cycle one or two of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy should consist of four cycles of a platinum agent and etoposide. Extensive-stage disease should be treated primarily with chemotherapy consisting of a platinum agent plus etoposide or irinotecan. Prophylactic cranial irradiation prolongs survival in patients with limited-stage disease who achieve a complete or partial response to initial therapy and may do so in similarly responding patients with extensive-stage disease as well. Additional information is available at http://www.asco.org/endorsements/sclc and http://www.asco.org/guidelineswiki

Role of Bone-Modifying Agents in Multiple Myeloma: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update

Purpose To update guideline recommendations on the role of bone-modifying agents in multiple myeloma. Methods An update panel conducted a targeted systematic literature review by searching PubMed and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, clinical practice guidelines, and observational studies. Results Thirty-five relevant studies were identified, and updated evidence supports the current recommendations. Recommendations For patients with active symptomatic multiple myeloma that requires systemic therapy with or without evidence of lytic destruction of bone or compression fracture of the spine from osteopenia on plain radiograph(s) or other imaging studies, intravenous administration of pamidronate 90 mg over at least 2 hours or zoledronic acid 4 mg over at least 15 minutes every 3 to 4 weeks is recommended. Denosumab has shown to be noninferior to zoledronic acid for the prevention of skeletal-related events and provides an alternative. Fewer adverse events related to renal toxicity have been noted with denosumab compared with zoledronic acid and may be preferred in this setting. The update panel recommends that clinicians consider reducing the initial pamidronate dose in patients with preexisting renal impairment. Zoledronic acid has not been studied in patients with severe renal impairment and is not recommended in this setting. The update panel suggests that bone-modifying treatment continue for up to 2 years. Less frequent dosing has been evaluated and should be considered in patients with responsive or stable disease. Continuous use is at the discretion of the treating physician and the risk of ongoing skeletal morbidity. Retreatment should be initiated at the time of disease relapse. The update panel discusses measures regarding osteonecrosis of the jaw

A Scoping Review of Strategies for the Prevention of Hip Fracture in Elderly Nursing Home Residents

Elderly nursing home residents are at increased risk of hip fracture; however, the efficacy of fracture prevention strategies in this population is unclear.We performed a scoping review of randomized controlled trials of interventions tested in the long-term care (LTC) setting, examining hip fracture outcomes.We searched for citations in 6 respective electronic searches, supplemented by hand searches. Two reviewers independently reviewed all citations and full-text papers; consensus was achieved on final inclusion. Data was abstracted in duplicate.We reviewed 22,349 abstracts or citations and 949 full-text papers. Data from 20 trials were included: 7--vitamin D (n = 12,875 participants), 2--sunlight exposure (n = 522), 1--alendronate (n = 327), 1--fluoride (n = 460), 4--exercise or multimodal interventions (n = 8,165), and 5--hip protectors (n = 2,594). Vitamin D, particularly vitamin D(3) > or = 800 IU orally daily, reduced hip fracture risk. Hip protectors reduced hip fractures in included studies, although a recent large study not meeting inclusion criteria was negative. Fluoride and sunlight exposure did not significantly reduce hip fractures. Falls were reduced in three studies of exercise or multimodal interventions, with one study suggesting reduced hip fractures in a secondary analysis. A staff education and risk assessment strategy did not significantly reduce falls or hip fractures. In a study underpowered for fracture outcomes, alendronate did not significantly reduce hip fractures in LTC.The intervention with the strongest evidence for reduction of hip fractures in LTC is Vitamin D supplementation; more research on other interventions is needed

HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma

CONTEXT: ERBB2 (erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 or HER2) is currently the only biomarker established for selection of a specific therapy for patients with advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). However, there are no comprehensive guidelines for the assessment of HER2 in patients with GEA. OBJECTIVES: To establish an evidence-based guideline for HER2 testing in patients with GEA, to formalize the algorithms for methods to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing while addressing which patients and tumor specimens are appropriate, and to provide guidance on clinical decision making. DESIGN: The College of American Pathologists, American Society for Clinical Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an expert panel to conduct a systematic review of the literature to develop an evidence-based guideline with recommendations for optimal HER2 testing in patients with GEA. RESULTS: The panel is proposing 11 recommendations with strong agreement from the open-comment participants. RECOMMENDATIONS: The panel recommends that tumor specimen(s) from all patients with advanced GEA, who are candidates for HER2-targeted therapy, should be assessed for HER2 status before the initiation of HER2-targeted therapy. Clinicians should offer combination chemotherapy and a HER2-targeted agent as initial therapy for all patients with HER2-positive advanced GEA. For pathologists, guidance is provided for morphologic selection of neoplastic tissue, testing algorithms, scoring methods, interpretation and reporting of results, and laboratory quality assurance. CONCLUSIONS: This guideline provides specific recommendations for assessment of HER2 in patients with advanced GEA while addressing pertinent technical issues and clinical implications of the results

HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists, American Society for Clinical Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology

-ERBB2 (erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 or HER2) is currently the only biomarker established for selection of a specific therapy for patients with advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). However, there are no comprehensive guidelines for the as

Systemic Therapy for Small-Cell Lung Cancer: ASCO-Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) Guideline

PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing clinicians on the management of patients with small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: An Expert Panel of medical oncology, thoracic surgery, radiation oncology, pulmonary, community oncology, research methodology, and advocacy experts were convened to conduct a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 1990 through 2022. Outcomes of interest included response rates, overall survival, disease-free survival or recurrence-free survival, and quality of life. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. RESULTS: The literature search identified 95 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. RECOMMENDATIONS: Evidence-based recommendations were developed to address systemic therapy options, timing of therapy, treatment in patients who are older or with poor performance status, role of biomarkers, and use of myeloid-supporting agents in patients with small-cell lung cancer.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines

Oncology Guidelines Usage in a Low- and Middle-Income Country

Purpose: There is a paucity of data about current usage of oncology guidelines in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), specifically in terms of the availability and quality of those guidelines. Our objective was to determine usage of oncology guidelines and the barriers and facilitators to their usage among radiation oncologists in LMICs. Methods: An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among practicing radiation oncologists in Nigeria via e-mail and the social media database of the Association of Radiation and Clinical Oncologists of Nigeria. In addition, paper questionnaires were administered at regional clinical meetings. Results: The survey response rate was 53.4% in a sample of 101 radiation oncologists from the database. Sixty-nine percent of respondents were consultants and 30% were residents. Approximately 43% had < 5 years’ experience. All of the respondents were involved in administering chemotherapy during the treatment of patients with cancer, whereas approximately half were involved in diagnosing cancer. Ninety-three percent reported using guidelines in treating patients, the top two guidelines being those from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (90%) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (50%). The two major barriers to guideline usage were that facilities were inadequate for proper guideline implementation and that the information in guidelines were too complex to understand. Potential facilitators included providing adequate facilities, developing local guidelines, and increasing awareness of guideline usage. Conclusion: Our study shows that clinicians involved in the treatment of patients with cancer in LMICs are aware of cancer treatment guidelines. However, implementation of these guidelines hinders their usage because the facilities are inadequate, guidelines are not applicable to the local setting, and the information in the guidelines is too complex

Procedure-specific Risks of Thrombosis and Bleeding in Urological Non-cancer Surgery : Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Context: Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis involves a trade-off between a reduction in venous thromboembolism (VTE) and increased bleeding. No guidance specific for procedure and patient factors exists in urology. Objective: To inform estimates of absolute risk of symptomatic VTE and bleeding requiring reoperation in urological non-cancer surgery. Evidence acquisition: We searched for contemporary observational studies and estimated the risk of symptomatic VTE or bleeding requiring reoperation in the 4 wk after urological surgery. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence. Evidence synthesis: The 37 eligible studies reported on 11 urological non-cancer procedures. The duration of prophylaxis varied widely both within and between procedures; for example, the median was 12.3 d (interquartile range [IQR] 3.1-55) for open recipient nephrectomy (kidney transplantation) studies and 1 d (IQR 0-1.3) for percutaneous nephrolithotomy, open prolapse surgery, and reconstructive pelvic surgery studies. Studies of open recipient nephrectomy reported the highest risks of VTE and bleeding (1.8-7.4% depending on patient characteristics and 2.4% for bleeding). The risk of VTE was low for 8/11 procedures (0.2-0.7% for patients with low/medium risk; 0.8-1.4% for high risk) and the risk of bleeding was low for 6/7 procedures ( Conclusions: Although inferences are limited owing to low-quality evidence, our results suggest that extended prophylaxis is warranted for some procedures (eg, kidney transplantation procedures in high-risk patients) but not others (transurethral resection of the prostate and reconstructive female pelvic surgery in low-risk patients). Patient summary: The best evidence suggests that the benefits of blood-thinning drugs to prevent clots after surgery outweigh the risks of bleeding in some procedures ( such as kidney transplantation procedures in patients at high risk of clots) but not others ( such as prostate surgery in patients at low risk of clots). (C) 2017 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V.Peer reviewe

Management of the Neck in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Oral Cavity and Oropharynx: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE:The aim of the current work is to provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing physicians and others on the management of the neck in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity and oropharynx. METHODS:ASCO convened an Expert Panel of medical oncology, surgery, radiation oncology, and advocacy experts to conduct a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective comparative observational studies published from 1990 through 2018. Outcomes of interest included survival, regional disease control, neck recurrence, and quality of life. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. RESULTS:The literature search identified 124 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. Six clinical scenarios were devised; three for oral cavity cancer and three for oropharynx cancer, and recommendations were generated for each one. RECOMMENDATIONS:For oral cavity cancers, clinical scenarios focused on the indications for and the hallmarks of a high-quality neck dissection, indications for postoperative radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, and whether radiotherapy alone is sufficient elective treatment of an undissected neck compared with high-quality neck dissection. For oropharynx cancers, clinical scenarios focused on hallmarks of a high-quality neck dissection, factors that would favor operative versus nonoperative primary management, and clarifying criteria for an incomplete response to definitive chemoradiation for which salvage neck dissection would be recommended. Consensus was reached and recommendations were made for all six clinical scenarios. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/head-neck-cancer-guidelines