The GuideLine Implementability Appraisal (GLIA): development of an instrument to identify obstacles to guideline implementation

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines are not uniformly successful in influencing clinicians' behaviour toward best practices. Implementability refers to a set of characteristics that predict ease of (and obstacles to) guideline implementation. Our objective is to develop and validate a tool for appraisal of implementability of clinical guidelines. METHODS: Indicators of implementability were identified from the literature and used to create items and dimensions of the GuideLine Implementability Appraisal (GLIA). GLIA consists of 31 items, arranged into 10 dimensions. Questions from 9 of the 10 dimensions are applied individually to each recommendation of the guideline. Decidability and Executability are critical dimensions. Other dimensions are Global, Presentation and Formatting, Measurable Outcomes, Apparent Validity, Flexibility, Effect on Process of Care, Novelty/Innovation, and Computability. We conducted a series of validation activities, including validation of the construct of implementability, expert review of content for clarity, relevance, and comprehensiveness, and assessment of construct validity of the instrument. Finally, GLIA was applied to a draft guideline under development by national professional societies. RESULTS: Evidence of content validity and preliminary support for construct validity were obtained. The GLIA proved to be useful in identifying barriers to implementation in the draft guideline and the guideline was revised accordingly. CONCLUSION: GLIA may be useful to guideline developers who can apply the results to remedy defects in their guidelines. Likewise, guideline implementers may use GLIA to select implementable recommendations and to devise implementation strategies that address identified barriers. By aiding the design and operationalization of highly implementable guidelines, our goal is that application of GLIA may help to improve health outcomes, but further evaluation will be required to support this potential benefit

Nutrition intervention is beneficial in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy to the gastrointestinal or head and neck area

Background: Malnutrition occurs frequently in patients with cancer of the gastrointestinal or head and neck area and can lead to negative outcomes. Objective: To determine the impact of early and intensive nutrition intervention on body weight, body composition, nutritional status, global quality of life and physical function compared to usual practice in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy to the gastrointestinal or head and neck area. Design: Outpatients commencing at least 20 fractions of radiotherapy to the gastrointestinal or head and neck area were randomised to receive intensive, individualised nutrition counselling by a dietitian using a standard protocol and oral supplements if required, or the usual practice of the centre (general advice and nutrition booklet). Outcome parameters were measured at baseline and four, eight, and twelve weeks after commencing radiotherapy using valid and reliable tools. Results: Sixty patients (51M;9F; mean age 61.9 yr +/- 14.0) were randomised to receive either nutrition intervention (n=29) or usual care (n=31). The nutrition intervention group had statistically smaller deteriorations in weight (p < 0.001), nutritional status (p = 0.020) and global quality of life (p = 0.009) compared with those receiving usual care. Clinically, but not statistically significant differences in fat-free mass were observed between the groups (p = 0.195). Conclusions Early and intensive nutrition intervention appears beneficial in terms of minimising weight loss, deterioration in nutritional status, global quality of life and physical function in oncology outpatients receiving radiotherapy to the gastrointestinal or head and neck area. Weight maintenance in this population leads to beneficial outcomes and suggests that this, rather than weight gain, may be a more appropriate aim of nutrition intervention

Glutamine depletion by crisantaspase hinders the growth of human hepatocellular carcinoma xenografts

Background: A subset of human hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) exhibit mutations of β-catenin gene CTNNB1 and overexpress Glutamine synthetase (GS). The CTNNB1-mutated HCC cell line HepG2 is sensitive to glutamine starvation induced in vitro with the antileukemic drug Crisantaspase and the GS inhibitor methionine-L-sulfoximine (MSO). Methods: Immunodeficient mice with subcutaneous xenografts of the CTNNB1-mutated HCC cell lines HepG2 and HC-AFW1 were treated with Crisantaspase and/or MSO, and tumour growth was monitored. At the end of treatment, tumour weight and histology were assessed. Serum and tissue amino acids were determined by HPLC. Gene and protein expression were estimated with RT-PCR and western blot and GS activity with a colorimetric method. mTOR activity was evaluated from the phosphorylation of p70S6K1. Results: Crisantaspase and MSO depleted serum glutamine, lowered glutamine in liver and tumour tissue, and inhibited liver GS activity. HepG2 tumour growth was significantly reduced by either Crisantaspase or MSO, and completely suppressed by the combined treatment. The combined treatment was also effective against xenografts of the HC-AFW1 cell line, which is Crisantaspase resistant in vitro. Conclusions: The combination of Crisantaspase and MSO reduces glutamine supply to CTNNB1-mutated HCC xenografts and hinders their growth

Interferon-α Regulates Glutaminase 1 Promoter through STAT1 Phosphorylation: Relevance to HIV-1 Associated Neurocognitive Disorders

HIV-1 associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) develop during progressive HIV-1 infection and affect up to 50% of infected individuals. Activated microglia and macrophages are critical cell populations that are involved in the pathogenesis of HAND, which is specifically related to the production and release of various soluble neurotoxic factors including glutamate. In the central nervous system (CNS), glutamate is typically derived from glutamine by mitochondrial enzyme glutaminase. Our previous study has shown that glutaminase is upregulated in HIV-1 infected monocyte-derived-macrophages (MDM) and microglia. However, how HIV-1 leads to glutaminase upregulation, or how glutaminase expression is regulated in general, remains unclear. In this study, using a dual-luciferase reporter assay system, we demonstrated that interferon (IFN) α specifically activated the glutaminase 1 (GLS1) promoter. Furthermore, IFN-α treatment increased signal transducer and activator of transcription 1 (STAT1) phosphorylation and glutaminase mRNA and protein levels. IFN-α stimulation of GLS1 promoter activity correlated to STAT1 phosphorylation and was reduced by fludarabine, a chemical that inhibits STAT1 phosphorylation. Interestingly, STAT1 was found to directly bind to the GLS1 promoter in MDM, an effect that was dependent on STAT1 phosphorylation and significantly enhanced by IFN-α treatment. More importantly, HIV-1 infection increased STAT1 phosphorylation and STAT1 binding to the GLS1 promoter, which was associated with increased glutamate levels. The clinical relevance of these findings was further corroborated with investigation of post-mortem brain tissues. The glutaminase C (GAC, one isoform of GLS1) mRNA levels in HIV associated-dementia (HAD) individuals correlate with STAT1 (p<0.01), IFN-α (p<0.05) and IFN-β (p<0.01). Together, these data indicate that both HIV-1 infection and IFN-α treatment increase glutaminase expression through STAT1 phosphorylation and by binding to the GLS1 promoter. Since glutaminase is a potential component of elevated glutamate production during the pathogenesis of HAND, our data will help to identify additional therapeutic targets for the treatment of HAND

Targeting cancer metabolism: a therapeutic window opens

Genetic events in cancer activate signalling pathways that alter cell metabolism. Clinical evidence has linked cell metabolism with cancer outcomes. Together, these observations have raised interest in targeting metabolic enzymes for cancer therapy, but they have also raised concerns that these therapies would have unacceptable effects on normal cells. However, some of the first cancer therapies that were developed target the specific metabolic needs of cancer cells and remain effective agents in the clinic today. Research into how changes in cell metabolism promote tumour growth has accelerated in recent years. This has refocused efforts to target metabolic dependencies of cancer cells as a selective anticancer strategy.Burroughs Wellcome FundSmith Family FoundationStarr Cancer ConsortiumDamon Runyon Cancer Research FoundationNational Institutes of Health (U.S.

Guidelines International Network: toward international standards for clinical practice guidelines.

Item does not contain fulltextGuideline development processes vary substantially, and many guidelines do not meet basic quality criteria. Standards for guideline development can help organizations ensure that recommendations are evidence-based and can help users identify high-quality guidelines. Such organizations as the U.S. Institute of Medicine and the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence have developed recommendations to define trustworthy guidelines within their locales. Many groups charged with guideline development find the lengthy list of standards developed by such organizations to be aspirational but infeasible to follow in entirety. Founded in 2002, the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) is a network of guideline developers that includes 93 organizations and 89 individual members representing 46 countries. The G-I-N board of trustees recognized the importance of guideline development processes that are both rigorous and feasible even for modestly funded groups to implement and initiated an effort toward consensus about minimum standards for high-quality guidelines. In contrast to other existing standards for guideline development at national or local levels, the key components proposed by G-I-N will represent the consensus of an international, multidisciplinary group of active guideline developers. This article presents G-I-N's proposed set of key components for guideline development. These key components address panel composition, decision-making process, conflicts of interest, guideline objective, development methods, evidence review, basis of recommendations, ratings of evidence and recommendations, guideline review, updating processes, and funding. It is hoped that this article promotes discussion and eventual agreement on a set of international standards for guideline development

Improving the quality of health care: using international collaboration to inform guideline programmes by founding the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N)(*)



 Clinical practice guidelines are regarded as powerful tools to achieve effective health care. Although many countries have built up experience in the development, appraisal, and implementation of guidelines, until recently there has been no established forum for collaboration at an international level. As a result, in different countries seeking similar goals and using similar strategies, efforts have been unnecessarily duplicated and opportunities for harmonisation lost because of the lack of a supporting organisational framework. This triggered a proposal in 2001 for an international guidelines network built on existing partnerships. A baseline survey confirmed a strong demand for such an entity. A multinational group of guideline experts initiated the development of a non-profit organisation aimed at promotion of systematic guideline development and implementation. The Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) was founded in November 2002. One year later the Network released the International Guideline Library, a searchable database which now contains more than 2000 guideline resources including published guidelines, guidelines under development, "guidelines for guidelines", training materials, and patient information tools. By June 2004, 52 organisations from 27 countries had joined the network including institutions from Oceania, North America, and Europe, and WHO. This paper describes the process that led to the foundation of the G-I-N, its characteristics, prime activities, and ideas on future projects and collaboration