An analysis of the evidence underpinning the national comprehensive cancer network practice guidelines

Author(s):  
Mitchell Love ◽  
Jordan Staggs ◽  
Corbin Walters ◽  
Cole Wayant ◽  
Trevor Torgerson ◽  
...  
2011 ◽  
Vol 86 (4) ◽  
pp. 657-662 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reynaldo José Sant'Anna Pereira de Souza ◽  
Adriana P Mattedi ◽  
Marcelo P Corrêa ◽  
Marcelo L Rezende ◽  
Ana Cláudia Andrade Ferreira

FUNDAMENTOS: O câncer de maior incidência no Brasil é o de pele não-melanoma, que afeta aproximadamente 0,06% da população. Não existem políticas públicas para sua prevenção e o impacto econômico do seu diagnóstico não tem sido avaliado. OBJETIVOS: Estimar os custos do diagnóstico e tratamento do câncer de pele não-melanoma no Estado de São Paulo entre 2000 a 2007 e compará-los com os do melanoma cutâneo no mesmo período. MÉTODOS: Foi utilizado como modelo de procedimento o projeto diretriz Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology, (National Comprehensive Cancer Network), adequado aos procedimentos da Fundação SOBECCan - Hospital do Câncer de Ribeirão Preto - SP. Os custos estimados baseiam-se nos valores do tratamento médico pagos pelos setores público e privado em 2007. RESULTADOS: Os valores médios de custo individual do tratamento anual do câncer de pele não-melanoma são muito mais baixos do que os estimados para o tratamento do melanoma cutâneo. Entretanto, observados os gastos totais no tratamento do câncer de pele não-melanoma, percebe-se que os 42.184 casos deste câncer em São Paulo, no período estudado, fazem com que o custo total do seu tratamento seja 14% superior ao dos 2.740 casos de melanoma cutâneo registrados no mesmo período para o SUS. Porém, para o sistema privado, o gasto total é, aproximadamente, 34% menor para o tratamento do câncer de pele não-melanoma. CONCLUSÃO: O elevado número de casos de câncer de pele não-melanoma no Brasil - com 114 mil novos casos previstos para 2010, sendo 95% diagnosticados em estágios precoces - representa um impacto financeiro ao sistema público e aos sistemas privados de saúde de cerca de R$ 37 milhões e R$ 26 milhões ao ano, respectivamente


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 32-32
Author(s):  
Aakash Desai ◽  
Harry E Fuentes ◽  
Sri Harsha Tella ◽  
Caleb J Scheckel ◽  
Thejaswi Poonacha ◽  
...  

Background: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines are the most comprehensive and widely used standard for clinical care in malignant hematology by clinicians and payers in the US. The level of scientific evidence in NCCN guidelines for malignant hematological conditions has not been recently investigated. We describe the distribution of categories of evidence and consensus (EC) among the 10 most common hematologic malignancies with regard to recommendations for staging, initial and salvage therapy, and surveillance. Methods: NCCN uses a system of guideline development distinct from other major professional organizations. The NCCN definitions for EC are: category I, high level of evidence such as randomized controlled trials with uniform consensus; category IIA, lower level of evidence with uniform consensus; category IIB, lower level of evidence without a uniform consensus but with no major disagreement; and category III, any level of evidence but with major disagreement. We compared our results with previously published results from 2011 guidelines. Results: Total recommendations increased by 16.6% from 1160 (2011) to 1353 (2020). Of the 1353 recommendations, Category 1, 2A, 2B and 3 EC were 5%, 91%, 4%, 1% while in 2011 they were 3%, 93%, 4% and 0% respectively. Recommendations with category 1 EC were found in all guidelines, except for Burkitt's Lymphoma. 6.3% of therapeutic recommendations were category 1 EC with the majority (56.4%) pertaining to initial therapy. Guidelines with highest proportions of therapeutic recommendations with category 1 EC were Multiple Myeloma (12.4%), CLL/SLL (6.9%) and AML (5.6%). Between 2011 and 2020, the proportion of category I recommendations increased significantly only in Follicular lymphoma and CLL/SLL. No category 1 EC recommendations existed in staging or surveillance. Conclusion: Recommendations issued in the 2020 NCCN guidelines are largely developed from lower levels of evidence but with uniform expert opinion. Despite the major advances in hematology in the past decade, this is largely unchanged. Our study underscores the urgent need and available opportunities to expand the current evidence base in malignant hematological disorders which forms the platform for clinical practice guidelines. Figure Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2007 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. 824
Author(s):  
_ _

Pain is one of the most common symptoms associated with cancer and one of the symptoms patients fear most; unrelieved pain denies them comfort and greatly affects their activities, motivation, interactions with family and friends, and overall quality of life. The importance of relieving pain and availability of effective therapies make it imperative that clinicians caring for cancer patients to be adept at assessing and treating cancer pain. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network Adult Cancer Pain Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology acknowledge the range of complex decisions faced in caring for these patients. As a result, they provide dosing guidelines for NSAIDs, opioids, and adjuvant analgesics. They also provide specific suggestions for escalating opioid dosage, managing opioid toxicity, and when and how to proceed to other techniques to manage cancer pain. For the most recent version of the guidelines, please visit NCCN.org


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document