RESUMEN

This article reports the annals of a national consensus meeting on add-ons and social networks in Assisted Reproduction Techniques (ART). The panel of experts has developed a set of consensus points and this document is intended to be referenced as a national consensus to allow social networks and add-ons to be used in ART, following the standards of the Code of Medical Ethics and the Federal Council of Medicine, in a safe ethical and responsible way.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Cancer patients often suffer from malnutrition and early detection and raising awareness of nutritional issues is crucial in this population. METHODS: The Spanish Oncology Society (SEOM) conducted the Quasar_SEOM study to investigate the current impact of the Anorexia-Cachexia Syndrome (ACS). The study employed questionnaires and the Delphi method to gather input from both cancer patients and oncologists on key issues related to early detection and treatment of ACS. A total of 134 patients and 34 medical oncologists were surveyed about their experiences with ACS. The Delphi methodology was used to evaluate oncologists' perspectives of ACS management, ultimately leading to a consensus on the most critical issues. RESULTS: Despite widespread acknowledgement of malnutrition in cancer as a significant issue by 94% of oncologists, the study revealed deficiencies in knowledge and protocol implementation. A mere 65% of physicians reported being trained to identify and treat these patients, with 53% failing to address ACS in a timely manner, 30% not monitoring weight, and 59% not adhering to any clinical guidelines. The lack of experience was identified as the primary hindrance to the use of orexigens in 18% of cases. Furthermore, patients reported concerns and a perception of inadequate attention to malnutrition-related issues from their physicians. CONCLUSION: The results of this study point to a gap in the care of this syndrome and a need to improve education and follow-up of cancer patients with anorexia-cachexia.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: To reach a consensus on recommendations for the management of high-risk and post-operative non-metastatic prostate cancer by a group of Radiation Oncologists in Catalonia dedicated to prostate cancer. METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was employed to reach consensus on controversial topics in Radiation Oncology on high-risk non-metastatic (eight questions) and post-operative (eight questions) prostate cancer. An agreement of at least 75% was considered as consensus. The survey was electronically sent 6 weeks before an expert meeting where topics were reviewed and discussed. A second-round survey for the controversial questions only was sent and answered by participants after the meeting. RESULTS: After the first round of the survey, 19 experienced Radiation Oncologists attended the meeting and 74% fulfilled the second-round online questionnaire. An agreement of 9 of the 16 questions was accounted for the first round. After the meeting, an additional agreement was reached in 3 questions leading to a final consensus on 12 of the 16 questions. There are still controversial topics like the use of PET for staging of high-risk and post-operative non-metastatic prostate cancer and the optimal dose to the prostate bed in the salvage setting. CONCLUSION: This consensus contributes to establish recommendations and a framework to help in prostate cancer radiation therapy and pharmacological management in daily clinical practice of high-risk and post-operative non-metastatic prostate cancer.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite the significant advances made in the diagnosis and treatment of Barrett's esophagus (BE), there is still a need for standardized definitions, appropriate recognition of endoscopic landmarks, and consistent use of classification systems. Current controversies in basic definitions of BE and the relative lack of anatomic knowledge are significant barriers to uniform documentation. We aimed to provide consensus-driven recommendations for uniform reporting and global application. METHODS: The World Endoscopy Organization Barrett's Esophagus Committee appointed leaders to develop an evidence-based Delphi study. A working group of 6 members identified and formulated 23 statements, and 30 internationally recognized experts from 18 countries participated in 3 rounds of voting. We defined consensus as agreement by ≥80% of experts for each statement and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool to assess the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. RESULTS: After 3 rounds of voting, experts achieved consensus on 6 endoscopic landmarks (palisade vessels, gastroesophageal junction, squamocolumnar junction, lesion location, extraluminal compressions, and quadrant orientation), 13 definitions (BE, hiatus hernia, squamous islands, columnar islands, Barrett's endoscopic therapy, endoscopic resection, endoscopic ablation, systematic inspection, complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia, complete eradication of dysplasia, residual disease, recurrent disease, and failure of endoscopic therapy), and 4 classification systems (Prague, Los Angeles, Paris, and Barrett's International NBI Group). In round 1, 18 statements (78%) reached consensus, with 12 (67%) receiving strong agreement from more than half of the experts. In round 2, 4 of the remaining statements (80%) reached consensus, with 1 statement receiving strong agreement from 50% of the experts. In the third round, a consensus was reached on the remaining statement. CONCLUSIONS: We developed evidence-based, consensus-driven statements on endoscopic landmarks, definitions, and classifications of BE. These recommendations may facilitate global uniform reporting in BE.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Immunotherapy-based approaches are standard first-line treatments for advanced/metastatic lung cancer or for chemoradiotherapy consolidation in locally advanced disease. Uncertainty on how to treat patients at disease progression prompted us to develop a consensus document on post-immunotherapy options in Spain for patients with advanced wild-type lung adenocarcinoma. METHODS: After extensive literature review, a 5-member scientific committee generated 33 statements in 4 domains: general aspects (n = 4); post-durvalumab in locally advanced disease (n = 6); post-first-line immunotherapy ± chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic disease (n = 11); and post-first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic disease (n = 12). A panel of 26 lung cancer experts completed 2 Delphi iterations through an online platform rating their degree of agreement/disagreement (first-round scale 1-5 and second-round scale 1-4, 1 = strongly disagree, 4/5 = strongly agree) for each statement. Second-round consensus: ≥ 70% of responses were in categories 1/2 (disagreement) or 3/4 (agreement). RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 2/33 statements in the first Delphi round and in 29/31 statements in the second round. Important variables informing treatment at disease progression with an immunotherapy-based treatment include: disease aggressiveness, previous treatment, accumulated toxicity, progression-free interval, PD-L1 expression, and tumour mutational burden. A platinum-based chemotherapy should follow a first-line immunotherapy treatment without chemotherapy. Treatment with docetaxel + nintedanib may be appropriate post-durvalumab in refractory patients or following progression to first-line chemotherapy + immunotherapy, or second-line chemotherapy after first-line immunotherapy, or first-line chemotherapy in some patients with low/negative PD-L1 expression, or second-line immunotherapy after first-line chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: To support decision making following progression to immunotherapy-based treatment in patients with advanced wild-type lung adenocarcinoma, a consensus document has been developed.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Decision-making in cancer-related venous thromboembolism (VTE) is often founded on scant lines of evidence and weak recommendations. The aim of this work is to evaluate the percentage of agreement surrounding a series of statements about complex, clinically relevant, and highly uncertain aspects to formulate explicit action guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Opinions were based on a structured questionnaire with appropriate scores and were agreed upon using a Delphi method. Questions were selected based on a list of recommendations with low evidence from the Spanish Society of Oncology Clinical Guideline for Thrombosis. The questionnaire was completed in two iterations by a multidisciplinary panel of experts in thrombosis. RESULTS: Of the 123 statements analyzed, the panel concurred on 22 (17%) and another 81 (65%) were agreed on by qualified majority, including important aspects of long-term and prolonged anticoagulation, major bleeding and rethrombosis management, treatment in special situations, catheter-related thrombosis and thromboprophylaxis. Among them, the panelists agreed the incidental events should be equated to symptomatic ones, long-term and extended use of full-dose low-molecular weight heparin, and concluded that the Khorana score is not sensitive enough to uphold an effective thromboprophylaxis strategy. CONCLUSION: Though the level of consensus varied depending on the scenario presented, overall, the iterative process achieved broad agreement as to the general treatment principles of cancer-associated VTE. Clinical validation of these statements in genuine practice conditions would be useful.

Asunto(s)