• E Parmelli, D Papini, L Moja, E Bandieri, M Belfiglio, G Ciccone, R De Palma, M Leoni, G Longo, N Magrini, I Moschetti, and A Liberati.
• Department of Oncology, Ematologia e Patologie dell'Apparato Respiratorio, Università degli Studi di Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy. elena.parmelli@unimore.it
• Ann. Oncol. 2011 Jan 1;22(1):188-94.

Backgroundclinical guidelines can improve quality of care summarising available knowledge and proposing recommendations for health care decisions. Being up to date is one of their quality requisites. Little experience is available on when and how guidelines should be updated. We report on the update process of evidence-based clinical recommendations on anticancer drugs.Methodsthree multidisciplinary panels, supported by methodology experts, updated the recommendations. The methodologists were in charge of the qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the evidence. The panels were responsible for the final decision about risk/benefit profile of the drugs and strength of the recommendations. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used.Resultssix recommendations out of 15 were completely updated in 8 months time. In four cases, the strength of the recommendation changed; in two of them, we moved from a weak to a strong positive one. Despite the increased certainty about the positive risk/benefit profile, this was translated in a change in the strength of the recommendation only in one case out of three. Three recommendations were refined making them more clinically specific.Conclusionsaccumulation of evidence is an opportunity for guideline panels to refine methodological rigour, clinical relevance and to foster consensus on recommendations. This requires time and resource investments.

16 keywords...

hide…