Global consensus for the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and surveillance of ovarian cancer in areas of significant resource limitations: report from the International Gynecological Cancer Society consensus meeting.
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Maluf Fernando, Helber Henrique A, Tostes Francinne, Maluf Ligia A, Helito Juliana K, Moretti-Marques Renato, Dal Molin Graziela Z, Azevedo Bruno Roberto B, Ortiz David I, Cantu David, Silva Filho Agnaldo L, Nogueira-Rodrigues Angelica, Ribeiro Reitan, Cintra Georgia F, Guitmann Gustavo, de Melo Andreia Cristina, Paulino Eduardo, Baiocchi Glauco, Resende Leandro, de Almeida Michelle S, de Andrade Diocesio A, de la Vega Julio L, Noll Florencia, Fin Fabio, Lopes Andre, Correa Miguel E, Ng Joseph S, Sanabria Daniel, Rendon Gabriel, Heredia Fernando, Lopes Ana Paula E, Mussi Myriam B, Bobinski Marcin, Quintanilla Milagros P, Meymar Jimena, Atallah David, Tsunoda Audrey
Аннотация
METHODS: The panel met in New York in September/October 2022 during the International Gynecological Cancer Society congress and was composed of specialists from countries in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, and the Middle East. The panel addressed 72 questions and provided recommendations for the diagnosis, staging, treatment, and surveillance of ovarian cancer. Consensus was defined as at least 75% of the voting members selecting a particular recommendation, whereas a majority vote was considered when one option garnered between 50% and 74.9% of votes. Resource limitation was defined as any issues limiting access to qualified surgeons, contemporary imaging or radiation-oncology techniques, antineoplastic drugs, or funding for providing modern medical care.
RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 10 out of 72 (13.9%) questions presented to the panel, whereas a majority vote was reached for 26 (36.1%) additional questions. For the remaining questions, there was considerable heterogeneity in the recommendations.
CONCLUSION: The development of guidelines focusing on areas facing more severe resource limitations may improve medical practice and patient care.