Annals of surgical oncology · 2025
Consensus Guideline for the Management of Peritoneal Mesothelioma.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Brown Leanne M, Wilkins Sarah G, Bansal Varun V, Su David G, Gomez-Mayorga Jorge, Turaga Kiran K, Gunderson Craig G, Lee Byrne, Nash Garrett M, Hays John L, Raghav Kanwal P, Husain Aliya L, Kluger Michael D, Zauderer Marjorie G, Kindler Hedy L, Alexander H Richard, Peritoneal Surface Malignancies (PSM) Consortium Group
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Treatment of peritoneal mesothelioma (PeM) poses significant challenges owing to its rare incidence, heterogeneity, and limited clinical evidence. This manuscript describes results from a national consensus aimed at addressing management of PeM.
METHODS: An update of the 2018 Chicago Consensus Guidelines was conducted using a Modified Delphi technique, encompassing two rounds of voting. The levels of agreement for various pathway blocks were assessed.
RESULTS: Of 101 participants responding in the first round of Modified Delphi voting, 95 (94%) responded in the second round. Over 90% consensus was achieved in 5/6 and 6/6 pathway blocks in rounds I and II, respectively. Observation was recommended for benign neoplasms, with guidance for interventions in the presence of symptoms or concerning clinicopathologic features. For malignant pathology, management was outlined based on a multidisciplinary assessment of patient characteristics, disease histology, and predictive success of medical and surgical interventions. Additional emphasis was placed on multimodal therapy for Intermediate-Risk and appropriate High-Risk patients. A rapid review demonstrated limited availability of data and inconclusive findings regarding optimal systemic therapy timing. There was unanimous support for considering clinical trial enrollment.
CONCLUSIONS: Given limited evidence, the consensus-driven pathway provides essential guidance regarding the management of PeM. To further direct clinical care, additional dedicated research to generate higher-quality evidence is needed.
METHODS: An update of the 2018 Chicago Consensus Guidelines was conducted using a Modified Delphi technique, encompassing two rounds of voting. The levels of agreement for various pathway blocks were assessed.
RESULTS: Of 101 participants responding in the first round of Modified Delphi voting, 95 (94%) responded in the second round. Over 90% consensus was achieved in 5/6 and 6/6 pathway blocks in rounds I and II, respectively. Observation was recommended for benign neoplasms, with guidance for interventions in the presence of symptoms or concerning clinicopathologic features. For malignant pathology, management was outlined based on a multidisciplinary assessment of patient characteristics, disease histology, and predictive success of medical and surgical interventions. Additional emphasis was placed on multimodal therapy for Intermediate-Risk and appropriate High-Risk patients. A rapid review demonstrated limited availability of data and inconclusive findings regarding optimal systemic therapy timing. There was unanimous support for considering clinical trial enrollment.
CONCLUSIONS: Given limited evidence, the consensus-driven pathway provides essential guidance regarding the management of PeM. To further direct clinical care, additional dedicated research to generate higher-quality evidence is needed.