This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Somerfield, M. R. Articles by Lyman, G. H. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Somerfield, M. R. Articles by Lyman, G. H. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines: Opportunities and Challenges

Mark R. Somerfield, Kaitlin Einhaus, Karen L. Hagerty, Melissa C. Brouwers, Jerome Seidenfeld, Gary H. Lyman

From the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA; Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; and the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Corresponding author: Mark R. Somerfield, PhD, 1900 Duke St, Alexandria, VA 22314; e-mail: Mark.somerfield{at}asco.org

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) published its first clinical practice guideline, which focused on the use of hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors, in 1994. Since then, ASCO has published 24 additional guidelines or technology assessments on a range of topics and is developing 11 additional guidelines. Guidelines are among ASCO's most valued products, according to membership surveys and data from the JCO.org Web site. However, the same data from ASCO members have highlighted a number of limitations to the guideline program. These relate to the timelines of guideline updates, difficulties locating guidelines and related products, and challenges to implementing ASCO guidelines in everyday clinical practice. This article outlines the concrete steps that the ASCO Health Services Committee (HSC) is taking to address these limitations, including the institution of a more aggressive guideline updating schedule, a transition from narrative to systematic literature reviews to support the practice recommendations, a new Board of Directors–approved policy to permit endorsement of other groups’ guidelines, and a robust Clinical Tools and Resources program that offers a range of guideline dissemination and implementation aids. Additional work is underway to establish stronger and deeper collaborations with practicing oncologists to expand their role in the review, field testing, and implementation of guideline clinical tools and resources. Finally, the HSC is discussing evaluation of the guidelines program to maximize the impact of ASCO clinical practice guidelines on clinical decision making and, ultimately, the quality of cancer care.

Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				I. Ray-Coquard, S. Dussart, C. Goillot, D. Mayeur, P. Debourdeau, H. Ghesquieres, T. Bachelot, A. Le Cesne, B. Anglaret, C. Agostini, et al. A risk model for severe anemia to select cancer patients for primary prophylaxis with epoetin {alpha}: a prospective randomized controlled trial of the ELYPSE study group Ann. Onc., June 1, 2009; 20(6): 1105 - 1112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. P. Balaban Current Issues Regarding ASCO Guideline Implementation J. Oncol. Pract, January 1, 2009; 5(1): 38 - 39. [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. P. Balaban, M. C. Brouwers, S. B. Temin, and G. H. Lyman Issues in Clinical Practice Guideline Implementation and Utilization ASCO Educational Book, January 1, 2009; 2009(1): 338 - 344. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. H. Lyman ASCO Clinical Practice Guidelines: Past, Present and Future J. Oncol. Pract, September 1, 2008; 4(5): 236 - 237. [Full Text] [PDF]