GuidelineDeutsches Arzteblatt international2021
Clinical Practice Guideline: Anal Cancer—Diagnosis, Treatment and Follow-up
Guideline in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Current guidelines for the management of anogenital diseases].Dermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- [Diagnostics, treatment and aftercare of anal cancer].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- An Updated Review on Imaging and Staging of Anal Cancer-Not Just Rectal Cancer.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe number of anal cancer diagnoses has been rising steadily, so that the incidence has doubled in the past 20 years. Almost all anal cancers are induced by persistent infection with human papillomaviruses. Hitherto the care of patients with anal cancer has been heterogeneous and little experience exists with the primary management of anal cancer.
methodsThe guideline was developed in accordance with the requirements of the German Guideline Program in Oncology. In line with the GRADE approach, the certainty of the evidence was assessed on the outcome level following a systematic literature search. Interdisciplinary working groups were set up to compile suggestions for recommendations, which were discussed and agreed upon in a formal consensus conference.
resultsNinety-three recommendations and statements were developed. No high-quality evidence was available to support recommendations for or against the treatment of stage I anal cancer with local excision alone as an alternative to chemoradiotherapy. Chemoradiotherapy is the gold standard in the treatment of stages II–III. Among other aspects regarding the timing and extent of response evaluation after chemoradiotherapy, the guideline panel recommended against obtaining a biopsy in the event of complete clinical response. Owing to lack of confidence in the available evidence, only open recommendations were given for treatment of stage IV.
conclusionThis evidence-based clinical practice guideline provides a sound basis for optimizing the interdisciplinary, cross-sector care of anal cancer patients. Among other areas, gaps in research were identified with respect to the care of patients with early-stage or metastatic anal cancer. Approaches such as chemoradiotherapy combined with regional deep hyperthermia require further investigation. The role for immunotherapy in the management of metastasized anal cancer has also been insufficiently explored to date.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.