Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36011054›Full record

ArticleCancers2022

Levels of Evidence Supporting United States Guidelines in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Treatment.

Anna Pellat, Isabelle Boutron, Romain Coriat, Philippe Ravaud

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anna PellatGastroentérologie et Oncologie Digestive, Hôpital Cochin, AP-HP, 27 Rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques, Université Paris Cité, 75014 Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6024-4830
Isabelle BoutronCentre of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS), Inserm U1153, 1 Parvis de Notre Dame, Université Paris Cité, 75004 Paris, France.
Romain CoriatGastroentérologie et Oncologie Digestive, Hôpital Cochin, AP-HP, 27 Rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques, Université Paris Cité, 75014 Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-4420-8340
Philippe RavaudCentre of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS), Inserm U1153, 1 Parvis de Notre Dame, Université Paris Cité, 75004 Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cancer guidelines are ideally based on high levels of evidence (LOE). We aim to evaluate the LOE supporting recommendations in United States (US) guidelines on pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treatment and its evolution over time. We searched for current guidelines from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and their prior publicly available versions on societies' websites and/or MEDLINE. We recorded the LOE and class of recommendation (opinion of the writing panel) for each recommendation. We defined high LOE as: a "high" quality of evidence from the GRADE methodology (ASCO) and "Category 1" (NCCN). Our main outcome was the proportion of PDAC recommendations supported by high LOE. Proportions of high LOE recommendations were 5% (2/40) and 8% (12/153) in current ASCO and NCCN guidelines, respectively. Less than 10% of class I recommendations were based on high LOE. For NCCN guidelines, the proportion of high LOE recommendations did not improve over time and only three recommendations increased their LOE. We identified a small percentage of high LOE recommendations for PDAC treatment in US guidelines. However, guidelines authors can only deal with the available evidence. The current framework of evidence should be challenged with consideration of observational evidence.

Indexed as

level of evidencepancreatic adenocarcinomatreatmentUnited States guidelines

Identifiers

PMID36011054
PMCPMC9406577

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.