Support of personalized medicine through risk-stratified treatment recommendations - an environmental scan of clinical practice guidelines

BMC Medicine

Milo A Puhan³  Cynthia Boyd¹  Tianjing Li³  Ravi Varadhan¹  Daniela Vollenweider²  Tsung Yu³ 

[1] Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA;Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA;Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA

关键词: treatment;    stroke;    risk assessment;    randomized trials;    guidelines;    diabetes;    COPD;    chronic disease;    cardiovascular disease;    Cancer;   

Others  :  857234
DOI  :  10.1186/1741-7015-11-7

 received in 2012-07-03, accepted in 2013-01-09,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Risk-stratified treatment recommendations facilitate treatment decision-making that balances patient-specific risks and preferences. It is unclear if and how such recommendations are developed in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Our aim was to assess if and how CPGs develop risk-stratified treatment recommendations for the prevention or treatment of common chronic diseases.

Methods

We searched the United States National Guideline Clearinghouse for US, Canadian and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (United Kingdom) CPGs for heart disease, stroke, cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and diabetes that make risk-stratified treatment recommendations. We included only those CPGs that made risk-stratified treatment recommendations based on risk assessment tools. Two reviewers independently identified CPGs and extracted information on recommended risk assessment tools; type of evidence about treatment benefits and harms; methods for linking risk estimates to treatment evidence and for developing treatment thresholds; and consideration of patient preferences.

Results

We identified 20 CPGs that made risk-stratified treatment recommendations out of 133 CPGs that made any type of treatment recommendations for the chronic diseases considered in this study. Of the included 20 CPGs, 16 (80%) used evidence about treatment benefits from randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses or other guidelines, and the source of evidence was unclear in the remaining four (20%) CPGs. Nine CPGs (45%) used evidence on harms from randomized controlled trials or observational studies, while 11 CPGs (55%) did not clearly refer to harms. Nine CPGs (45%) explained how risk prediction and evidence about treatments effects were linked (for example, applying estimates of relative risk reductions to absolute risks), but only one CPG (5%) assessed benefit and harm quantitatively and three CPGs (15%) explicitly reported consideration of patient preferences.

Conclusions

Only a small proportion of CPGs for chronic diseases make risk-stratified treatment recommendations with a focus on heart disease and stroke prevention, diabetes and breast cancer. For most CPGs it is unclear how risk-stratified treatment recommendations were developed. As a consequence, it is uncertain if CPGs support patients and physicians in finding an acceptable benefit- harm balance that reflects both profile-specific outcome risks and preferences.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Yu et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Kent DM, Hayward RA: Limitations of applying summary results of clinical trials to individual patients: the need for risk stratification. JAMA 2007, 298:1209-1212.
• [2]Falk JA, Minai OA, Mosenifar Z: Inhaled and systemic corticosteroids in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Proc Am Thorac Soc 2008, 5:506-512.
• [3]Puhan MA, Bachmann LM, Kleijnen J, Ter Riet G, Kessels AG: Inhaled drugs to reduce exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a network meta-analysis. BMC Med 2009, 7:2. BioMed Central Full Text
• [4]The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD): Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. [http://www.goldcopd.org/uploads/users/files/GOLD2011_Summary.pdf] webciteBethesda (MD): Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD); 2011.
• [5]Loke YK, Cavallazzi R, Singh S: Risk of fractures with inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Thorax 2011, 66:699-708.
• [6]Singh S, Amin AV, Loke YK: Long-term use of inhaled corticosteroids and the risk of pneumonia in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med 2009, 169:219-229.
• [7]Eddy DM, Adler J, Patterson B, Lucas D, Smith KA, Morris M: Individualized guidelines: the potential for increasing quality and reducing costs. Ann Intern Med 2011, 154:627-634.
• [8]Wennberg JE: Tracking Medicine: A Researcher's Quest to Understand Health Care. Ne York, USA: Oxford University Press; 2010.
• [9]27th Bethesda conference. Matching the intensity of risk factor management with the hazard for coronary disease events. September 14-15, 1995 J Am Coll Cardiol 1996, 27:957-1047.
• [10]National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III): Third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment anel III) final report. Circulation 2002, 106:3143-3421.
• [11]Dorresteijn JA, Visseren FL, Ridker PM, Paynter NP, Wassink AM, Buring JE, van der Graaf Y, Cook NR: Aspirin for primary prevention of vascular events in women: individualized prediction of treatment effects. Eur Heart J 2011, 32:2962-2969.
• [12]Dorresteijn JA, Visseren FL, Ridker PM, Wassink AM, Paynter NP, van der Graaf Y, Cook NR: Estimating treatment effects for individual patients based on the results of randomised clinical trials. BMJ 2011, 343:d5888.
• [13]Hill JC, Whitehurst DG, Lewis M, Bryan S, Dunn KM, Foster NE, Konstantinou K, Main CJ, Mason E, Somerville S, Sowden G, Vohora K, Hay EM: Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2011, 378:1560-1571.
• [14]Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: The Burden of Chronic Diseases and Their Risk Factors: National and State Perspectives 2004. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2005.
• [15]US Cancer Statistics Working Group: [http://www.cdc.gov/uscs] webciteUnited States Cancer Statistics: 1999-2007 Incidence and Mortality Web-based Report. Atlanta (GA): Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National Cancer Institute; 2010.
• [16]D'Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA, Tomaszewski JE, Renshaw AA, Kaplan I, Beard CJ, Wein A: Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1998, 280:969-974.
• [17]Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Merz CN, Brewer HB Jr, Clark LT, Hunninghake DB, Pasternak RC, Smith SC Jr, Stone NJ, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, American College of Cardiology Foundation, American Heart Association: Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. Circulation 2004, 110:227-239.
• [18]National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): [http://guidance.nice.org.uk/TA94] webciteStatins for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Events. London (UK): National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE); 2006.
• [19]Goldstein LB, Adams R, Alberts MJ, Goldstein LB, Adams R, Alberts MJ, Appel LJ, Brass LM, Bushnell CD, Culebras A, DeGraba TJ, Gorelick PB, Guyton JR, Hart RG, Howard G, Kelly-Hayes M, Nixon JV, Sacco RL: Primary prevention of ischemic stroke: a guideline from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Stroke Council: cosponsored by the Atherosclerotic Peripheral Vascular Disease Interdisciplinary Working Group; Cardiovascular Nursing Council; Clinical Cardiology Council; Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism Council; and the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Working Group. Circulation 2006, 113:e873-923.
• [20]Mosca L, Banka CL, Benjamin EJ, Berra K, Bushnell C, Dolor RJ, Ganiats TG, Gomes AS, Gornik HL, Gracia C, Gulati M, Haan CK, Judelson DR, Keenan N, Kelepouris E, Michos ED, Newby LK, Oparil S, Ouyang P, Oz MC, Petitti D, Pinn VW, Redberg RF, Scott R, Sherif K, Smith SC Jr, Sopko G, Steinhorn RH, Stone NJ, Taubert KA, et al.: Evidence-based guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention in women: 2007 update. Circulation 2007, 115:1481-1501.
• [21]Medical Services Commission: [http://www.bcguidelines.ca/pdf/cvd.pdf] webciteCardiovascular Disease - Primary Prevention. Victoria (BC): British Columbia Medical Services Commission; 2008.
• [22]National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care: [http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG67] webciteLipid modification. Cardiovascular Risk Assessment and the Modification of Blood Lipids for the Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease. London (UK): National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE); 2008.
• [23]Becker RC, Meade TW, Berger PB, Ezekowitz M, O'Connor CM, Vorchheimer DA, Guyatt GH, Mark DB, Harrington RA, American College of Chest Physicians: The primary and secondary prevention of coronary artery disease: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Chest 2008, 133:776S-814S.
• [24]Medical Services Commission: [http://www.bcguidelines.ca/pdf/hypertension.pdf] webciteHypertension - Detection, Diagnosis and Management. Victoria (BC): British Columbia Medical Services Commission; 2008.
• [25]U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Aspirin for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2009, 150:396-404.
• [26]University of Michigan Health System: [http://www.med.umich.edu/1info/fhp/practiceguides/lipids.html] webciteScreening and Management of Lipids. Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan Health System; 2009.
• [27]Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI): [http:/ / www.icsi.org/ guidelines_and_more/ gl_os_prot/ cardiovascular/ lipid_management_3/ lipid_management_in_adults__4.html] webciteLipid Management in Adults. Bloomington (MN): Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI); 2009.
• [28]Michigan Quality Improvement Consortium: [http:/ / www.mqic.org/ pdf/ mqic_screening_and_management_of_hy percholesterolemia_cpg.pdf] webciteScreening and Management of Hypercholesterolemia. Southfield (MI): Michigan Quality Improvement Consortium; 2009.
• [29]Rosenzweig JL, Ferrannini E, Grundy SM, Haffner SM, Heine RJ, Horton ES, Kawamori R, Endocrine Society: Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes in patients at metabolic risk: an Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008, 93:3671-3689.
• [30]National Collaborating Centre for Chronic Conditions: [http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=download&o=40803] webciteType 2 Diabetes: National Clinical Guideline for Management in Primary and Secondary Care (update). London (UK): National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE); 2008.
• [31]Medical Services Commission: [http://www.bcguidelines.ca/pdf/diabetes.pdf] webciteDiabetes Care. Victoria (BC): British Columbia Medical Services Commission; 2010.
• [32]American Diabetes Association: Standards of medical care in diabetes--2011. Diabetes Care 2011, 34:S11-S61.
• [33]University of Michigan Health System: Common Breast Problems. [http://www.med.umich.edu/1info/fhp/practiceguides/breast.html] webciteAnn Arbor (MI): University of Michigan Health System; 2007.
• [34]Berliner JL, Fay AM, Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors' Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group: Risk assessment and genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. J Genet Couns 2007, 16:241-260.
• [35]Visvanathan K, Chlebowski R, Hurley P, Col NF, Ropka M, Collyar D, Morrow M, Runowicz C, Pritchard KI, Hagerty K, Arun B, Garber J, Vogel V, Wade JL, Brown P, Cuzick J, Kramer BS, Lippman SM: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline update on the use of pharmacologic interventions including tamoxifen, raloxifene, and aromatase inhibition for breast cancer risk reduction. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:3235-3258.
• [36]National Collaborating Centre for Cancer: [http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG80] webciteEarly and Locally Advanced Breast Cancer: Diagnosis and Treatment. London (UK): National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE); 2009.
• [37]Altman DG, Royston P: What do we mean by validating a prognostic model? Stat Med 2000, 19:453-473.
• [38]Altman DG, Vergouwe Y, Royston P, Moons KG: Prognosis and prognostic research: validating a prognostic model. BMJ 2009, 338:b605.
• [39]Bleeker SE, Moll HA, Steyerberg EW, Donders AR, Derksen-Lubsen G, Grobbee DE, Moons KG: External validation is necessary in prediction research: a clinical example. J Clin Epidemiol 2003, 56:826-832.
• [40]Quanstrum KH, Hayward RA: Lessons from the mammography wars. N Engl J Med 2010, 363:1076-1079.
• [41]Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Vist GE, Liberati A, Schünemann HJ, GRADE Working Group: Going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ 2008, 336:1049-1051.
• [42]Pignone M, Earnshaw S, Pletcher MJ, Tice JA: Aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in women: a cost-utility analysis. Arch Intern Med 2007, 167:290-295.
• [43]Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Meerpohl J, Norris S, Guyatt GH: GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011, 64:401-406.
• [44]Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, Montori V, Akl EA, Djulbegovic B, Falck-Ytter Y, Norris SL, Williams JW Jr, Atkins D, Meerpohl J, Schünemann HJ: GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence--study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol 2011, 64:407-415.
• [45]Guo JJ, Pandey S, Doyle J, Bian B, Lis Y, Raisch DW: A review of quantitative risk-benefit methodologies for assessing drug safety and efficacy - report of the ISPOR risk-benefit management working group. Value Health 2010, 13:657-666.
• [46]Institute of Medicine of the National Academies: [http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309164257] webciteFinding What Works in Health Care. Standards for Systematic Reviews. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011.
• [47]Kreis J, Puhan MA, Schünemann HJ, Dickersin K: Consumer involvement in systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness research. Health Expect 2012, in press.
• [48]Nilsen ES, Myrhaug HT, Johansen M, Oliver S, Oxman AD: Methods of consumer involvement in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines and patient information material. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, 3:CD004563.