Abstract
Context: Numerous health care organizations have established guidelines on diagnosis and treatment of bladder cancer. However, the lack of a standardized guideline development approach results in considerable differences of the guidelines’ methodological quality. Objective: To assess the methodological quality of all relevant clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for urinary bladder cancer and provide a reference for clinicians in choosing guidelines of high methodological quality. Evidence Acquisition: A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline via PubMed, 4 CPG databases, and 7 databases of interdisciplinary organizations. CPGs for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) with the topics screening, pathology, diagnosis, treatment, and aftercare published in English language between 2012 and 2018 were included. The CPG quality was analyzed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Evidence Synthesis: A total of 16 CPGs were included for the quality appraisal. Because of predefined criteria, 5 CPGs were “strongly recommended” (American Urological Association NMIBC, European Association of Urology [EAU] NMIBC, EAU MIBC, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network), 4 CPGs were “weakly recommended” and 7 CPGs were “not recommended.” Conclusions: The methodological quality of bladder cancer guidelines is diverse. Considering the rapid development of new therapies (e.g., immune checkpoint inhibitors), “living guidelines” of high methodological quality, such as the EAU NMIBC or MIBC guideline, will become more relevant in the future guideline’s landscape.
References
1.
Ferlay
J
, Soerjomataram
I
, Dikshit
R
, Eser
S
, Mathers
C
, Rebelo
M
, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012
. Int J Cancer
. 2015
;136
(5
):E359
–86
. 2.
Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration
. Global, regional, and national cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life-years for 32 cancer groups, 1990 to 2015: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study
. JAMA Oncol
. 2017
;3
(4
):524
–48
. 3.
Richters
A
, Aben
KKH
, Kiemeney
LALM
. The global burden of urinary bladder cancer: an update
. World J Urol
. 2019 Nov 1
.Epub ahead of print
. 4.
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee to Advise the Public Health Service on Clinical Practice Guidelines
. Clinical practice guidelines: directions for a new program
. Field
MJ
, Lohr
KN
, editors. Washington, DC
: National Academies Press
; 1990
.5.
Burls
A
. AGREE II-improving the quality of clinical care
. Lancet
. 2010
;376
(9747
):1128
–9
. 6.
Merseburger
AS
, Apolo
AB
, Chowdhury
S
, Hahn
NM
, Galsky
MD
, Milowsky
MI
, et al. SIU-ICUD recommendations on bladder cancer: systemic therapy for metastatic bladder cancer
. World J Urol
. 2019
;37
(1
):95
–105
. 7.
Leow
JJ
, Bedke
J
, Chamie
K
, Collins
JW
, Daneshmand
S
, Grivas
P
, et al. SIU–ICUD consultation on bladder cancer: treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer
. World J Urol
. 2019
;37
(1
):61
–83
. 8.
Brouwers
MC
, Kho
ME
, Browman
GP
, Burgers
JS
, Cluzeau
F
, Feder
G
, et al. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting, and evaluation in health care
. Prev Med
. 2010
;51
(5
):421
–4
. 9.
Available from: http://www.agreetrust.org. [cited 2017 Dec 12]
.10.
AGREE Collaboration
. Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: the AGREE project
. Qual Saf Health Care
. 2003
;12
(1
):18
–23
.11.
Available from: https://www.agreetrust.org/about-the-agree-enterprise/agree-history/. [cited 2017 Dec 12]
.12.
Leyendecker
JR
, Clingan
MJ
, Remer
EM
, Bishoff
JT
, Blaufox
MD
, Eberhardt
SC
, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® pretreatment staging of invasive bladder cancer
. Reston, VA
: American College of Radiology
; 2012
.13.
Leyendecker
JR
, Clingan
MJ
, Eberhardt
SC
, Friedman
B
, Fulgham
PF
, Hartman
MS
, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® post-treatment surveillance of bladder cancer
. Reston, VA
: American College of Radiology
; 2014
.14.
Alberta Health Services
. Nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer
. 2013
.15.
Alberta Health Services
. Muscle invasive and locally advanced/metastatic bladder cancer
. 2013
.16.
Chang
SS
, Boorjian
SA
, Chou
R
, Clark
PE
, Daneshmand
S
, Konety
BR
, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: AUA/SUO Guideline
. J Urol
. 2016
;196
(4
):1021
–9
. 17.
Chang
SS
, Bochner
BH
, Chou
R
, Dreicer
R
, Kamat
AM
, Lerner
SP
, et al. Treatment of non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer: AUA/ASCO/ASTRO/SUO Guideline
. J Urol
. 2017
;198
(3
):552
–9
. 18.
Kassouf
W
, Traboulsi
SL
, Kulkarni
GS
, Breau
RH
, Zlotta
A
, Fairey
A
, et al. CUA guidelines on the management of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer
. Can Urol Assoc J
. 2015
;9
(9–10
):E690
–704
. 19.
European Association of Urology
. Guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder
. 2018
.20.
European Association of Urology
. Guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer
. 2018
.21.
European Association of Urology
. Guidelines on lasers and technologies
. 2014
.22.
European Association of Urology
. Guidelines on robotic- and single-site surgery in urology
. 2014
.23.
Bellmunt
J
, Orsola
A
, Leow
JJ
, Wiegel
T
, De Santis
M
, Horwich
A
, et al. Bladder cancer: ESMO Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up
. Ann Oncol
. 2014
;25
(Suppl 3
):iii40
–8
. 24.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
. Bladder cancer: diagnosis and management of bladder cancer: © NICE (2015)
. BJU Int
. 2015
;120
(6
):755
–65
. 25.
Flaig
TW
, Spiess
PE
, Agarwal
N
, Bangs
R
, Boorjian
SA
, Buyyounouski
MK
, et al. NCCN guidelines insights: bladder cancer, version 5.2018
. J Natl Compr Canc Netw
. 2018
;16
(9
):1041
–53
.26.
British Uro-Oncology Group (BUG); British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS); Action on Bladder Cancer (ABC)
. Multi-disciplinary team (MDT) guidance for managing bladder cancer
. 2013
.27.
Lazaro
M
, Gallardo
E
, Doménech
M
, Pinto
Á
, González-del-Alba
A
, Del Alba
AG
, et al. SEOM clinical guideline for treatment of muscle-invasive and metastatic urothelial bladder cancer (2016)
. Clin Transl Oncol
. 2016
;18
(12
):1197
–205
. 28.
Moher
D
, Liberati
A
, Tetzlaff
J
, Altman
DG
. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
. Open Med
. 2009
;3
(3
):e123
-30
.29.
Available from: https://www.agreetrust.org/resource-centre/ [cited 2017 Dec 12]
.30.
Bladder cancer: diagnosis and management of bladder cancer: © NICE (2015) Bladder cancer: diagnosis and management of bladder cancer
. BJU Int
. 2017
;120
(6
):755
–65
. 31.
Alonso-Coello
P
, Irfan
A
, Solà
I
, Gich
I
, Delgado-Noguera
M
, Rigau
D
, et al. The quality of clinical practice guidelines over the last two decades: a systematic review of guideline appraisal studies
. Qual Saf Health Care
. 2010
;19
(6
):e58
. 32.
Guyatt
GH
, Oxman
AD
, Vist
GE
, Kunz
R
, Falck-Ytter
Y
, Alonso-Coello
P
, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
. BMJ
. 2008
;336
(7650
):924
–6
. © 2020 S. Karger AG, Basel
2020
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.
