PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Gastric cancer (GC) has been known as one of the most common causes of cancer mortality both in Western and Eastern countries. However, there might be differences between how it is managed in different countries. Thus, we aimed to investigate these differences.
METHODS: The most well-known clinical guidelines in field of GC management including Korean GC Association (KGCA), Japanese GC Association (JGCA), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), and National Institute for health and Care Excellence (NICE) have been reviewed.
RESULTS: The contents of these guidelines were categorized under eight headings including (1) genetic predisposition, (2) prevention, (3) management of gastric polyp, atrophy, dysplasia and metaplasia, (4) diagnosis, (5) pathology and molecular biology, (6) treatment, (7) supportive and palliative care, and (8) follow up. Difference in each section was discussed.
CONCLUSIONS: Considering KGCA and JGCA as Eastern and NCCN, ESMO, BSG, and NICE as Western guidelines, it is revealed that both sets of guidelines share common practices such as prioritizing comprehensive diagnostic evaluations, personalizing treatment plans, and palliative care. However, main differences can be seen in treatment regimens, the adoption of newer therapies like immunotherapy, and the utilization of emerging techniques such as HIPEC. These differences reflect the diverse clinical landscapes, research focuses, and healthcare systems within these regions.
METHODS: The most well-known clinical guidelines in field of GC management including Korean GC Association (KGCA), Japanese GC Association (JGCA), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), and National Institute for health and Care Excellence (NICE) have been reviewed.
RESULTS: The contents of these guidelines were categorized under eight headings including (1) genetic predisposition, (2) prevention, (3) management of gastric polyp, atrophy, dysplasia and metaplasia, (4) diagnosis, (5) pathology and molecular biology, (6) treatment, (7) supportive and palliative care, and (8) follow up. Difference in each section was discussed.
CONCLUSIONS: Considering KGCA and JGCA as Eastern and NCCN, ESMO, BSG, and NICE as Western guidelines, it is revealed that both sets of guidelines share common practices such as prioritizing comprehensive diagnostic evaluations, personalizing treatment plans, and palliative care. However, main differences can be seen in treatment regimens, the adoption of newer therapies like immunotherapy, and the utilization of emerging techniques such as HIPEC. These differences reflect the diverse clinical landscapes, research focuses, and healthcare systems within these regions.
摘要：
■胃癌（GC）在西方和东方国家都被认为是癌症死亡的最常见原因之一。然而,不同国家的管理方式可能有所不同。因此，我们的目的是调查这些差异。
方法：GC管理领域最著名的临床指南，包括韩国GC协会（KGCA），日本GC协会（JGCA），国家综合癌症网络（NCCN）欧洲医学肿瘤学会（ESMO），英国胃肠病学会（BSG），和国家健康与护理卓越研究所（NICE）已经过审查。
结果：这些指南的内容分为八个标题，包括（1）遗传易感性，(2)预防,(3)胃息肉的管理,萎缩,发育不良和化生，(4)诊断,（5）病理学和分子生物学，(6)治疗,（7）支持和姑息治疗，（8）跟进。讨论了每个部分的差异。
结论：将KGCA和JGCA视为东部和NCCN，ESMO,BSG,和西方指南一样好，据透露，两套指南都有共同的做法，例如优先考虑全面的诊断评估，个性化治疗计划，和姑息治疗。然而,主要区别在于治疗方案，采用较新的疗法，如免疫疗法，以及HIPEC等新兴技术的利用。这些差异反映了不同的临床景观，研究重点,以及这些地区的医疗保健系统。
方法：GC管理领域最著名的临床指南，包括韩国GC协会（KGCA），日本GC协会（JGCA），国家综合癌症网络（NCCN）欧洲医学肿瘤学会（ESMO），英国胃肠病学会（BSG），和国家健康与护理卓越研究所（NICE）已经过审查。
结果：这些指南的内容分为八个标题，包括（1）遗传易感性，(2)预防,(3)胃息肉的管理,萎缩,发育不良和化生，(4)诊断,（5）病理学和分子生物学，(6)治疗,（7）支持和姑息治疗，（8）跟进。讨论了每个部分的差异。
结论：将KGCA和JGCA视为东部和NCCN，ESMO,BSG,和西方指南一样好，据透露，两套指南都有共同的做法，例如优先考虑全面的诊断评估，个性化治疗计划，和姑息治疗。然而,主要区别在于治疗方案，采用较新的疗法，如免疫疗法，以及HIPEC等新兴技术的利用。这些差异反映了不同的临床景观，研究重点,以及这些地区的医疗保健系统。
