Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Strategies for Translating Evidence-Based Medicine in Lung Cancer into Community Practice

  • Lung Cancer (JM Johnson, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Oncology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment has rapidly evolved over the past decade. This is exemplified by the use of molecular targeted agents, immunotherapies, and newer technologies such as stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). As the translation of preclinical discoveries into clinical practice continues, the effective dissemination and implementation of evidence-based treatment of NSCLC will remain a foremost challenge for oncologists. To further extend evidence-based medicine into the community setting, community oncologists are being engaged on multiple fronts including leadership and participation in national clinical trials and utilization of internet-based resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Tsao MS, Sakurada A, Cutz JC, et al. Erlotinib in lung cancer—molecular and clinical predictors of outcome. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:133–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Eberhard DA, Johnson BE, Amler LC, et al. Mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor and in KRAS are predictive and prognostic indicators in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy alone and in combination with erlotinib. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5900–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Paez JG, Janne PA, Lee JC, et al. EGFR mutations in lung cancer: correlation with clinical response to gefitinib therapy. Science. 2004;304:1497–500.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Shaw AT, Solomon BJ. Crizotinib in ROS1-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:683–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Morgensztern D, Campo MJ, Dahlberg SE, et al. Molecularly targeted therapies in non-small-cell lung cancer annual update 2014. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10:S1–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Borghaei H, Paz-Ares L, Horn L, et al. Nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1627–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Brahmer J, Reckamp KL, Baas P, et al. Nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced squamous-cell non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:123–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Herbst RS, Baas P, Kim DW, et al. Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel for previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-010): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387:1540–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Reck M, Rodríguez-Abreu D, Robinson AG, et al. Pembrolizumab versus Chemotherapy for PD-L1-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 10;375(19):1823–1833

  10. Chang JY, Senan S, Paul MA, et al. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus lobectomy for operable stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis of two randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:630–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Timmerman R, Paulus R, Galvin J, et al. Stereotactic body radiation therapy for inoperable early stage lung cancer. JAMA. 2010;303:1070–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Gomez DR, Liao KP, Giordano S, Nguyen H, Smith BD, Elting LS. Adherence to national guidelines for antiemesis prophylaxis in patients undergoing chemotherapy for lung cancer: a population-based study. Cancer. 2013;119:1428–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zerhouni EA. US biomedical research: basic, translational, and clinical sciences. JAMA. 2005;294:1352–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. • Smith MSR, Stuckhardt L, et al. Best care at lower cost: the path to continuously learning health care in America. Washington DC: Institute of Medicine; 2013 .IOM report on barriers and solutions to the information paradox.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington DC: Institute of Medicine; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sackett DL. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ. 1996;312:71–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. von Dincklage JJ, Ball D, Silvestri GA. A review of clinical practice guidelines for lung cancer. J Thorac Dis. 2013;5(Suppl 5):S607–22.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Duggan KJ, Descallar J, Vinod SK. Application of guideline recommended treatment in routine clinical practice: a population-based study of stage I-IIIB non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2016.

  20. Flanagan MR, Varghese Jr TK, Backhus LM, et al. Gaps in guideline-concordant use of diagnostic tests among lung cancer patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;100:2006–12.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Nadpara PA, Madhavan SS, Tworek C, Sambamoorthi U, Hendryx M, Almubarak M. Guideline-concordant lung cancer care and associated health outcomes among elderly patients in the United States. J Geriatr Oncol. 2015;6:101–10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Ost DE, Niu J, SE L, Buchholz TA, Giordano SH. Quality gaps and comparative effectiveness in lung cancer staging and diagnosis. Chest. 2014;145:331–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sandelin M, Berglund A, Sundstrom M, et al. Patients with non-small cell lung cancer analyzed for EGFR: adherence to guidelines, prevalence and outcome. Anticancer Res. 2015;35:3979–85.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wiener RS, Gould MK, Slatore CG, Fincke BG, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Resource use and guideline concordance in evaluation of pulmonary nodules for cancer: too much and too little care. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:871–80.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Casey Jr DE. Why don’t physicians (and patients) consistently follow clinical practice guidelines? JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:1581–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mercuri M, Sherbino J, Sedran RJ, Frank JR, Gafni A, Norman G. When guidelines don’t guide: the effect of patient context on management decisions based on clinical practice guidelines. Acad Med. 2015;90:191–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Vinod SK. Decision making in lung cancer—how applicable are the guidelines? Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2015;27:125–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Minasian LM, Carpenter WR, Weiner BJ, et al. Translating research into evidence-based practice: the National Cancer Institute Community Clinical Oncology Program. Cancer. 2010;116:4440–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. • Zon RT, Bruinooge SS, Lyss AP. The changing face of research in community practice. J Oncol Pract. 2014;10:155–60. Summary of the NCORP program.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Medline trend: automated yearly statistics of PubMed results for any query. 2004. (Accessed 28 Aug 2016, at http://dan.corlan.net/medline-trend.html.).

  31. De Leo G, LeRouge C, Ceriani C, Niederman F. Websites most frequently used by physician for gathering medical information. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2006:902.

  32. Thiele RH, Poiro NC, Scalzo DC, Nemergut EC. Speed, accuracy, and confidence in Google, Ovid, PubMed, and UpToDate: results of a randomised trial. Postgrad Med J. 2010;86:459–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Cook DA, Sorensen KJ, Hersh W, Berger RA, Wilkinson JM. Features of effective medical knowledge resources to support point of care learning: a focus group study. PLoS One. 2013;8:e80318.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Borbas C, Morris N, McLaughlin B, Asinger R, Gobel F. The role of clinical opinion leaders in guideline implementation and quality improvement. Chest. 2000;118:24S–32S.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Carpenter CR, Sherbino J. How does an "opinion leader" influence my practice? CJEM. 2010;12:431–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Dopson S, FitzGerald L, Ferlie E, Gabbay J, Locock L. No magic targets! Changing clinical practice to become more evidence based. Health Care Manag Rev. 2002;27:35–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Berner ES, Baker CS, Funkhouser E, et al. Do local opinion leaders augment hospital quality improvement efforts? A randomized trial to promote adherence to unstable angina guidelines. Med Care. 2003;41:420–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Lomas J, Enkin M, Anderson GM, Hannah WJ, Vayda E, Singer J. Opinion leaders vs audit and feedback to implement practice guidelines. Delivery after previous cesarean section. JAMA. 1991;265:2202–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Soumerai SB, McLaughlin TJ, Gurwitz JH, et al. Effect of local medical opinion leaders on quality of care for acute myocardial infarction: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 1998;279:1358–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Greco PJ, Eisenberg JM. Changing physicians’ practices. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1271–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. • Fisch MJ, Chung AE, Accordino MK. Using technology to improve cancer care: social media, wearables, and electronic health records. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2016;35:200–8. Up to date summary of oncologist engagement in social media.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Chaudhry A, Glode LM, Gillman M, Miller RS. Trends in twitter use by physicians at the American society of Clinical Oncology annual meeting, 2010 and 2011. J Oncol Pract. 2012;8:173–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Katz MS, Utengen A, Anderson PF, et al. Disease-specific hashtags for online communication about cancer care. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2:392–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Thompson MA. Using social media to learn and communicate: it is not about the tweet. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2015:206–11.

  45. Dizon DS, Graham D, Thompson MA, et al. Practical guidance: the use of social media in oncology practice. J Oncol Pract. 2012;8:e114–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. How did pharma use Twitter at #ASCO16? 2016. (Accessed 28 Aug 2016, at https://www.ashfieldhealthcare.com/en/post/pharma-use-twitter-asco16/.).

  47. Molecular Oncology Tumor Boards. (Accessed 28 Aug 2016, at http://university.asco.org/motb.).

  48. Research to practice. (Accessed 28 Aug 2016, at http://www.researchtopractice.com/.).

  49. theMednet. (Accessed 28 Aug 2016, at http://www.themednet.org.).

  50. Housri N, Burt, L, Lucas, JT, Housri, S. Will academic and community physicians engage and share knowledge in an online physician social network? Lessons from the Radiation Oncology Community. J Clin Oncol 34, 2016 (suppl; abstr e18200).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Human Oncology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, USA

    Stephen A. Rosenberg & Andrew M. Baschnagel

  2. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Perelman Center South Pavilion Extension, 10th Floor, Room 134, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Stephen J. Bagley

  3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, 195 Little Albany St, New Brunswick, NJ, 08903, USA

    Nadine Housri

Authors
  1. Stephen A. Rosenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew M. Baschnagel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephen J. Bagley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nadine Housri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nadine Housri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Stephen A. Rosenberg declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Andrew M. Baschnagel declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Stephen J. Bagley declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Paula Taylor has received grants from Drug Company A.

Nadine Housri is a co-founder of theMednet.org.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Lung Cancer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rosenberg, S.A., Baschnagel, A.M., Bagley, S.J. et al. Strategies for Translating Evidence-Based Medicine in Lung Cancer into Community Practice. Curr Oncol Rep 19, 5 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-017-0563-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-017-0563-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation