Oncology

Actual people, real studies,
direct impact

Almost 10M people die every year from cancer. It causes one in every six deaths. We’re grateful to the leaders on the forefront of research and innovation, working every day to cure cancer and save lives.

case study overview

 

Conversion of a
colorectal cancer
guideline into
clinical decision
trees with
assessment of
validity

Read this to understand how the Dutch guidelines for colorectal cancer were transformed into decision trees that will enable online decision support environments to facilitate guideline application. Patient data and treatment recommendations were manually entered into a Case Report Form using Castor EDC.

key results

↑ Click to expand 

 

References: 

Oxford Academic

The aim of this study was to convert the Dutch guideline for colorectal cancer into decision trees and subsequently implement decision trees in an online decision support environment to facilitate guideline application.

The recommendations of the Dutch CRC guidelines were translated into decision trees consisting of decision nodes, branches and leaves that represent data items, data item values and recommendations, respectively. Decision trees were discussed with experts in the field and published as interactive open access decision support software. Decision tree validation and a concordance analysis were performed using consecutive reports at Amsterdam University Medical Centers.

In total, 34 decision trees were developed, driven by 101
decision nodes based on the guideline recommendations.
Decision trees represented recommendations for diagnostics, staging, primary treatment, pathology, and
follow-up and included one overview decision tree for
optimal navigation. We identified several guideline information gaps and areas of inconclusive evidence. A total of 158 patients’ MTB reports were eligible for decision tree validation and resulted in treatment recommendations in 80% of cases. The concordance rate between decision tree treatment
recommendations and MTB advices was 81%. Decision trees reported in 22 out of 24 non-concordant cases (92%) that no guideline recommendation was available.

The Dutch CRC guideline was converted into decision trees and identified several information gaps and areas of the inconclusive evidence, the latter being the main cause of the observed disagreement between decision tree recommendations and MTB advices.