Anticancer drug-induced interstitial lung disease: a critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements

ABSTRACT

Anticancer drug-induced interstitial lung disease (DIILD) has received increasing clinical attention, and the quality of relevant guidance documents has become critical. Our purpose was to assess the quality of documents for anticancer DIILD and summarize the recommendations. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements with recommendations were searched in electronic databases, websites of guideline organizations, and professional societies. The quality of documents was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) methodology, and the specific recommendations were aggregated and compared. A total of 11 documents were eligible, including 6 CPGs and 5 consensus statements, and the quality of AGREE II assessments differed greatly. The domains of scope and purpose and clarity of presentation received the highest median scores, while the stakeholder involvement domain received the lowest score. Recommendations were inconsistent between documents, particularly regarding the selection of steroid regimens. The methodological quality of the guidance documents needs to be enhanced, especially in the domain of stakeholder involvement. Inconsistencies exist in documents, and further discussions among multidisciplinary experts are needed. Particularly, differences in steroid regimens require attentions, and researches on the risks of adverse events and discovery of precise biomarkers are necessary.

KEYWORDS:

• Anticancer drug
• interstitial lung disease
• pneumonitis
• AGREE II
• clinical practice guideline
• consensus statement

Declaration of interests

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

Reviewer disclosures

Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/14740338.2024.2315113.

Additional information

Funding

This paper was not funded.