Objective: The Asian Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Expert Panel on Atopic Dermatitis developed this reference guide to provide a holistic and evidence-based approach in managing AD among Asians.
Methods: Electronic searches were performed to retrieve relevant systematic reviews and guidelines on AD. Recommendations were appraised for level of evidence and strength of recommendation based on the U.K. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network guidelines. These practice points were based on the consensus recommendations discussed during the Asia Pacific Meeting of Experts in Dermatology held in Bali, Indonesia in October 2016 and April 2017.
Results: The Expert Panel recommends an approach to treatment based on disease severity. The use of moisturizers is recommended across all levels of AD severity, while topical steroids are recommended only for flares not controlled by conventional skin care and moisturizers. Causes of waning efficacy must be explored before using topical corticosteroids of higher potency. Topical calcineurin inhibitors are recommended for patients who have become recalcitrant to steroid, in chronic uninterrupted use, and when there is steroid atrophy, or when there is a need to treat sensitive areas and pediatric patients. Systemic steroids have a limited role in AD treatment and should be avoided if possible. Educational programs that allow a patient-centered approach in AD management are recommended as an adjunct to conventional therapies. Recommendations on the use of phototherapy, systemic drugs, and emerging treatments are also included.
Conclusion: The management of AD among Asians requires a holistic approach, integrating evidence-based treatments while considering accessibility and cultural acceptability.
METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: The group convened and discussed evidence-based recommendations and clinical experiences in the management of malnutrition in hospitalized and community-dwelling adults, and the relevance of oral nutritional supplements in clinical practice. Supported by a literature search from January 2007-September 2017, consensus statements on key aspects of malnutrition management were developed.
RESULTS: Malnutrition management should be considered as an integral part of patient care and managed by a multidisciplinary team. Hospitalized patients and outpatients should be screened for risk of malnutrition with validated tools. Nutrition intervention, including oral, enteral, or parenteral nutrition, should be accessible and individualized to all patients who are malnourished or at risk of malnutrition. Education on nutrition care is imperative for healthcare professionals, patients and caregivers.
CONCLUSION: These consensus recommendations provide practical guidance to improve nutrition practice within healthcare in Southeast Asia. With collaborative efforts from the clinical community, professional societies and policy makers, this regional effort may also facilitate change in the nutrition practice at the institutional and national level.
METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, and abstract databases of the Asia-Pacific Vitreo-retina Society, European Society of Retina Specialists, American Academy of Ophthalmology, and Controversies in Ophthalmology: Asia-Australia congresses, was conducted to assess evidence for T&E regimens in nAMD. Only studies with ≥100 study eyes were included. An expert panel reviewed the results and key factors potentially influencing the use of T&E regimens in nAMD and PCV, and subsequently formed consensus recommendations for their application in the Asia-Pacific region.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included. Studies demonstrated that T&E regimens with aflibercept, ranibizumab, or bevacizumab in nAMD, and with aflibercept in PCV, were efficacious and safe. The recommendation for T&E is, after ≥3 consecutive monthly loading doses, treatment intervals can be extended by 2 to 4 weeks up to 12 to 16 weeks. When disease activity recurs, the recommendation is to reinject and shorten intervals by 2 to 4 weeks until fluid resolution, after which treatment intervals can again be extended. Intraretinal fluid should be treated until resolved; however, persistent minimal subretinal fluid after consecutive treatments may be tolerated with treatment intervals maintained or extended if the clinical condition is stable.
CONCLUSIONS: T&E regimens are efficacious and safe for nAMD and PCV, can reduce the number of visits, and minimize the overall burden for clinicians and patients.
DESIGN: A questionnaire containing 47 questions was developed which encompassed clinical scenarios such as treatment response to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and steroid, treatment side effects, as well as cost and compliance/reimbursement in the management of DME using a Dephi questionnaire as guide.
METHODS: An expert panel of 12 retinal specialists from Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, India and Vietnam responded to this questionnaire on two separate occasions. The first round responses were compiled, analyzed and discussed in a round table discussion where a consensus was sought through voting. Consensus was considered achieved, when 9 of the 12 panellists (75%) agreed on a recommendation.
RESULTS: The DME patients were initially profiled based on their response to treatment, and the terms target response, adequate response, nonresponse, and inadequate response were defined. The panellists arrived at a consensus on various aspects of DME treatment such as need for classification of patients before treatment, first-line treatment options, appropriate time to switch between treatment modalities, and steroid-related side effects based on which recommendations were derived, and a treatment algorithm was developed.
CONCLUSIONS: This consensus article provides comprehensive, evidence-based treatment guidelines in the management of DME in Asian population. In addition, it also provides recommendations on other aspects of DME management such as steroid treatment for stable glaucoma patients, management of intraocular pressure rise, and recommendations for cataract development.
PURPOSE: To study the various surgical practices of different surgeons in the Asia-Pacific region.
OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Given the diversity among Asia-Pacific surgeons, there is no clear consensus on the preferred management strategies for cervical myelopathy. In particular, the role of prophylactic decompression for silent cervical spinal stenosis is under constant debate and should be addressed.
METHODS: Surgeons from the Asia-Pacific Spine Society participated in an online questionnaire comprising 50 questions. Data on clinical diagnosis, investigations and outcome measures, approach to asymptomatic and silent cervical spinal stenosis, guidelines for surgical approach, and postoperative immobilization were recorded. All parameters were analyzed by the Mantel-Haenszel test.
RESULTS: A total of 79 surgeons from 16 countries participated. Most surgeons used gait disturbance (60.5%) and dyskinetic hand movement (46.1%) for diagnosis. Up to 5.2% of surgeons would operate on asymptomatic spinal stenosis, and 18.2% would operate on silent spinal stenosis. Among those who would not operate, most (57.1%) advised patients on avoidance behavior and up to 9.5% prescribed neck collars. For ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL), anterior removal was most commonly performed for one-level disease (p<0.001), whereas laminoplasty was most commonly performed for two- to four-level disease (p=0.036). More surgeons considered laminectomy and fusion for multilevel OPLL. Most surgeons generally preferred to use a rigid neck collar for 6 weeks postoperatively (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The pooled recommendations include prophylactic or early decompression surgery for patients with silent cervical spinal stenosis, particularly OPLL. Anterior decompression is primarily suggested for one- or two-level disease, whereas laminoplasty is preferred for multilevel disease.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the inter-rater reliability of Rajasekaran's kyphosis classification through a multicenter validation study.
OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The classification of kyphosis, developed by Rajasekaran, incorporates factors related to curve characteristics, including column deficiency, disc mobility, curve magnitude, and osteotomy requirements. Although the classification offers significant benefits in determining prognosis and management decisions, it has not been subjected to multicenter validation.
METHODS: A total of 30 sets of images, including plain radiographs, computed tomography scans, and magnetic resonance imaging scans, were randomly selected from our hospital patient database. All patients had undergone deformity correction surgery for kyphosis. Twelve spine surgeons from the Asia-Pacific region (six different countries) independently evaluated and classified the deformity types and proposed their surgical recommendations. This information was then compared with standard deformity classification and surgical recommendations.
RESULTS: The kappa coefficients for the classification were as follows: 0.88 for type 1A, 0.78 for type 1B, 0.50 for type 2B, 0.40 for type 3A, 0.63 for type 3B, and 0.86 for type 3C deformities. The overall kappa coefficient for the classification was 0.68. Regarding the repeatability of osteotomy recommendations, kappa values were the highest for Ponte's (Schwab type 2) osteotomy (kappa 0.8). Kappa values for other osteotomy recommendations were 0.52 for pedicle subtraction/disc-bone osteotomy (Schwab type 3/4), 0.42 for vertebral column resection (VCR, type 5), and 0.30 for multilevel VCRs (type 6).
CONCLUSIONS: Excellent accuracy was found for types 1A, 1B, and 3C deformities (ends of spectrum). There was more variation among surgeons in differentiating between one-column (types 2A and 2B) and two-column (types 3A and 3B) deficiencies, as surgeons often failed to recognize the radiological signs of posterior column failure. This failure to identify column deficiencies can potentially alter kyphosis management. There was excellent consensus among surgeons in the recommendation of type 2 osteotomy; however, some variation was observed in their choice for other osteotomies.
FINDINGS: Differences in genetics, environment, lifestyle, diet and culture are all likely to influence the management of advanced prostate cancer in the APAC region when compared with the rest of the world. When considering the strong APCCC 2017 recommendation for the use of upfront docetaxel in metastatic castration-naïve prostate cancer, the panel noted possible increased toxicity in Asian men receiving docetaxel, which would affect this recommendation in the APAC region. Although androgen receptor-targeting agents appear to be well tolerated in Asian men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, access to these drugs is very limited for financial reasons across the region. The meeting highlighted that cost and access to contemporary treatments and technologies are key factors influencing therapeutic decision-making in the APAC region. Whilst lower cost/older treatments and technologies may be an option, issues of culture and patient or physician preference mean, these may not always be acceptable. Although generic products can reduce cost in some countries, costs may still be prohibitive for lower-income patients or communities. The panellists noted the opportunity for a coordinated approach across the APAC region to address issues of access and cost. Developments in technologies and treatments are presenting new opportunities for the diagnosis and treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Differences in genetics and epidemiology affect the side-effect profiles of some drugs and influence prescribing.
CONCLUSIONS: As the field continues to evolve, collaboration across the APAC region will be important to facilitate relevant research and collection and appraisal of data relevant to APAC populations. In the meantime, the APAC APCCC 2018 meeting highlighted the critical importance of a multidisciplinary team-based approach to treatment planning and care, delivery of best-practice care by clinicians with appropriate expertise, and the importance of patient information and support for informed patient choice.
METHODS: Six key sections were chosen: (1) high-risk localized and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) oligometastatic prostate cancer, (3) castration-naïve prostate cancer, (4) castrate resistant prostate cancer, (5) use of osteoclast-targeted therapy and (6) global access to prostate cancer drugs. There were 101 consensus questions, consisting of 91 questions from APCCC 2017 and 10 new questions from MyAPCCC 2018, selected and modified by the steering committee; of which, 23 questions were assessed in both ideal world and real-world settings. A panel of 22 experts, comprising of 11 urologists and 11 oncologists, voted on 101 predefined questions anonymously. Final voting results were compared with the APCCC 2017 outcomes.
RESULTS: Most voting results from the MyAPCCC 2018 were consistent with the APCCC 2017 outcomes. No consensus was achieved for controversial topics with little level I evidence, such as management of oligometastatic disease. No consensus was reached on using high-cost drugs in castration-naïve or castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer in real-world settings. All panellists recommended using generic drugs when available.
CONCLUSIONS: The MyAPCCC 2018 voting results reflect the management of advanced prostate cancer in a middle-income country in a real-world setting. These results may serve as a guide for local clinical practices and highlight the financial challenges in modern healthcare.
METHODS: Medline via PubMed platform, Science Direct, Scopus, and CINAHL databases were searched to find studies that examined CRC FT. There was no limit on the design or setting of the study.
RESULTS: Out of 819 papers identified through an online search, only 15 papers were included in this review. The majority (n = 12, 80%) were from high-income countries, and none from low-income countries. Few studies (n = 2) reported objective FT denoted by the prevalence of catastrophic health expenditure (CHE), 60% (9 out of 15) reported prevalence of subjective FT, which ranges from 7 to 80%, 40% (6 out of 15) included studies reported cost of CRC management- annual direct medical cost ranges from USD 2045 to 10,772 and indirect medical cost ranges from USD 551 to 795.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of consensus in defining and quantifying financial toxicity hindered the comparability of the results to yield the mean cost of managing CRC. Over and beyond that, information from some low-income countries is missing, limiting global representativeness.
METHODS: CPGs for the management of hypertension in Southeast Asia were retrieved from the websites of the Ministry of Health or cardiovascular specialty societies of the individual countries of Southeast Asia during November to December 2020. The recommendations for the management of hypertension specified in the 2017 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guideline and the 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Society of Hypertension (ESH) guideline were selected to be the reference standards; the recommendations concerning the management of hypertension in the included CPGs in Southeast Asia were assessed if they were concordant with the reference recommendations generated from both the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline and the 2018 ESC/ESH guideline, using the population (P)-intervention (I)-comparison (C) combinations approach.
RESULTS: A total of 59 reference recommendations with unique and unambiguous P-I-C specifications was generated from the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline. In addition, a total of 51 reference recommendations with unique and unambiguous P-I-C specifications was generated from the 2018 ESC/ESH guideline. Considering the six included CPGs from Southeast Asia, concordance was observed for 30 reference recommendations (50.8%) out of 59 reference recommendations generated from the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline and for 31 reference recommendations (69.8%) out of 51 reference recommendations derived from the 2018 ESC/ESH guideline.
CONCLUSIONS: Hypertension represents a significant issue that places health and economic strains in Southeast Asia and demands guideline-based care, yet CPGs in Southeast Asia have a high rate of non-concordance with internationally reputable CPGs. Concordant recommendations could perhaps be considered a standard of care for hypertension management in the Southeast Asia region.