Citations

This guideline has been updated. This ASCO Living Guideline is reviewed on an eight-week cycle. Please see the online dynamic version for the latest updates. Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis, as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating clinician and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information (Appendix I and Appendix II). Updates are published regularly and can be found on the ASCO Publications website .

Abstract Background Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) represents an important complication of total joint arthroplasty, affecting approximately 2% of patients. However, considerable heterogeneity in outcome definitions renders cross-study and clinical comparisons challenging. Methods We performed a meta-epidemiological study and systematic review of cohort studies and randomized controlled trial (RCTs) reporting clear definitions of PJI outcomes. Relevant data regarding outcome definitions of treatment success or failure were extracted and categorized into 7 outcome domains: clinical signs and symptoms, imaging, microbiology, mortality, antibiotics-related, surgical-related, and histology. A network plot was generated to visualize domains combinations. Data on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were also collected. Based on these results, we finally proposed a working definition of PJI core outcome set. Results The literature search identified 7585 references, leading to 461 studies. The majority were retrospective (416/461, 90.2%), with limited representation of prospective studies (37/461, 8.0%) and RCTs (8/461, 1.7%). Outcome reporting was highly heterogeneous, with the clinical criterion being the most frequently used domain, combined with microbiological, surgical, and mortality-related outcomes. In contrast, histopathological, imaging, and antibiotic-related criteria were rarely reported. Thirty-six PROMs were included in only 111 (24.1%) studies, most commonly the Knee Society Score (26%) and Harris Hip Score (23%). Conclusions We showed substantial heterogeneity in PJI outcome definitions, with inconsistent reporting across key domains, limiting comparability and evidence synthesis. Standardized, consensus-based outcomes incorporating patient-reported and antibiotic-related measures are needed, and the proposed core outcome set may support harmonized research and clinical practice aligned with the new PJI definition.

ABSTRACT Background and Objective Despite growing interest in mindfulness‐based interventions for adolescents with chronic pain, the data have not been systematically summarized. We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analyses to estimate the effect of mindfulness‐based interventions on pain intensity, catastrophizing, acceptance and interference; functioning, quality of life, and anxiety and depression in youth with chronic pain. Databases and Data Treatment Electronic databases CINAHL, CCTR, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science were systematically searched to January 2, 2025. Studies were included if they were in English, included > 5 patients, were not part of intensive interdisciplinary pain treatment and included pre‐post outcomes from mindfulness‐based interventions delivered to adolescents with chronic pain. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results Fourteen studies including a total of 323 adolescents were identified. There were significant within group improvements in pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, pain acceptance, pain interference, functioning, depression, anxiety, and quality of life, with results maintained or increased at follow‐up effect sizes at follow‐up were moderate to large (e.g., quality of life SMD = 0.33; pain intensity SMD = −0.73; pain interference SMD = −1.44). Heterogeneity of results was generally moderate to high. Compared to standardized long interventions, variable length interventions showed greater pre‐post changes in functioning, pain intensity, and pain catastrophizing. The certainty in the estimates was generally low, due to risk of bias and pre‐post designs. Conclusions Although adolescents with chronic pain report improvements after participating in mindfulness‐based interventions, rigorous RCTs are needed to substantiate these results. Significance Statement Chronic pain in youth is common and difficult to treat. Previous interventions have largely been based on cognitive‐behavioural therapy and not successful for all. This is the first systematic review and meta‐analysis in paediatric chronic pain to focus on mindfulness‐based interventions, highlighting an alternative and potentially effective intervention approach. This study informs clinicians about an effective intervention approach and assists researchers in identifying gaps for further research.

Abstract Background Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a significant public health concern associated with increased rates of hospital admissions and mortality. The purpose of the current study was to compare beta-lactam plus azithromycin or doxycycline vs fluoroquinolones in adults hospitalized with CAP. Methods We searched several databases from inception to 10 June 2024. Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data. Disagreements were resolved by consensus or a third reviewer. Study quality was assessed in duplicate with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 for randomized studies and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for nonrandomized studies. Meta-analysis was conducted by a random effect model when feasible. Network meta-analysis was performed to compare direct and indirect evidence. The GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) was followed to rate the certainty of evidence. Results Twenty studies were included (20 beta-lactam + azithromycin, 7 beta-lactam + doxycycline, 12 levofloxacin, and 4 moxifloxacin): 6 were randomized, enrolling 861 participants (mean age, 61.8 years; 43.2% women), and 14 were nonrandomized, enrolling 185 928 participants (mean age, 65.2 years; 42.9% women). Direct comparison and network meta-analysis results showed no statistically significant differences and likely equal effectiveness between beta-lactam + azithromycin and beta-lactam + doxycycline in terms of in-hospital mortality, need for intensive care unit admission or invasive mechanical ventilation, or safety outcomes including Clostridioides difficile infection and QT prolongation. Conclusions The current evidence demonstrated no likely difference in outcomes between azithromycin and doxycycline in adults hospitalized with CAP receiving beta-lactam. Head-to-head randomized clinical trials are needed to validate these results.

Objective To examine the potential errors of a general large language model (LLM) (ie, Claude 3.5 Sonnet) on data extraction from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Design and setting An empirical study comparing Claude 3.5 Sonnet extractions against a human-performed verification dataset. The extraction tasks for Claude 3.5 Sonnet were based solely on original RCT portable document format (PDF) files. For PDFs that could not be directly extracted by Claude 3.5 Sonnet, optical character recognition was employed to convert them into text format before extraction. Participants A random sample of 664 trials was selected from a well-established trial bank and a final data pool was established based on rigorous manual cross-checking as a reference standard. Data sources PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science (all databases) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to February 2023. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies RCTs on children involving medication and adverse events. Main outcome measures Claude 3.5 Sonnet was applied to extract the basic information (eg, trial design, population information and source of funding) and adverse outcomes (ie, name of adverse events, number of events). Claude 3.5 Sonnet outputs were compared against the final data pool and all errors were recorded. Results are presented as error rates and with 95% CI, estimated using a generalised linear mixed model. Results For the 664 trials, a total of 23 069 data cells were extracted via Claude 3.5 Sonnet, with 10 624 for basic information and 12 445 for adverse outcomes. The overall error rate for data extraction was 6.6% (95% CI 5.4% to 8.2%), with 5.7% (95% CI 5.2% to 6.1%) in basic information and 7.6% (95% CI 4.9% to 11.8%) in adverse outcomes. When stratified the 1542 total errors by error types, misallocation (assigning data to incorrect fields; 57.1%, 881/1542) and missed or omitted data (incomplete extraction of available data; 23.2%, 357/1542) accounted for the two most frequent errors, with misallocation occurring more in basic information (53.3%, 470/881), while missed or omitted data occurred more in adverse outcomes (96.1%, 343/357). Post hoc analysis examining the association between trial reporting quality (assessed using Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2025 and LLM data extraction error rates indicated that higher CONSORT adherence was associated with lower extraction error rates. Conclusions The data extraction error of Claude was relatively low, but it alerts LLM applications in evidence synthesis. Detailed checking for LLM outputs should be the primary consideration for evidence synthesisers.

Objectives This study aims to compare the reliability and accuracy of three large language models (LLMs) (Claude, Gemini and GPT) in assessing the risk of bias of nonrandomised studies using the ROBINS-I tool. Methods and analysis We conducted a secondary analysis of 171 nonrandomised studies previously assessed with Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool by two independent human review teams. Only studies with concordant human domain-level ratings were included. Each study was independently assessed twice by Claude, Gemini and Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) using agent-based structured implementations of the ROBINS-I tool. Reliability (agreement between two runs of the same LLM) was evaluated using percent agreement and Gwet’s AC1. Accuracy (agreement with human reviewers) was assessed only for studies with consistent LLM ratings, using the same metrics. Results Claude demonstrated high reliability across all domains (79.5–98.0% agreement, AC1=0.729–0.975). Gemini showed moderate-to-high reliability (agreement 76.7–100%, AC1=0.680–1.0). GPT exhibited lower reliability overall, though domain-level agreement ranged from 70.9–95.6% (AC1=0.596–0.944). In terms of accuracy, Claude showed overall poor agreement with human reviewers (14.4–68.5% agreement; low AC1 values). Gemini demonstrated moderate-to-high accuracy in several domains, including deviations from intended interventions (79.6%, AC1=0.848) and measurement of outcomes (73.9%, AC1=0.702), with the highest overall agreement (40.0%, AC1=0.672). GPT showed variable accuracy, with the highest in measurement of outcomes (62.8%, AC1=0.571) and classification of interventions (57.8%, AC1=0.498), but poor performance in selection (14.3%, AC1 = −0.041) and overall agreement (23.0%, AC1=0.267). Conclusions Claude was internally consistent but poorly aligned with human reviewers. Gemini achieved both high reliability and moderate-to-high accuracy, whereas GPT had lower reliability and mixed accuracy. Current off-the-shelf LLMs cannot reliably perform ROBINS-I risk of bias assessments.

Abstract Context Central precocious puberty (CPP). Objective To summarize the available supporting evidence for the Endocrine Society guidelines about the management of CPP. Methods Multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus) were searched to identify studies that addressed the Endocrine Society Guideline Development Panel's 10 clinical questions. Identified studies were selected and appraised, and data were extracted by pairs of independent trained reviewers. Results The systematic review yielded 3796 citations, of which 32 citations were included. The systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that in children with CPP, with no central nervous system symptoms, the rate of magnetic resonance imaging identification of pathogenic lesions (ie, hamartomas and brain tumors) was 6% (35 noncomparative studies with 5541 children with CPP). For girls with idiopathic CPP, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) treatment was associated with +2.7 cm adult height gain compared to those who did not receive treatment (21 comparative observational studies with 1835 girls [mean age 8.20 ± 1.08 years]). The review did not identify any studies that assessed the clinical questions on: benefits of additional evaluation in cases of early thelarche, differentiation of slowly vs rapidly progressing CPP, order of biochemical testing to establish and monitor the diagnosis of CPP, genetic testing for individuals diagnosed with CPP, and chronological age and/or bone age for discontinuation of GnRHa treatment. Conclusion This systematic review addresses various aspects of CPP evaluation and treatment of CPP and will support the development of the Endocrine Society guidelines.

Abstract Background Central precocious puberty (CPP), which is traditionally defined as the development of secondary sexual characteristics before age 8 years in girls and age 9 years in boys, results from the premature activation of the hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal (HPG) axis. CPP can be associated with short adult stature, adverse psychosocial outcomes, and increased cardiometabolic and cancer risks in adulthood. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists can effectively suppress premature activation of the HPG axis and have the potential to increase adult height as well as improve psychosocial and long-term health outcomes among patients with CPP. However, as secular trends have continued to shift toward earlier age of pubertal onset, some subpopulations of children with CPP, as it is currently defined, may not require the same extent of diagnostic evaluation and treatment. Objective Develop evidence-based recommendations related to the diagnosis and treatment of CPP. Methods A multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts, along with experts in guideline methodology and systematic literature review, used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to address 10 clinical questions related to the diagnosis and treatment of CPP. Systematic reviews of health-related benefits and harms were conducted for each clinical question. The guideline development panel (GDP) also used the GRADE evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework to address stakeholder values and preferences, costs and required resources, cost-effectiveness, acceptability, feasibility, and potential impacts on health equity. Results In girls with thelarche (Tanner stage B2) between ages 7.0 and 8.0 years, the GDP suggests watchful waiting via periodic physical examinations (every 4-6 months) rather than immediately performing evaluation with laboratory testing or radiologic imaging. In addition, the GDP suggests that all girls with breast development (ie, Tanner stage B2) before age 7 years should first be observed for 4 to 6 months to differentiate unsustained or slowly progressive puberty vs rapidly progressive puberty. These recommendations are largely based on evidence that girls with slowly progressive puberty attain a normal adult height without treatment. When hormonal evaluation is performed to confirm central (GnRH-dependent) activation as the cause of precocious puberty, the GDP suggests starting the evaluation with ultrasensitive basal luteinizing hormone (LH) concentration rather than routine GnRH/GnRH agonist (GnRHa) stimulation testing for all patients. While brain magnetic resonance imaging has been a traditional part of CPP evaluation, the GDP suggests that it should not be routinely performed in girls ages 6.0 to 8.0 years and boys ages 8.0 to 9.0 years without central nervous system (eg, neuro-ophthalmologic) symptoms, largely based on a low prevalence of pathologic intracranial findings in these age groups. The GDP suggests against routine genetic testing for patients with CPP, although they judged that genetic testing (eg, MKRN3 sequencing) should be considered for patients with familial CPP through a shared decision-making process. The GDP suggests GnRHa treatment for many children with CPP, although available evidence suggests that some patient subgroups (eg, older girls with slowly progressive CPP) may be less likely to receive a net benefit with this treatment. Rather than always starting GnRHa treatment with a monthly injectable formulation, the GDP suggests that treatment should be initiated with the formulation (such as a longer-acting formulation) that is anticipated to be used long-term. The GDP suggests against routine addition of growth hormone therapy to increase adult height. They also suggest against the routine biochemical testing (eg, LH, sex steroids) to monitor pubertal suppression while receiving GnRHa, instead reserving biochemical testing to confirm clinically suspected treatment failure. Finally, the GDP suggests against routinely continuing GnRHa treatment beyond chronologic age 10.0 to 11.0 years (girls) or 11.0 to 12.0 years (boys) and/or bone age 11.0 to 12.0 years (girls) or 12.0 to 13.0 years (boys). Conclusion These clinical recommendations were developed to address important uncertainties in the diagnosis and treatment of children with CPP. They are based on the best available scientific evidence regarding clinical outcomes judged to be most important to patients and families. The GDP's overarching goal was to suggest diagnostic and therapeutic strategies that will most likely provide net clinical benefits while simultaneously considering important contextual factors such as cost and feasibility. The guideline-development process highlighted important knowledge gaps and the substantial need for additional research.

Introduction Increasing publication of fraudulent clinical trials poses a serious threat to evidence-based medicine. In the VITALITY Study I, we demonstrated that contamination by retracted trials significantly distorts evidence synthesis. The upcoming VITALITY Study II will take a step further and investigate how such problematic evidence undermines the credibility of guideline recommendations. Methods and analyses The VITALITY Study II will adopt a retrospective cohort design and will be structured as three work packages (WPs). To start with, a cohort of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that were contaminated by retracted trials and/or meta-analyses that included retracted trials will be established based on forward citation searching (WP1). Then, recommendations from these CPGs that used evidence from retracted trials and/or meta-analyses that synthesised these retracted trials will be re-evaluated after removing such problematic evidence, in terms of both the direction and strength of effect sizes (WP2). Finally, the subsequent impact on patient outcomes attributable to distorted recommendations will be estimated on a hypothetical population, measured by the number of expected benefit loss and the number of expected harm increment per 100 000 patients (WP3). Ethics and dissemination Formal ethical approval is not necessary for this study as it does not involve human or animal participants, nor does it involve the collection of primary data. We will disseminate the findings through publication in peer-reviewed journals and, whenever possible, presentations at academic conferences.