American Society of Hematology
View all recommendations from this societyReleased December 4, 2013
Limit surveillance computed tomography (CT) scans in asymptomatic patients following curative-intent treatment for aggressive lymphoma.
CT surveillance in asymptomatic patients in remission from aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma may be harmful through a small but cumulative risk of radiation-induced malignancy. It is also costly and has not been demonstrated to improve survival. Physicians are encouraged to carefully weigh the anticipated benefits of post-treatment CT scans against the potential harm of radiation exposure. Due to a decreasing probability of relapse with the passage of time and a lack of proven benefit, CT scans in asymptomatic patients more than 2 years beyond the completion of treatment are rarely advisable.
These items are provided solely for informational purposes and are not intended as a substitute for consultation with a medical professional. Patients with any specific questions about the items on this list or their individual situation should consult their physician.
How The List Was Created
1-5: The American Society of Hematology (ASH) Choosing Wisely® Task Force utilized a modified Delphi technique to collect suggestions from committee members and recipients of its clinically focused newsletter, the ASH Practice Update. Respondents were asked to consider the core values of harm, cost, strength of evidence, frequency and control. Fifty-nine of 167 ASH committee members (35%) and 2 recipients of the ASH Practice Update submitted 81 unique suggestions. The Task Force used a nominal group technique (NGT) to identify the top 20 items, which were scored by ASH committee and practice community members, with a 46 percent participation rate. ASH’s Task Force reviewed all scores to develop a 10-item list. A professional methodologist conducted a systematic literature review on each of the 10 items; the Task Force chair served as the second reviewer. Evidence reviews and source material for the 10 items were shared with ASH’s Task Force, which ranked the items according to the core values. The Task Force then identified the top 5 items plus 1 alternate. ASH member content experts provided external validation for the veracity and clarity of the items.
6–10: Suggestions for the second ASH Choosing Wisely list were solicited from members of the ASH Committee on Practice, the ASH Committee on Quality, the ASH Choosing Wisely Task Force, ASH Consult-a-Colleague volunteers and members of the ASH Practice Partnership. Six principles were used to prioritize items: avoiding harm to patients, producing evidence-based recommendations, considering both the cost and frequency of tests and treatments, making recommendations in the clinical purview of the hematologist, and considering the potential impact of recommendations. Harm avoidance was established as the campaign’s preeminent guiding principle. Guided by the 6 principles, the ASH Choosing Wisely Task Force scored all suggestions. Modified group technique was used to select 10 semi-finalist items. Systematic reviews of the literature were then completed for each of the 10 semi-finalist items. Guided by the 6 core principles outlined above, and by the systematic reviews of the evidence, the ASH Choosing Wisely Task Force selected 5 recommendations for inclusion in ASH’s second Choosing Wisely Campaign.
ASH’s disclosure and conflict of interest policy can be found at www.hematology.org.
Sources
Zelenetz AD, Wierda WG, Abramson JS, Advani RH, Andreadis CB, Bartlett N, Bellam N, Byrd JC, Czuczman MS, Fayad LE, Glenn MJ, Gockerman JP, Gordon LI, Harris NL, Hoppe RT, Horwitz SM, Kelsey CR, Kim YH, Krivacic S, LaCasce AS, Nademanee A, Porcu P, Press O, Pro B, Reddy N, Sokol L, Swinnen L, Tsien C, Vose JM, Yahalom J, Zafar N, Dwyer MA, Naganuma M; National Comprehensive Cancer Network. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas: Version 1.2013. Fort Washington (PA): NCCN.2013.
Lin TL, Kuo MC, Shih LY, Dunn P, Wang PN, Wu JH, Tang TC, Chang H, Hung YS, Lu SC. Value of surveillance computed tomography in the follow-up of diffuse large B-cell and follicular lymphomas. Ann Hematol. 2012 Nov;91(11):1741–5.
Guppy AE, Tebbutt NC, Norman A, Cunningham D. The role of surveillance CT scans in patients with diffuse large B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma.2003 Jan;44(1):123–5.
Shenoy P, Sinha R, Tumeh JW, Lechowicz MJ, Flowers CR. Surveillance computed tomography scans for patients with lymphoma: is the risk worth the benefits? Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2010 Aug;10(4):270–7.
