Systematic evaluation of Merkel cell carcinoma clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE II instrument

Abstract

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare type of skin cancer that requires a multidisciplinary approach with a variety of specialists for management and treatment. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have recently been established to standardize management algorithms. The objective of this study was to appraise such CPGs via the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Eight CPGs were identified via systematic literature search following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria. Four appraisers trained in AGREE II protocols evaluated each CPG and deemed two CPGs as high quality, five as moderate quality, and one as low quality. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to verify reviewer consistency as excellent, good, and moderate across four, one, and one domain, respectively. The majority of MCC CPGs are lacking in specifying stakeholder involvement, applicability, and rigor of development. The two high quality CPGs are from the Alberta Health Services (AHS) and the collaboration between the European Dermatology Forum, the European Association of Dermato-Oncology, and the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EDF/EADO/EORTC). The EDF/EADO/EORTC CPG had the highest overall score with no significant deficiencies across any domain. An important limitation is that the AGREE II instrument is not designed to evaluate the validity of each CPG’s recommendations; conclusions therefore can only be drawn about each CPG’s developmental quality. Future MCC CPGs may benefit from garnering public perspectives, inviting external expert review, and considering available resources and implementation barriers during their developmental stages.