Recommendations of the French Society of Rheumatology for the management in current practice of patients with polymyalgia rheumatica.

OBJECTIVE: To develop recommendations for the routine management of patients with polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR). METHODS: Following standard procedures, a systematic review of the literature by five supervised junior rheumatologists, based on the questions selected by the steering committee (5 senior rheumatologists), was used as the basis for working meetings, followed by a one-day plenary meeting with the working group (15 members), leading to the development of the wording and determination of the strength of the recommendations and the level of agreement of the experts. RESULTS: Five general principles and 19 recommendations were drawn up. Three recommendations relate to diagnosis and the use of imaging, and five to the assessment of the disease, its activity and comorbidities. Non-pharmacological therapies are the subject of one recommendation. Three recommendations concern initial treatment based on general corticosteroid therapy, five concern the reduction of corticosteroid therapy and follow-up, and two concern corticosteroid dependence and steroid-sparing treatments (anti-IL-6). CONCLUSION: These recommendations take account of current data on PMR, with the aim of reducing exposure to corticosteroid therapy and its side effects in a fragile population. They are intended to be practical, to help practitioners in the day-to-day management of patients with PMR.

Good clinical practice recommendations for the use of PET/CT in oncology.

Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) is a nuclear medicine functional imaging technique with proven clinical value in oncology. PET/CT indications are continually evolving with fresh advances made through research. French practice on the use of PET in oncology was framed in recommendations based on Standards-Options-Recommendations methodology and coordinated by the French federation of Comprehensive Cancer Centres (FNLCC). The recommendations were originally issued in 2002 followed by an update in 2003, but since then, a huge number of scientific papers have been published and new tracers have been licenced for market release. The aim of this work is to bring the 2003 version recommendations up to date. For this purpose, a focus group was set up in collaboration with the French Society for Nuclear Medicine (SFMN) to work on developing good clinical practice recommendations. These good clinical practice recommendations have been awarded joint French National Heath Authority (HAS) and French Cancer Institute (INCa) label status-the stamp of methodological approval. The present document is the outcome of comprehensive literature review and rigorous appraisal by a panel of experts, organ specialists, clinical oncologists, surgeons and imaging specialists. These data were also used for the EANM referral guidelines.

[Update of the recommendations of good clinical practice for the use of PET in oncology]. / Actualisation des recommandations de bonne pratique clinique pour l'utilisation de la TEP en cancérologie.

Positron Emission Tomography (PET) is a functional nuclear medicine imaging technique which clinical value in oncology has been demonstrated. PET indications are constantly evolving, thanks to the contribution of research. The use of PET in oncology has been the subject of recommendations according to the Standard-Options-Recommendations methodology from the Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer in 2002, updated in 2003. However, many scientific works have been published since 2003 and new tracers have also obtained a marketing authorization in France. The objective of this work was therefore to update the recommendations established in 2003. In this context, in collaboration with the Société française de médecine nucléaire, a working group was set up for the development of good clinical practice recommendations under the HAS-INCA methodological label. The present document is issued from a comprehensive review of the literature and rigorous appraisal by a panel of national experts, organ specialists, clinical oncologists, surgeons, and imaging specialists. It is intended to be used as a guide to decision-making for those oncology teams that are able to manage patients in various situations in which the AMM label is not sufficiently precise.