The British Gynaecological Cancer Society Guidelines public consultation

[TheOvacomeTeam]

The British Gynaecological Cancer Society (BGCS) has developed new guidelines for the management of ovarian cancer in the UK. It is the first time that the Society has initiated a process of evidence based guidelines generation for clinical practice to be distributed throughout the UK and also in NICE. This draft has already been reviewed by the BGCS Council and by international reviewers. The public consultation period has been extended to 5pm on Friday 19th February.

If you wish to comment on the guidelines, please email Debbie Lewis at [e-mail] and your comments will be passed onto the Guidelines team.

You can read the guidelines here: ovacome.org.uk/media/66258/...

Best wishes,

The Ovacome Team.

[Hidden]

Sounds a little harsh to be honest. Ovarian Cancer Patients need hope that the drugs prescribed by the oncologist will work. Targeted therapys have extended the lives of some people and also extended the progression free periods. Does this not count, is not one or two lives important enough to allow Avastin and the other targeted therapies if the consultant feels it will help the patient?

[TinaB1]

Thanks for this. I found it interesting reading. I particularly liked what was written on page 3 where the recommendation is for swift referral to specialist centres from primary/secondary care. That's what I interpreted anyway.

[Susan3]

Thought the comments about the potential benefits for surgery at recurrence interesting. It's so frustrating that studies will need to prove this before it is adopted mainstream. I know that how good science is supposed to work but the reality is most of us don't have time to wait around with this disease.

Good that nice guidelines are allowing parp inhibitors . How will we know how/who they work if we do not get moving with these. Side effects nothing like chemo apparently .

[Hidden]

Unable to open this link. Either the site contains a malignant virus or it has been shut down ... not sure which one as both excuses keep popping up

[Maus123]

Thanks for posting the link.

Wow. Not a mention of low grade cancer (actually, it's mentioned twice, very briefly and with no real guidance on treatment). And a very brief paragraph on borderline. I guess we just continue to roll dice.

Also disappointed that targeted therapies are not supported outside trials, and that MRI scans are considered too expensive.

On the bright side, happy to see ultrasound mentioned as standard initial treatment, along with CA125, and the recommendation to adhere to reasonable referral time lines.

[thomas62]

Thanks or posting the link.

Like Maus123 disappointed not a mention of low grade cancer, albeit v.v.briefly, and without any real guidance on treatments. Also frustrating abt the comments regarding surgery at recurrence - it is frustrating to read that we need further studies before it can be adopted at mainstream level. And also the availability of Avastin and other targeted therapies if consultants feel it would benefit patients; as Suzuki mentions they have saved some lives and extended others