Clinical practice guidelines for the nutrition of colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review

Purpose The aim of this study is to rigorously assess the methodological quality of published clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) related to nutrition among colorectal cancer patients, to compile consensus recommendations, and to evaluate the quality of the included CPGs. Methods The systematic search covered eight electronic databases, two relevant professional association websites, and six guideline websites from their inception up to January 22, 2023. The methodological quality of the eligible guidelines was evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument, and then, consensus recommendations were synthesized. The scores for each domain were expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD). Using the mean score as the benchmark for comparison, they were subsequently ranked from highest to lowest. The included guidelines were then categorized as having “high,” “moderate,” or “low” quality based on their scores. Results The literature search yielded ten guidelines. The findings indicated that the “Clarity of presentation” domain had the highest mean score (65.2 ± 7.7). This demonstrates how the guidelines effectively articulate recommendations. Additionally, the “Scope and purpose” domain achieved a mean score of 60.7 ± 10.9, followed by “Rigor of development” (51.7 ± 15.7), “Editorial independence” (51.1 ± 21), “Stakeholder involvement” (48 ± 16.8), and “Applicability” domains (47.5 ± 17.3). Two CPGs received an overall rating of “high quality” and were recommended; four CPGs received an overall rating of “moderate” and were recommended with modifications; and four CPGs received an overall rating of “low quality” and were not recommended. Furthermore, this study compiled twenty consensus recommendations related to nine distinct clinical issues. Conclusion This study identified disparities in the methodological quality of the included CPGs, particularly in the “Applicability” domain, thus emphasizing the need for advancement in clinical feasibility and implementation. Notably, there is few guidelines specifically targeting colorectal cancer nutrition. These synthesized findings provided an intuitive, convenient, and comprehensive reference for evaluating nutrition among colorectal cancer patients. When applying these results, users should make careful decisions based on their specific situations.