Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 27, 2025

Merkel Cell Polyomavirus Infection and Detection
Published on: February 7, 2019
Systematic evaluation of Merkel cell carcinoma clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE II instrument
Deepak Lakshmipathy1, Christian Fritz1, Jacob Harris2
1Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, 800 Walnut Street, 18th Floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.
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.
Insights
This study evaluated Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) using the AGREE II tool. Two CPGs were high quality, but most lacked stakeholder input and development rigor.
Area of Science:
- Oncology
- Dermatology
- Clinical Guideline Development
Background:
- Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare, aggressive skin cancer requiring multidisciplinary care.
- Standardized management algorithms are crucial for optimal patient outcomes.
- Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) aim to standardize MCC treatment approaches.
Purpose of the Study:
- To critically appraise existing Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).
- To assess the quality and developmental rigor of MCC CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument.
Main Methods:
- Systematic literature search using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria identified eight MCC CPGs.
- Four trained appraisers evaluated CPGs using the AGREE II instrument.
- Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) assessed reviewer consistency.
Main Results:
- Two of eight MCC CPGs were rated as high quality; five were moderate, and one was low quality.
- The European Dermatology Forum/European Association of Dermato-Oncology/European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EDF/EADO/EORTC) CPG scored highest.
- Most CPGs lacked detail on stakeholder involvement, applicability, and development rigor.
Conclusions:
- While some MCC CPGs demonstrate good developmental quality, many require improvement.
- Future MCC CPG development should incorporate public perspectives, external expert review, and implementation considerations.
- The AGREE II instrument evaluates guideline development quality, not recommendation validity.
Related Concept Videos
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
SBAR II: Application of SBAR
SBAR Report from a Nurse to a Health Care Provider
S: "Hello, Dr. Smith. This is Jane, RN, from the Med Surg unit. I am calling to tell you about Ms. White in Room 210, who is experiencing increased pain and redness at her incision site. Her recent...

