Expert document on management of acromegaly

Abstract

ObjectivesTo seek a consensus on issues that may generate doubts in management of acromegaly in Spain. MethodNominal groups and Delphi. Four experts defined relevant issues in management of acromegaly and generated different assertions and recommendations. Subsequently, a group of 30 additional experts was selected to test agreement with the assertions through two Delphi rounds. The following response categories were established: (1) Totally disagree; (2) Basically disagree; (3) Basically agree; (4) Totally agree. Agreement was defined as ≥70% of answers in categories 1 and 2 (consensus with the disagreement) or 3 and 4 (consensus with the agreement) in the second Delphi round. ResultsAssertions covers various aspects of clinical practice, including: (1) Useful instruments in individualization of treatment (response predictive markers, imaging techniques, etc.); (2) Clinical profiles and relevant comorbidities in treatment individualization; (3) Role of patient in treatment decision-making; (4) Access to treatments (accessibility and equity). The first Delphi round included 35 assertions. Consensus was reached on six of these assertions, two were eliminated, and two were reformulated. Of the 27 assertions included in the second round, consensus was reached on 24 (22 in the agreement, two in the disagreement) and three were eliminated. ConclusionsThis document is intended to solve some common clinical questions and to facilitate decision making in the management of patients with acromegaly.