The Singapore Cancer Network (SCAN) guidelines on systemic therapy published in this special issue represent the fi rst effort by Singapore oncologists to develop a national consensus on cancer care. Nine specialist workgroups, involving over 70 subspecialists from both the public and private sectors, have written 15 guidelines, defi ning a framework for systemic treatments of nearly all common solid tumours in Singapore. The guidelines have been internationally peer-reviewed and endorsed by the Chapter of Medical Oncologists of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore (AMS) as well as the Singapore Society of Oncology (SSO). The audience envisioned for these guidelines would include professionals, patients and policymakers. For clinicians, including medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgeons, oncology pharmacists and other disciplines, the SCAN guidelines serve as a framework of quality care for systemic therapy in Singapore as defi ned by subspecialists. For patients, a national consensus on cancer care developed within Singapore will provide both education and reassurance. Finally, for policymakers, the guidelines serve as an independent professional national reference useful for understanding a complex and challenging fi eld of medicine. In terms of membership, each SCAN guideline workgroup was composed of a panel of clinicians with relevant advanced subspecialist training and experience derived from both public and private sectors. Each autonomous workgroup was chaired by an internally elected member. A major goal during guideline development was to limit complexity in the creation and subsequent updating of the SCAN guidelines. Since 2000, the Ministry of Health has regularly released Singapore clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in many fi elds of medicine based on best available evidence. While useful in establishing local clinical practice recommendations in many areas, utilisation of these CPGs has been more limited in oncology, because of the rapidity of developments in the fi eld. To address the concern of administrative complexity, the ADAPTE methodology1 was
[1]
Y. Amer,et al.
The 'Adapted ADAPTE': an approach to improve utilization of the ADAPTE guideline adaptation resource toolkit in the Alexandria Center for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.
,
2015,
Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.
[2]
Q. Ng,et al.
Efficacy and Safety of an Attenuated-Dose Sunitinib Regimen in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results From a Prospective Registry in Singapore.
,
2015,
Clinical genitourinary cancer.
[3]
A. Abernethy,et al.
The financial toxicity of cancer treatment: a pilot study assessing out-of-pocket expenses and the insured cancer patient's experience.
,
2013,
The oncologist.
[4]
R. Go,et al.
Level of scientific evidence underlying recommendations arising from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guidelines.
,
2011,
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
[5]
Ahmed H. YoussefAgha,et al.
Adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: how presentation of recurrence risk influences decision-making.
,
2003,
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.