过去十年，全身抗癌治疗 (SACT) 方案的数量迅速增加。需要确保不同资源环境中癌症服务和系统的 SACT 交付质量，以减少个人和系统层面的发病率、死亡率和有害的经济影响。关于 SACT 的现有文献侧重于治疗效果，很少有关于质量或与放射和肿瘤外科手术相比 SACT 在常规护理中如何实施的研究。系统评价是按照 PRISMA 指南进行的。对 EMBASE 和 MEDLINE 进行了检索，并进行了手动检索，以识别有关现有质量指标 (QI) 的文献，这些指标可检测不同医疗机构、地区或国家之间 SACT 交付质量的有意义的差异。数据提取由两名独立评审员进行。该评审从 15 篇论文中确定了 63 个不同的 QI。大多数是与治疗适当性和指南遵守情况 (n = 28, 44.4%) 相关的过程质量 (n = 55, 87.3%)。结果 QI 很少（n = 7，11.1%），只有一种结构 QI（n = 1，1.6%）。纳入的研究仅针对乳腺癌、结直肠癌、肺癌和皮肤癌。除一项研究外，所有研究都是在高收入国家进行的。本次审查的结果突显了对 SACT QI 的研究严重缺乏，特别是那些适合低收入和中等收入国家资源有限环境的研究。该审查应为未来通过针对具体情况的 QI SACT 开发、验​​证和实施来转变 SACT 规定的绩效衡量工作奠定基础。版权所有 © 2023。由 Elsevier Ltd 出版。

The number of systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) regimens has expanded rapidly over the last decade. There is a need to ensure quality of SACT delivery across cancer services and systems in different resource settings to reduce morbidity, mortality, and detrimental economic impact at individual and systems level. Existing literature on SACT focuses on treatment efficacy with few studies on quality or how SACT is delivered within routine care in comparison to radiation and surgical oncology.Systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched and handsearching was undertaken to identify literature on existing quality indicators (QIs) that detect meaningful variations in the quality of SACT delivery across different healthcare facilities, regions, or countries. Data extraction was undertaken by two independent reviewers.This review identified 63 distinct QIs from 15 papers. The majority were process QIs (n = 55, 87.3%) relating to appropriateness of treatment and guideline adherence (n = 28, 44.4%). There were few outcome QIs (n = 7, 11.1%) and only one structural QI (n = 1, 1.6%). Included studies solely focused on breast, colorectal, lung, and skin cancer. All but one studies were conducted in high-income countries.The results of this review highlight a significant lack of research on SACT QIs particularly those appropriate for resource-constrained settings in low- and middle-income countries. This review should form the basis for future work in transforming performance measurement of SACT provision, through context-specific QI SACT development, validation, and implementation.Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.