Literature DB >> 32708519

Risk-Reducing Gynecological Surgery in Lynch Syndrome: Results of an International Survey from the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database.

Mev Dominguez-Valentin1, Toni T Seppälä2,3, Christoph Engel4, Stefan Aretz5,6, Finlay Macrae7,8, Ingrid Winship7,8, Gabriel Capella9,10, Huw Thomas11, Eivind Hovig1,12, Maartje Nielsen13, Rolf H Sijmons14, Lucio Bertario15, Bernardo Bonanni16, Maria Grazia Tibiletti17, Giulia Martina Cavestro18, Miriam Mints19, Nathan Gluck20, Lior Katz21, Karl Heinimann22, Carlos A Vaccaro23, Kate Green24, Fiona Lalloo24, James Hill25, Wolff Schmiegel26, Deepak Vangala27, Claudia Perne5,6, Hans-Georg Strauß28, Johanna Tecklenburg29, Elke Holinski-Feder30,31, Verena Steinke-Lange30,31, Jukka-Pekka Mecklin32,33, John-Paul Plazzer7, Marta Pineda9,10, Matilde Navarro9,10, Joan Brunet Vidal9,10, Revital Kariv20, Guy Rosner20, Tamara Alejandra Piñero23, María Laura Gonzalez23, Pablo Kalfayan23, Julian R Sampson34, Neil A J Ryan24, D Gareth Evans24, Pål Møller1, Emma J Crosbie24.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To survey risk-reducing hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) practice and advice regarding hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in women with Lynch syndrome.
METHODS: We conducted a survey in 31 contributing centers from the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database (PLSD), which incorporates 18 countries worldwide. The survey covered local policies for risk-reducing hysterectomy and BSO in Lynch syndrome, the timing when these measures are offered, the involvement of stakeholders and advice regarding HRT.
RESULTS: Risk-reducing hysterectomy and BSO are offered to path_MLH1 and path_MSH2 carriers in 20/21 (95%) contributing centers, to path_MSH6 carriers in 19/21 (91%) and to path_PMS2 carriers in 14/21 (67%). Regarding the involvement of stakeholders, there is global agreement (~90%) that risk-reducing surgery should be offered to women, and that this discussion may involve gynecologists, genetic counselors and/or medical geneticists. Prescription of estrogen-only HRT is offered by 15/21 (71%) centers to women of variable age range (35-55 years).
CONCLUSIONS: Most centers offer risk-reducing gynecological surgery to carriers of path_MLH1, path_MSH2 and path_MSH6 variants but less so for path_PMS2 carriers. There is wide variation in how, when and to whom this is offered. The Manchester International Consensus Group developed recommendations to harmonize clinical practice across centers, but there is a clear need for more research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lynch syndrome; endometrial cancer; ovarian cancer; risk-reducing surgery

Year:  2020        PMID: 32708519      PMCID: PMC7408942          DOI: 10.3390/jcm9072290

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Med        ISSN: 2077-0383            Impact factor:   4.241


1. Background

Lynch syndrome is one of the most common hereditary cancer syndromes, affecting an estimated 1 in 300 individuals, based on the prevalence of underlying genetic abnormalities in the general population. It is caused by pathogenic variants affecting one of the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes (path_MMR): path_MLH1, path_MSH2, path_MSH6 and path_PMS2, each of which results in different risks for cancer, particularly colorectal, endometrial and ovarian cancer [1]. Women with Lynch syndrome (excepting path_PMS2) have a lifetime risk of up to 50% of developing colorectal and endometrial cancer and a lower risk (up to 17%) of developing ovarian cancer [2]. Risk estimates for age-related gynecological cancer in Lynch syndrome vary by gene, as described by the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database (PLSD). PLSD reported a cumulative incidence of endometrial and ovarian cancer at 75 years of 37% and 11% for path_MLH1 carriers, 49% and 17% for path_MHS2 carriers and 41% and 11% for path_MSH6 carriers, respectively [2]. Notably, female path_MSH6 carriers are at highest risk of endometrial cancer compared with cancer in other organs [2,3,4]. Whilst colonoscopy surveillance has been associated with improved survival by early detection of colorectal lesions compared with no surveillance [5], there is limited evidence that gynecological cancer surveillance offers a survival benefit due to a lack of high-quality trial data [6]. Nevertheless, a 98% 10-year survival from endometrial cancer has been reported by the PLSD in women who are known path_MMR carriers, suggesting that surveillance and/or increased awareness of the red flag symptoms of gynecological cancers may enable detection at early stages when cure is more likely [4]. In contrast, risk-reducing hysterectomy and BSO have been shown to prevent gynecological cancer in women with Lynch syndrome [7]. The Manchester International Consensus Group recommendations for the management of gynecological cancers in Lynch syndrome suggested that risk-reducing total hysterectomy and BSO should be offered no earlier than 35–40 years of age, following completion of childbearing, to path_MLH1, path_MSH2 and path_MSH6 carriers. However, the group concluded that there was insufficient evidence to offer risk-reducing surgery to path_PMS2 carriers, whose risk of gynecological cancers is appreciably lower [6,8]. The prescription of estrogen-only replacement therapy (HRT) until at least natural menopause (~51 years) was strongly recommended for women who undergo risk-reducing surgery [6]. In this report, we describe the current practice for hysterectomy and BSO reported by each PLSD contributing center. We also explore reasons for divergence in the participating centers at the time of the survey.

2. Methods

All contributing centers were asked to complete a structured survey of current practice of risk-reducing gynecological surgery by April 2019 (Table 1). Data were collected via a structured questionnaire (with areas for qualitative data collection).
Table 1

Survey covering questions regarding the current practice with respect to prophylactic hysterectomy and/or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) in path_MMR carriers.

Current Practice Path_MLH1 CarrierPath_MSH2 CarrierPath_MSH6 CarrierPath_PMS2 Carrier
Prophylactic hysterectomyAvailable (Y/N)
If so, at which age
If so, only if patient asks *
If so, to be mentioned by counsellor *
If so, to be advocated by counsellor *
Prophylactic oophorectomyAvailable(Y/N)
If so, at which age
If so, only if patient asks **
If so, to be mentioned by counsellor **
If so, to be advocated by counsellor **
If premenopausal oophorectomy, HRT to which age?

*/** mutually exclusive, answer only one for each gene; */** please specify who the counsellor would be (more than one if applicable), e.g. gynecologist, medical geneticist, genetic counsellor, GP, other.

The survey covered questions regarding the current practice for path_MLH1, path_MSH2, path_MSH6 and path_PMS2 carriers, including risk-reducing hysterectomy and BSO and the timing of surgery. We asked each center about the involvement of the patient and healthcare professional stakeholders in initiating discussions about risk-reducing gynecological surgery, whether surgery was actively recommended and if so, for whom. Data were exported to an excel file, and descriptive statistics were used to catalogue the findings. Local guidelines for gynecological surveillance and the modalities used are shown in Supplementary Table 1.

3. Results

3.1. Survey Response

We conducted the survey in 31 participating medical centers, from 18 countries. Of the thirty-one centers, 21 (68%) from 12 countries, including Germany (n = 5), Finland (n = 1), Australia (n = 1), Spain (n = 1), the United Kingdom (n = 2), Norway (n = 1), The Netherlands (n = 2), Italy (n = 3), Sweden (n = 1), Israel (n = 2), Switzerland (n = 1) and Argentina (n = 1), completed the survey (Table 2).
Table 2

Currently recommended practice for females with path_MMR variants in the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database (PLSD) by country.

CountriesNumber of Centers Path_MLH1 and Path_MSH2 Carriers Path_MSH6 Carriers Path_PMS2 Carriers
Prophylactic HysterectomyProphylactic BSOProphylactic HysterectomyProphylactic BSOProphylactic HysterectomyProphylactic BSO
Germany5555555
Finland1111111
Australia1111111
Spain1111111
UK2222211
Norway1111111
The Netherlands2222200
Italy3333311
Sweden1111111
Israel2221111
Switzerland *1000000
Argentina1111111
Total 21202019191414

*: There is no national guidelines or statements for female Lynch syndrome patients yet; BSO: bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy.

3.2. Risk-Reducing Hysterectomy and BSO as Measures to Prevent Gynecological Cancer in Path_MMR Carriers

Risk-reducing hysterectomy and BSO are offered in 20/21 (95%) centers for path_MLH1 and path_MSH2 carriers. For path_MSH6 carriers, risk-reducing hysterectomy and BSO are offered in 19/21 (91%) centers. Fourteen out of 21 (67%) centers offer risk-reducing hysterectomy and BSO for path_PMS2 carriers (Table 2). The most common reported age at which risk-reducing surgery is currently offered is ≥40 years in path_MMR carriers. Prescription of estrogen-only HRT after premenopausal oophorectomy is recommended by 15/21 (71%) centers, across a variable age range (35–55 years).

3.3. Involvement of Stakeholders

3.3.1. Risk-Reducing Hysterectomy

Of the 21 centers, 11 provided information about which stakeholders are involved in initiating discussions about risk-reducing hysterectomy with Lynch syndrome carriers. Ten (91%) centers stated that healthcare professionals (mainly gynecologists, genetic counselors and medical geneticists) offer advice about risk-reducing hysterectomy to women with Lynch syndrome, and 6/9 (67%) centers that provided further information stated that risk-reducing hysterectomy is actively recommended. Of the 21 centers, only 4 provided information about patient engagement in discussions about risk-reducing hysterectomy. Of these four centers, one (25%) reported that risk-reducing hysterectomy is only provided upon request by Lynch syndrome carriers.

3.3.2. BSO

With regards to risk-reducing BSO, 10/21 centers provided information about stakeholder involvement in these discussions. Nine (90%) centers stated that healthcare professionals (mainly gynecologists, genetic counselors and medical geneticists) offer advice to Lynch syndrome carriers about risk-reducing BSO. In 9/10 centers, risk-reducing BSO is advocated by healthcare professionals, and in 5/9 (56%), it is actively recommended. Of the 21 centers, 6 provided information about the involvement of patients in discussions about risk-reducing BSO. Three of those centers (50%) stated that surgery is only provided upon request by Lynch syndrome carriers.

4. Discussion

Here, we provide insight into the current management of gynecological cancer risk in women with Lynch syndrome across participating PLSD centers. We received data from 21/31 (68%) PLSD centers, incorporating practices from 12 countries worldwide. There was global agreement (>90%) for offering both hysterectomy and BSO to path_MLH1, path_MSH2 and path_MSH6 carriers after the age of 40 years. The reported age at which risk-reducing surgery is offered is later than the minimum age (35 years) for path_MLH1 and path_MSH2 carriers suggested by the recent expert consensus statement [6], which was based on the reported rapidly rising risk of gynecological cancers for path_MSH2 and path_MSH6 carriers from that age onwards [2]. Despite the very low risk for gynecological cancer in path_PMS2 carriers, risk-reducing hysterectomy and BSO are still offered by 67% of the responding centers. Interestingly, we identified no major differences between the countries, but there are some discrepancies between centers from the same country (e.g., the UK, The Netherlands and Israel). Of note, the survey was taken one year ago (April 2019), and some retrospective and prospective data studies on ovarian and endometrial cancer risk in Lynch syndrome were just being published [8,9,10]. This may explain the discrepancies between centers, especially for path_PMS2 carriers, whereby some centers (e.g., The Netherlands) have adapted their practice, but changes have not been incorporated into national guidelines yet, whilst other centers (e.g., Switzerland) rely on recommendations from European and US guidelines/statements. Decisions about risk-reducing surgery reflect discussions between women and healthcare providers that incorporate a range of issues, including personalized risk calculations, advantages/disadvantages of risk-reducing surgery, gynecological health, medical co-morbidity, family planning, and women’s values and preferences. The complexity of these individualized discussions cannot be captured in a simple survey of this nature. Nevertheless, we sought to understand more about the drivers for these discussions, whether healthcare professionals are active or passive in providing risk-reducing gynecological surgery, and whether this differs by center, country, surgery type (hysterectomy versus BSO) and affected gene. Most centers offer risk-reducing hysterectomy and/or BSO, but there is a huge variation between centers as to whether surgery is actively recommended or provided only upon patient request. This likely reflects inconsistency in national and international guidelines underpinned by a lack of high-quality published studies. There is a clear unmet clinical need for more research in this area to guide a consistent approach to risk-reducing gynecological surgery for Lynch syndrome carriers irrespective of where an individual woman lives and who is involved in her care [11]. The prescription of HRT following premenopausal oophorectomy is recommended in 71% of the centers from 35 years for a variable duration of up to 55 years of age. The reported ages at which HRT is offered is not in line with the strong recommendation by the Manchester International Consensus Group that suggests HRT is offered until at least the age of natural menopause (~51 years) [6]. Some centers do not prescribe HRT at all; it is notable that the current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for risk management for women with Lynch syndrome do not mention prescription of HRT [12]. However, estrogen protects against colorectal cancer [13,14,15,16,17,18], which is particularly relevant for Lynch syndrome carriers, as well as protecting bone and cardiovascular health [19,20]. Many of the well-publicized harms associated with HRT relate to its prolonged use in older women and specifically from the progestin component that is not required when the uterus is removed [21,22]. Risk-reducing hysterectomy and/or BSO has been reported to prevent cancer and/or to improve survival in women with Lynch syndrome [7]. For women who choose not to undergo risk-reducing surgery, an understanding of the ‘red flag’ symptoms for these cancers is important to trigger prompt referral for urgent investigation [23]. A woman’s personal risk should be used to provide individualized counselling regarding the need for risk-reducing surgery and the optimal timing of this.

5. Conclusions

This study provides a snapshot of the preventive gynecological recommendations provided to women with Lynch syndrome by 21 centers from 18 countries worldwide. There is a wide variation in how, when and to whom risk-reducing gynecological surgery is offered. The Manchester International Consensus Group developed guidance to harmonize the care offered to women with Lynch syndrome but noted the lack of high-quality research in this area. There is a clear need for further research so that women with Lynch syndrome can expect and receive consistent, evidence-based care for the management of their gynecological cancer risk.
  22 in total

Review 1.  Long-term health consequences of premature or early menopause and considerations for management.

Authors:  S S Faubion; C L Kuhle; L T Shuster; W A Rocca
Journal:  Climacteric       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 3.005

2.  Controlled 15-year trial on screening for colorectal cancer in families with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer.

Authors:  H J Järvinen; M Aarnio; H Mustonen; K Aktan-Collan; L A Aaltonen; P Peltomäki; A De La Chapelle; J P Mecklin
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Systematic review of acceptability, cardiovascular, neurological, bone health and HRT outcomes following risk reducing surgery in BRCA carriers.

Authors:  Faiza Gaba; Ranjit Manchanda
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2020-02-04       Impact factor: 5.237

4.  Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results From the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Jacques E Rossouw; Garnet L Anderson; Ross L Prentice; Andrea Z LaCroix; Charles Kooperberg; Marcia L Stefanick; Rebecca D Jackson; Shirley A A Beresford; Barbara V Howard; Karen C Johnson; Jane Morley Kotchen; Judith Ockene
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-07-17       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 5.  Postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy: scientific review.

Authors:  Heidi D Nelson; Linda L Humphrey; Peggy Nygren; Steven M Teutsch; Janet D Allan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-08-21       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy versus hysterectomy alone.

Authors:  Laura A M van Lieshout; Miranda P Steenbeek; Joanne A De Hullu; M Caroline Vos; Saskia Houterman; Jack Wilkinson; Jurgen Mj Piek
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-08-28

7.  Cancer incidence and survival in Lynch syndrome patients receiving colonoscopic and gynaecological surveillance: first report from the prospective Lynch syndrome database.

Authors:  Pål Møller; Toni Seppälä; Inge Bernstein; Elke Holinski-Feder; Paola Sala; D Gareth Evans; Annika Lindblom; Finlay Macrae; Ignacio Blanco; Rolf Sijmons; Jacqueline Jeffries; Hans Vasen; John Burn; Sigve Nakken; Eivind Hovig; Einar Andreas Rødland; Kukatharmini Tharmaratnam; Wouter H de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel; James Hill; Juul Wijnen; Kate Green; Fiona Lalloo; Lone Sunde; Miriam Mints; Lucio Bertario; Marta Pineda; Matilde Navarro; Monika Morak; Laura Renkonen-Sinisalo; Ian M Frayling; John-Paul Plazzer; Kirsi Pylvanainen; Julian R Sampson; Gabriel Capella; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; Gabriela Möslein
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 23.059

8.  Cancer risk and survival in path_MMR carriers by gene and gender up to 75 years of age: a report from the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database.

Authors:  Pål Møller; Toni T Seppälä; Inge Bernstein; Elke Holinski-Feder; Paulo Sala; D Gareth Evans; Annika Lindblom; Finlay Macrae; Ignacio Blanco; Rolf H Sijmons; Jacqueline Jeffries; Hans F A Vasen; John Burn; Sigve Nakken; Eivind Hovig; Einar Andreas Rødland; Kukatharmini Tharmaratnam; Wouter H de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel; James Hill; Juul T Wijnen; Mark A Jenkins; Kate Green; Fiona Lalloo; Lone Sunde; Miriam Mints; Lucio Bertario; Marta Pineda; Matilde Navarro; Monika Morak; Laura Renkonen-Sinisalo; Mev Dominguez Valentin; Ian M Frayling; John-Paul Plazzer; Kirsi Pylvanainen; Maurizio Genuardi; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; Gabriela Moeslein; Julian R Sampson; Gabriel Capella
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2017-07-28       Impact factor: 23.059

9.  Cancer Risks for PMS2-Associated Lynch Syndrome.

Authors:  Sanne W Ten Broeke; Heleen M van der Klift; Carli M J Tops; Stefan Aretz; Inge Bernstein; Daniel D Buchanan; Albert de la Chapelle; Gabriel Capella; Mark Clendenning; Christoph Engel; Steven Gallinger; Encarna Gomez Garcia; Jane C Figueiredo; Robert Haile; Heather L Hampel; John L Hopper; Nicoline Hoogerbrugge; Magnus von Knebel Doeberitz; Loic Le Marchand; Tom G W Letteboer; Mark A Jenkins; Annika Lindblom; Noralane M Lindor; Arjen R Mensenkamp; Pål Møller; Polly A Newcomb; Theo A M van Os; Rachel Pearlman; Marta Pineda; Nils Rahner; Egbert J W Redeker; Maran J W Olderode-Berends; Christophe Rosty; Hans K Schackert; Rodney Scott; Leigha Senter; Liesbeth Spruijt; Verena Steinke-Lange; Manon Suerink; Stephen Thibodeau; Yvonne J Vos; Anja Wagner; Ingrid Winship; Frederik J Hes; Hans F A Vasen; Juul T Wijnen; Maartje Nielsen; Aung Ko Win
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-08-30       Impact factor: 50.717

10.  Cancer risks by gene, age, and gender in 6350 carriers of pathogenic mismatch repair variants: findings from the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database.

Authors:  Mev Dominguez-Valentin; Julian R Sampson; Toni T Seppälä; Sanne W Ten Broeke; John-Paul Plazzer; Sigve Nakken; Christoph Engel; Stefan Aretz; Mark A Jenkins; Lone Sunde; Inge Bernstein; Gabriel Capella; Francesc Balaguer; Huw Thomas; D Gareth Evans; John Burn; Marc Greenblatt; Eivind Hovig; Wouter H de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel; Rolf H Sijmons; Lucio Bertario; Maria Grazia Tibiletti; Giulia Martina Cavestro; Annika Lindblom; Adriana Della Valle; Francisco Lopez-Köstner; Nathan Gluck; Lior H Katz; Karl Heinimann; Carlos A Vaccaro; Reinhard Büttner; Heike Görgens; Elke Holinski-Feder; Monika Morak; Stefanie Holzapfel; Robert Hüneburg; Magnus von Knebel Doeberitz; Markus Loeffler; Nils Rahner; Hans K Schackert; Verena Steinke-Lange; Wolff Schmiegel; Deepak Vangala; Kirsi Pylvänäinen; Laura Renkonen-Sinisalo; John L Hopper; Aung Ko Win; Robert W Haile; Noralane M Lindor; Steven Gallinger; Loïc Le Marchand; Polly A Newcomb; Jane C Figueiredo; Stephen N Thibodeau; Karin Wadt; Christina Therkildsen; Henrik Okkels; Zohreh Ketabi; Leticia Moreira; Ariadna Sánchez; Miquel Serra-Burriel; Marta Pineda; Matilde Navarro; Ignacio Blanco; Kate Green; Fiona Lalloo; Emma J Crosbie; James Hill; Oliver G Denton; Ian M Frayling; Einar Andreas Rødland; Hans Vasen; Miriam Mints; Florencia Neffa; Patricia Esperon; Karin Alvarez; Revital Kariv; Guy Rosner; Tamara Alejandra Pinero; María Laura Gonzalez; Pablo Kalfayan; Douglas Tjandra; Ingrid M Winship; Finlay Macrae; Gabriela Möslein; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; Maartje Nielsen; Pål Møller
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Risk-Reducing Bilateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy for Ovarian Cancer: A Review and Clinical Guide for Hereditary Predisposition Genes.

Authors:  Ying L Liu; Kelsey Breen; Amanda Catchings; Megha Ranganathan; Alicia Latham; Deborah J Goldfrank; Rachel N Grisham; Kara Long Roche; Melissa K Frey; Dennis S Chi; Nadeem Abu-Rustum; Carol Aghajanian; Kenneth Offit; Zsofia K Stadler
Journal:  JCO Oncol Pract       Date:  2021-09-28

2.  Screening and risk reducing surgery for endometrial or ovarian cancers in Lynch syndrome: a systematic review.

Authors:  Natalie Lim; Martha Hickey; Graeme P Young; Finlay A Macrae; Christabel Kelly
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2022-05-03       Impact factor: 4.661

3.  Assessing Effectiveness of Colonic and Gynecological Risk Reducing Surgery in Lynch Syndrome Individuals.

Authors:  Nuria Dueñas; Matilde Navarro; Àlex Teulé; Ares Solanes; Mònica Salinas; Sílvia Iglesias; Elisabet Munté; Jordi Ponce; Jordi Guardiola; Esther Kreisler; Elvira Carballas; Marta Cuadrado; Xavier Matias-Guiu; Napoleón de la Ossa; Joan Lop; Conxi Lázaro; Gabriel Capellá; Marta Pineda; Joan Brunet
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-11-18       Impact factor: 6.639

4.  Uptake of hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in carriers of pathogenic mismatch repair variants: a Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database report.

Authors:  Toni T Seppälä; Mev Dominguez-Valentin; Emma J Crosbie; Christoph Engel; Stefan Aretz; Finlay Macrae; Ingrid Winship; Gabriel Capella; Huw Thomas; Eivind Hovig; Maartje Nielsen; Rolf H Sijmons; Lucio Bertario; Bernardo Bonanni; Maria G Tibiletti; Giulia M Cavestro; Miriam Mints; Nathan Gluck; Lior Katz; Karl Heinimann; Carlos A Vaccaro; Kate Green; Fiona Lalloo; James Hill; Wolff Schmiegel; Deepak Vangala; Claudia Perne; Hans-Georg Strauß; Johanna Tecklenburg; Elke Holinski-Feder; Verena Steinke-Lange; Jukka-Pekka Mecklin; John-Paul Plazzer; Marta Pineda; Matilde Navarro; Joan B Vida; Revital Kariv; Guy Rosner; Tamara A Piñero; Walter Pavicic; Pablo Kalfayan; Sanne W Ten Broeke; Mark A Jenkins; Lone Sunde; Inge Bernstein; John Burn; Marc Greenblatt; Wouter H de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel; Adriana Della Valle; Francisco Lopez-Koestner; Karin Alvarez; Reinhard Büttner; Heike Görgens; Monika Morak; Stefanie Holzapfel; Robert Hüneburg; Magnus von Knebel Doeberitz; Markus Loeffler; Silke Redler; Jürgen Weitz; Kirsi Pylvänäinen; Laura Renkonen-Sinisalo; Anna Lepistö; John L Hopper; Aung K Win; Noralane M Lindor; Steven Gallinger; Loïc Le Marchand; Polly A Newcomb; Jane C Figueiredo; Stephen N Thibodeau; Christina Therkildsen; Karin A W Wadt; Marian J E Mourits; Zohreh Ketabi; Oliver G Denton; Einar A Rødland; Hans Vasen; Florencia Neffa; Patricia Esperon; Douglas Tjandra; Gabriela Möslein; Erik Rokkones; Julian R Sampson; D G Evans; Pål Møller
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 5.  Novel Biomarkers in the Diagnosis of Benign and Malignant Gastrointestinal Diseases.

Authors:  Paulius Jonaitis; Vytautas Kiudelis; Greta Streleckiene; Rolandas Gedgaudas; Jurgita Skieceviciene; Juozas Kupcinskas
Journal:  Dig Dis       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 3.421

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.