Geoffrey Roberts1,2, Patrick R Benusiglio3, Tanya Bisseling4, Daniel Coit5, Jeremy L Davis6, Sam Grimes7, Theresa A Guise8, Richard Hardwick7, Kirsty Harris9, Paul Furman Mansfield8, Jeremy Rossaak10, Karen Chelcun Schreiber11, Peter P Stanich12, Vivian E Strong5, Pardeep Kaurah13. 1. Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK. geoffroberts@cantab.net. 2. Cambridge Oesophagogastric Centre, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK. geoffroberts@cantab.net. 3. Genetics Department, Pitié-Salpêtrière and Saint-Antoine Hospitals, AP-HP Sorbonne University, Paris, France. 4. Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 5. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA. 6. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA. 7. Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK. 8. The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA. 9. , Brisbane, Australia. 10. Tauranga Hospital, Tauranga, New Zealand. 11. Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer Advocacy, Madison, USA. 12. The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, USA. 13. BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prophylactic total gastrectomy (PTG) remains the only means of preventing gastric cancer for people with genetic mutations predisposing to Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer (HDGC), mainly in the CDH1 gene. The small but growing cohort of people undergoing PTG at a young age are expected to have a life-expectancy close to the general population, however, knowledge of the long-term effects of, and monitoring requirements after, PTG is limited. This study aims to define the standard of care for follow-up after PTG. METHODS: Through a combination of literature review and two-round Delphi consensus of major HDGC/PTG units and physicians, and patient advocates, we produced a set of recommendations for follow-up after PTG. RESULTS: There were 42 first round, and 62 second round, responses from clinicians, allied health professionals and patient advocates. The guidelines include recommendations for timing of assessments and specialties involved in providing follow-up, micronutrient supplementation and monitoring, bone health and the provision of written information. CONCLUSION: While the evidence supporting the guidelines is limited, expert consensus provides a framework to best manage people following PTG, and could support the collection of information on the long-term effects of PTG.
BACKGROUND: Prophylactic total gastrectomy (PTG) remains the only means of preventing gastric cancer for people with genetic mutations predisposing to Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer (HDGC), mainly in the CDH1 gene. The small but growing cohort of people undergoing PTG at a young age are expected to have a life-expectancy close to the general population, however, knowledge of the long-term effects of, and monitoring requirements after, PTG is limited. This study aims to define the standard of care for follow-up after PTG. METHODS: Through a combination of literature review and two-round Delphi consensus of major HDGC/PTG units and physicians, and patient advocates, we produced a set of recommendations for follow-up after PTG. RESULTS: There were 42 first round, and 62 second round, responses from clinicians, allied health professionals and patient advocates. The guidelines include recommendations for timing of assessments and specialties involved in providing follow-up, micronutrient supplementation and monitoring, bone health and the provision of written information. CONCLUSION: While the evidence supporting the guidelines is limited, expert consensus provides a framework to best manage people following PTG, and could support the collection of information on the long-term effects of PTG.
Authors: Yanfeng Hu; Hyoung-Il Kim; Woo Jin Hyung; Ki Jun Song; Joong Ho Lee; Yoo Min Kim; Sung Hoon Noh Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Vanessa R Blair; Maybelle McLeod; Fátima Carneiro; Daniel G Coit; Johanna L D'Addario; Jolanda M van Dieren; Kirsty L Harris; Nicoline Hoogerbrugge; Carla Oliveira; Rachel S van der Post; Julie Arnold; Patrick R Benusiglio; Tanya M Bisseling; Alex Boussioutas; Annemieke Cats; Amanda Charlton; Karen E Chelcun Schreiber; Jeremy L Davis; Massimiliano di Pietro; Rebecca C Fitzgerald; James M Ford; Kimberley Gamet; Irene Gullo; Richard H Hardwick; David G Huntsman; Pardeep Kaurah; Sonia S Kupfer; Andrew Latchford; Paul F Mansfield; Takeshi Nakajima; Susan Parry; Jeremy Rossaak; Haruhiko Sugimura; Magali Svrcek; Marc Tischkowitz; Toshikazu Ushijima; Hidetaka Yamada; Han-Kwang Yang; Adrian Claydon; Joana Figueiredo; Karyn Paringatai; Raquel Seruca; Nicola Bougen-Zhukov; Tom Brew; Simone Busija; Patricia Carneiro; Lynn DeGregorio; Helen Fisher; Erin Gardner; Tanis D Godwin; Katharine N Holm; Bostjan Humar; Caroline J Lintott; Elizabeth C Monroe; Mark D Muller; Enrique Norero; Yasmin Nouri; Joana Paredes; João M Sanches; Emily Schulpen; Ana S Ribeiro; Andrew Sporle; James Whitworth; Liying Zhang; Anthony E Reeve; Parry Guilford Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2020-08 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Ariel Bar-Mashiah; Emily R Soper; Sinead Cullina; Gillian M Belbin; Eimear E Kenny; Aimee L Lucas; Noura S Abul-Husn Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 2.375