MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103172754 · doi:10.1136/jmedgenet-2015-103094

Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer: updated clinical guidelines with an emphasis on germline <i>CDH1</i> mutation carriers

2015· review· en· W2103172754 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel S. van der Post, Ingrid P. Vogelaar, Fátima Carneiro, Parry Guilford, David G. Huntsman, Carlos Caldas, Karen E Chelcun Schreiber, Richard Hardwick, Margreet G.E.M. Ausems, Linda Bardram, Patrick R. Benusiglio, Tanya M. Bisseling, Vanessa Blair, Eveline M. A. Bleiker, Alex Boussioutas, Annemieke Cats, Daniel G. Coit, Lynn DeGregorio, Joana Figueiredo, James M. Ford, Esther Heijkoop, Rosella Hermens, Bostjan Humar, Pardeep Kaurah, G. Keller, Jennifer F. Lai, Marjolijn J. L. Ligtenberg, Maria O’Donovan, Carla Oliveíra, Hugo Pinheiro, Krish Ragunath, Esther Rasenberg, Susan Richardson, Franco Roviello, Hans K. Schackert, Raquel Seruca, Amy Taylor, Anouk ter Huurne, Marc Tischkowitz, Sheena Tjon A Joe, Benjamin van Dijck, Nicole C.T. van Grieken, Richard van Hillegersberg, Johanna W. van Sandick, Rianne Vehof, J. Han van Krieken, Rebecca C. Fitzgerald

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Genetics · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
FundersMedical Research CouncilZonMwRadboud Universitair Medisch CentrumNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchLeids Universitair Medisch CentrumKoninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van WetenschappenUniversiteit LeidenCancer Research UK
KeywordsCDH1MedicineBreast cancerGermline mutationCancerGenetic testingSignet ring cell carcinomaGastrectomyProphylactic MastectomyInvasive lobular carcinomaInternal medicineOncologyMastectomyGeneral surgeryMutationGeneticsAdenocarcinomaGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Germline CDH1 mutations confer a high lifetime risk of developing diffuse gastric (DGC) and lobular breast cancer (LBC). A multidisciplinary workshop was organised to discuss genetic testing, surgery, surveillance strategies, pathology reporting and the patient's perspective on multiple aspects, including diet post gastrectomy. The updated guidelines include revised CDH1 testing criteria (taking into account first-degree and second-degree relatives): (1) families with two or more patients with gastric cancer at any age, one confirmed DGC; (2) individuals with DGC before the age of 40 and (3) families with diagnoses of both DGC and LBC (one diagnosis before the age of 50). Additionally, CDH1 testing could be considered in patients with bilateral or familial LBC before the age of 50, patients with DGC and cleft lip/palate, and those with precursor lesions for signet ring cell carcinoma. Given the high mortality associated with invasive disease, prophylactic total gastrectomy at a centre of expertise is advised for individuals with pathogenic CDH1 mutations. Breast cancer surveillance with annual breast MRI starting at age 30 for women with a CDH1 mutation is recommended. Standardised endoscopic surveillance in experienced centres is recommended for those opting not to have gastrectomy at the current time, those with CDH1 variants of uncertain significance and those that fulfil hereditary DGC criteria without germline CDH1 mutations. Expert histopathological confirmation of (early) signet ring cell carcinoma is recommended. The impact of gastrectomy and mastectomy should not be underestimated; these can have severe consequences on a psychological, physiological and metabolic level. Nutritional problems should be carefully monitored.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.149
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations564
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical GeneticsSame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207