GuidelineGut2013
International Cancer of the Pancreas Screening (CAPS) Consortium summit on the management of patients with increased risk for familial pancreatic cancer.
Guideline in Gut, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 345 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Quality Control Study of MR Based Screening of Individual With Increased Risk for Pancreas Cancer
International CAPS Registry: Operated Cases and Cases With Advanced Disease Among High-risk Individuals Participating in a Pancreatic Cancer Surveillance Program; a Case-control Study
Pancreatic Cancer Screening in a Population at High Risk
Who cites it
345 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Performance of risk prediction models for pancreatic cancer in patients with new-onset diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Studies on Pancreatic Cancer Screening.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Pooled it
- Coffee and Risk of Pancreatic Cancer: Insights from Two-Sample and Multivariable Mendelian Randomization Analyses.Nutrients · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical Practice Guideline—Acute and Chronic Pancreatitis.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2022Guideline
- The Role of Circulating Protein and Metabolite Biomarkers in the Development of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Clinical Perspective on Proteomic and Glycomic Biomarkers for Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Prediction of Pancreatic Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Pooled it
- Breath analysis for the detection of digestive tract malignancies: systematic review.BJS open · 2021Pooled it
- Guideline
- Appropriateness of pancreatic resection in high-risk individuals for familial pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a patient-level meta-analysis and proposition of the Beaujon score.United European gastroenterology journal · 2019Pooled it
- A systematic review on metabolomics-based diagnostic biomarker discovery and validation in pancreatic cancer.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2018Pooled it
- Focal Pancreatic Parenchymal Atrophy and Delayed Enhancement in Early Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Narrative Review of Pathologic Basis, Diagnostic Pitfalls, and Evidence Limitations.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Review
- Progress, challenges, and future directions of pancreatic cancer surveillance in high-risk populations.Communications medicine · 2026Review
- Hereditary Pancreatic Cancer: Genetic Risk, Surveillance Strategies, and Therapeutic Implications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Toward scalable early cancer detection: evaluating EHR-based predictive models against traditional screening criteria.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- Genetic Predisposition to Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review of Hereditary Syndromes and Familial Aggregation.Cancers · 2026Review
- Factors affecting compliance with pancreas surveillance in patients with familial/genetic risk.Familial cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- The Clinical Significance of Extrapancreatic Incidental Findings Detected During Pancreas Surveillance.Gastro hep advances · 2026Article
- Bioinformatic Identification and Preliminary Validation of TP53, TGFB1, and NFE2L2 as Potential Ferroptosis-Related Regulators in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Duodenal Fluid Microbiome Diversity and Pancreatic Cyst Status Among Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Surveillance.Gastro hep advances · 2026Article
285 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issuedHammell, Pascal [corrected to Hammel, Pascal]
- Erratum issuedHamell, Pascal [corrected to Hammell, Pascal]
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundScreening individuals at increased risk for pancreatic cancer (PC) detects early, potentially curable, pancreatic neoplasia.
objectiveTo develop consortium statements on screening, surveillance and management of high-risk individuals with an inherited predisposition to PC.
methodsA 49-expert multidisciplinary international consortium met to discuss pancreatic screening and vote on statements. Consensus was considered reached if ≥ 75% agreed or disagreed.
resultsThere was excellent agreement that, to be successful, a screening programme should detect and treat T1N0M0 margin-negative PC and high-grade dysplastic precursor lesions (pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm). It was agreed that the following were candidates for screening: first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with PC from a familial PC kindred with at least two affected FDRs; patients with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome; and p16, BRCA2 and hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) mutation carriers with ≥ 1 affected FDR. Consensus was not reached for the age to initiate screening or stop surveillance. It was agreed that initial screening should include endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and/or MRI/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography not CT or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. There was no consensus on the need for EUS fine-needle aspiration to evaluate cysts. There was disagreement on optimal screening modalities and intervals for follow-up imaging. When surgery is recommended it should be performed at a high-volume centre. There was great disagreement as to which screening abnormalities were of sufficient concern to for surgery to be recommended.
conclusionsScreening is recommended for high-risk individuals, but more evidence is needed, particularly for how to manage patients with detected lesions. Screening and subsequent management should take place at high-volume centres with multidisciplinary teams, preferably within research protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.