ArticleFamilial cancer2025
Pancreatic cancer surveillance not recommended for familial adenomatous polyposis: a fine and gray risk analysis.
Article in Familial cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer (PDAC) surveillance programs are recommended for individuals with a PDAC lifetime-risk ≥ 5% to improve outcomes. While familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is linked to increased PDAC risk, robust data to guide surveillance recommendations is lacking. This study evaluates PDAC risk in a large FAP-cohort.Data were collected from FAP cohorts in the United States (US) and the Netherlands (NL), including individuals (≥ 18 years) with a confirmed (likely) pathogenic APC variant. Cumulative PDAC incidence, adjusted for death as competing risk, was compared with control data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Statistics Netherlands. Data were collected from FAP cohorts in the United States (US) and the Netherlands (NL), including individuals (≥ 18 years) with a confirmed (likely) pathogenic APC variant. Cumulative PDAC incidence, adjusted for death as competing risk, was compared with control data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and Statistics Netherlands. The US-cohort (n = 357) and NL-cohort (n = 1000) had a median age at the end of follow-up of 46 years (IQR, 32.0-60.0) and 60 years (IQR, 47.5-72.5), respectively. The cumulative risk of PDAC by age 70 was 1.3% (95% CI, 0.2-8.4) in the US cohort and 0.6% (95% CI 0.2-1.7) in the NL cohort. When combining both FAP-cohorts, the cumulative risk of PDAC by age 70 was 0.7% (95% CI, 0.3-1.8). For comparison, the cumulative incidence of PDAC in the general population at age 70 was 0.3% (95% CI 0.3-0.3), corresponding to a relative risk of 2.2 (95% CI, 0.9-5.7). Our findings indicate that PDAC risk in FAP patients is not statistically significantly higher than in the general population. As the cumulative incidence remains below the 5% threshold, PDAC surveillance is not recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41286156What 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.