Buscar en
Revista Médica Clínica Las Condes
Toda la web
Inicio Revista Médica Clínica Las Condes HEREDITARY COLORECTAL CANCER REGISTRY: A CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION EXPERIENCE
Información de la revista
Vol. 28. Núm. 4.
Tema central: Tumores hereditarios que predisponen al desarrollo del cáncer
Páginas 553-560 (Julio - Agosto 2017)
Compartir
Compartir
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Visitas
2489
Vol. 28. Núm. 4.
Tema central: Tumores hereditarios que predisponen al desarrollo del cáncer
Páginas 553-560 (Julio - Agosto 2017)
Open Access
HEREDITARY COLORECTAL CANCER REGISTRY: A CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION EXPERIENCE
Visitas
2489
J Church
Autor para correspondencia
churchj@ccf.org

Corresponding author.
, M O’Malley, L Laguardia, D Crowe, X Xhaja, H Hasson, L Arroyo, G Dasilva, B Jiminez, K Hurley, B Leach, J Marquard, C Burke, M Kalady
Sandford R. Weiss MD Center for Hereditary Colorectal Cancer, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Este artículo ha recibido

Under a Creative Commons license
Información del artículo
Resumen
Texto completo
Bibliografía
Descargar PDF
Estadísticas
Figuras (1)
Tablas (2)
TABLE 1. ACTIVITIES OF THE SANFORD R. WEISS MD CENTER FOR HEREDITARY COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA.
TABLE 2. NUMBERS OF PROBANDS WITH HEREDITARY COLORECTAL CANCER SYNDROMES AS OF DECEMBER 2016.
Mostrar másMostrar menos
INTRODUCTION

The Hereditary Colorectal Cancer registry is one of the oldest and largest registries of its kind. It cares for patients with all hereditary syndromes of colorectal cancer using the three basic approaches of patient care, education and research. This article summarizes the structure and function of the registry, and gives examples of its contributions to the management of affected patients.

ACTIVITY

In 2016 the registry served over 1000 families with FAP, 224 families with Lynch syndrome, 61 with MYH associated polyposis and 146 with one of the hamartomatous polyposes. In 2016 there were 1009 patient visits with 80 new patients and 879 endoscopies. Over 60 surgeries were performed.

SUMMARY

the Cleveland Clinic approach to hereditary colorectal cancer is described. This is multidisciplinary, involving several specialties and both genetic counseling and mental health services within the registry.

Keywords:
Hereditary colorectal cancer
registry
Texto completo
INTRODUCTION

Registries have a very important role in the management of patients and families with syndromes of hereditary colorectal cancer. They literally save lives through effective surveillance and expert clinical care 1,2. Patients with these syndromes deserve to be cared for at a registry, or at least by experts with experience and expertise in the management of these syndromes.

The Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Registry at the Cleveland Clinic began in 1979, when Dr. David G. Jagelman established a registry for patients and families with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP). In the subsequent 38 years the registry has grown to become the largest single institution Hereditary Colorectal Cancer registry in the world. Making use of the high number of patients and families, the Clinic registry has been a leader in developing clinical practice guidelines for managing patients with hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes. During its existence, the Registry has undergone many changes; in knowledge, technology and personnel. In 1988 Dr. Jagelman moved to the new Cleveland Clinic satellite hospital in Florida. Dr Church took over direction of the registry when he arrived at the Clinic in 1989. In 2017 the leadership was transferred to another colorectal surgeon, Dr Matthew Kalady. Over the years the genotypes of most of the major syndromes of hereditary colorectal cancer have been discovered. While some syndromes remain a puzzle, we are now able to offer genetic testing to families with suggestive phenotypes. The technology of DNA sequencing has changed, leading to the introduction of Next Generation Sequencing 3. This allows Multigene Panel Testing, using large panels of genes that cover all the known syndromes and some peripheral genes as well. Multigene Panels are quicker and cheaper than the old single gene Sanger sequencing, and can lead to surprising results. This has heightened the need for genetic counseling and for an understanding of the biology of colorectal carcinogenesis. There are at least 10 known hereditary syndromes of colorectal cancer, where we can offer genetic testing and sound clinical management. Because these syndromes are rare, multigenerational and familial, and because affected patients need complex multidisciplinary care for life, a central repository of information is essential so that care can be organized. This central repository of information is the registry.

DEFINITION

In simple terms a registry is a list; in the medical world this is often a list of patients. A Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Registry is a list of names; names of patients with a hereditary colorectal cancer syndrome and the names of their relatives. Other facts about these patients and relatives can be stored to facilitate clinical care, to allow education of the families, and to enable clinical research. As information technology advances, databases have been designed for use in this setting. The Cleveland Clinic designed its own database, Cologene™, for use as a translational tool to store family pedigrees as well as clinical information, and to use the information to generate patient appointments letters and to perform research. The database is in use at several Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Centers around the world.

STRUCTURE

Most Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Registries arise around one or two key individuals, with special interest and expertise in the area. The St Marks Polyposis Registry, the original registry founded in 1929, arose around the surgical skills of John Percy Lockhart-Mummery and the pathology expertise of Cuthbert Dukes 4. The Johns Hopkins Registry was founded in 1973 by Victor McKusick, the “father” of American Medical genetics and the Creighton Registry in Omaha, Nebraska by a medical oncologist named Henry Lynch. There is evidence of the founder in many registries and there is usually a special expertise or interest, such as surgery, or medical genetics, or gastroenterology. In 2004 we surveyed all the 18 registries for Hereditary Colorectal Cancer in the USA, and described a wide range of definitions and methods. The most striking finding was the small number of registries available to the potentially large number of affected patients and families. The effects of this lack of registries can be seen in the unfortunate outcomes of treatments performed by those with little experience. In Cleveland the registry was based on the interest of David Jagelman, a colorectal surgeon who had trained at St. Marks Hospital and had noticed the benefits of the registry there. The Cleveland registry was therefore centered on colorectal surgical expertise, but over the years expert Gastroenterology, Pathology, Genetics, General Surgery, Endocrinology, Urology, Psychology, and Gynecology services have been added.

A Registry therefore starts with an interested clinician who sets about organizing a registry coordinator. The Coordinator is the “go between” between patients/families and the registry staff. A Coordinator receives referrals, gathers records, arranges appointments, and is the contact between the registry and the patient/family. Registries need a database, an office, and some organizational support. Above all, they need funding. Registries can run on a tight budget but some support needs to come from the host institution. Registries generate income by attracting referrals, seeing patients and families on a regular basis, and need appointments for their patients with multiple specialties. To this extent they generate their own support. The current structure of the Cleveland Clinic Registry is shown in Figure 1. Because of the large number of patients and families the syndromes are divided into those involving polyposis and those without polyposis. The “Florida branch “of the Registry shares the Cologene database but patients are identified according to Institution so that duplicate records are not created.

FIGURE 1.

STRUCTURE OF THE SANFORD R. WEISS MD CENTER FOR HEREDITARY COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA

(0,5MB).
PROCESS

The mission of the Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Registry at the Cleveland Clinic is to prevent death from syndrome- related cancer while maintaining quality of life. The essence of fulfilling this mission is excellence in patient care. This involves timely and accurate diagnosis, effective surveillance, and appropriate endoscopy and surgery. In addition to patient care, the fulfillment of the mission involves education of patients, families and healthcare providers, and the performance of relevant research. These three components of the registry process are detailed in table 1.

TABLE 1.

ACTIVITIES OF THE SANFORD R. WEISS MD CENTER FOR HEREDITARY COLORECTAL NEOPLASIA.

PATIENT CARE  EDUCATION  RESEARCH 
High Risk Clinic
Genetic Counseling and Testing
Staff Outpatient Clinics
Shared Medical Appointments
Psychologist
Endoscopy and Surgery
Cologene
Consultants in other specialties
Support Group 
Brochures
Family matters
Website
Public Education programs
Book
Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Day
Social media
 
Cologene
Jagelman Registries
Presentations
Manuscripts
CGA/InSiGHT/IMRC
Polyp Prevention Studies
Collaborative Studies:
OCCPI
CFR (Collaborative family registry) 
THE PATIENT EXPERIENCE

Referrals to the registry are usually received by a coordinator. Records are sought and received and assessed to determine the likely syndrome that applies to the patient, the medical and genetic testing that has been done, and the likely schedule that will have to be set up for the clinic visit. New patients are usually seen in a “High Risk” clinic, where consultations, endoscopies and other tests are scheduled on the same day to facilitate the patient visit. At minimum patients see either a colorectal surgeon, a gastroenterologist, or both, as well as a genetic counselor. If genetic testing is needed and agreed to then it is arranged. Patients are provided with information about the syndromes that are likely and after informed consent has been obtained are enrolled into the registry. A full family tree is drawn and the data entered into Cologene. At risk relatives need to be contacted and the proband is asked to do this, often using letters that have been provided by the registry. Surgeries or endoscopies are arranged and performed.

A recent development in the registry is the inception of shared medical appointments, where groups of patients with the same syndrome can receive both individualized care and a general information session about their syndrome. It is an efficient way of managing referrals.

During the initial intake patients and families are assessed to see if they need social/financial/psychological help. Resources are available to help with necessary uncovered services, with work-related papers and with mental health symptoms.

Much of the Registry activity is surveillance. This happens after patients have had risk-reducing surgery or endoscopy. Recommendations are given for continued surveillance, the organs and the intervals dependent on genotype and both personal and family phenotype. Once surveillance programs are established they are entered into Cologene which sends automatic prompt letters to remind patients of an upcoming appointment.

EDUCATION

As shown in table 1, education of patients, families and healthcare providers is an important role for the registry. Our practice is to provide the necessary specialized care and then return to patient and family to their local physicians. However both the family and the caregivers need to be educated about the syndrome. To this end we produce brochures and a newsletter, and maintain a web site with links to resources. A Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Day provides the patients and their families with opportunities to meet less formally with Registry staff and to interact with them more fully. Social media is increasingly used by patients to compare experiences and to set up support groups. Involvement with this is part of the registry process.

RESEARCH

Research is a registry response to the complexity of hereditary colorectal cancer and the opportunity that large numbers of affected patients and families presents. Cologene is the hub of the research effort as the registry addresses clinical questions important to patients and caregivers. Because of the rarity of the syndromes, collaborative research is often necessary. Sometimes this is organized through the collaborative groups that exist and of which the Cleveland Clinic registry is an integral part. There are the Collaborative Group of the Americas for Inherited Colorectal cancer (CGA), and the International Society for Gastrointestinal Hereditary Tumors (InSiGHT). The registry is also involved in prospective studies of chemoprevention and is a resource for other institutions who may need extra patients to add to their studies.

PATIENT ACTIVITY

The numbers of probands with the different syndromes as of 2016 is shown in Table 2. Outpatient activity for 2017 is shown in Table 3. These numbers reflect a steady increase in new patients and new families being referred to the Registry. These are often complex presentations and sometimes involve trying to salvage unfortunate situations that have occurred as a result of care performed elsewhere. The Cleveland Clinic registry has special interest in desmoid disease, and has a specific registry for such patients. The Cleveland Clinic registry also features advanced surgery and endoscopy techniques including minimally invasive and robotic surgery, pancreas-sparing duodenectomy, and endoscopic mucosal resection.

TABLE 2.

NUMBERS OF PROBANDS WITH HEREDITARY COLORECTAL CANCER SYNDROMES AS OF DECEMBER 2016.

SYNDROMES  PROBANDS 
Familial Adenomatous Polyposis  1053 
MYH Associated Polyposis  61 
Peutz-Jeghers Polyposis  39 
Juvenile Polyposis  67 
Serrated Polyposis  161 
Cowdens  38 
Bannayan Ruvalcaba Riley 
Hereditary Mixed Polyposis Syndrome 
Lynch Syndrome  224 (409 patients) 
HNPCC  95 
Familial Colorectal Cancer Type X  26 
Tumor Lynch  10 
Likely Lynch 
RPS20 
Total  1783 

HNPCC = hereditary non polyposis colorectal cancer (defined as a family fitting Amsterdam I or II criteria)

Tumor Lynch = microsatellite unstable high colorectal tumor or lacking expression of a mismatch repair gene on immunohistochemistry, but no germline mutation and without Amsterdam compliant family history

Likely Lynch= microsatellite unstable high colorectal tumor or lacking expression of a mismatch repair gene on immunohistochemistry, but no germline mutation, but with an Amsterdam compliant family history

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

There is no doubt that the Hereditary Colorectal Cancer Registry at the Cleveland Clinic has flourished since its inception in 1979. Due to the Institutional support, the excellence of the Registry Coordinators and the hard work and dedication of the Physicians, the reputation of the registry is second to none. The number of probands speaks for itself. The registry has produced well over 100 articles in the literature and at least one book on Molecular Genetics of Colorectal Cancer 6. Each of the Registry physicians has been President of the CGA, an organization that the Registry played a key role in founding. In 2003 the Registry hosted the joint meeting of the Leeds Castle Polyposis Group and the International Collaborative Group on HNPCC, while the CGA has met here in 1997 and 2008. The Registry bibliography shows key contributions in desmoid disease 7–18, upper GI polyps in FAP 19–23, colorectal surgery in FAP 24–39, prophylactic surgery in Lynch Syndrome 40–42, thyroid disease in FAP and MAP 43–45, hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia in juvenile polyposis (JPS) 46, surgery in JPS and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome 47–49, the colorectal phenotype of Cowdens disease 50, and the rare syndrome of Hereditary Mixed Polyposis 51. Review papers have tried to enhance understanding within the medical community of new syndromes and advances in genetic testing technology 52–59, and the Registry has been represented in several guideline articles 60–62. The registry has served as a model for other institutions that wish to start their own. This is an important role for an established registry and one that we encourage.

THE FUTURE

Hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes are here to stay. They account for about 5% of all colorectal cancers and are important for the opportunity they give to intervene in high risk families and save lives. They are also important for the lessons they teach in the biology and the management of sporadic colorectal cancer. The field is becoming increasingly complex, as the advancing front of knowledge discovers new molecular perturbations that result in hereditary predisposition to colorectal cancer. Clinically more effort is needed to design patient specific treatments rather than syndrome specific treatments. The quality of surveillance must continue to improve and the importance of quality of life cannot be over-emphasized. The mental health ramifications of these syndromes is poorly understood and a major effort is needed to provide the assessment and treatment that patients deserve. All of this will be accomplished through registries, but for this to happen new, enthusiastic physicians and counselors are needed to continue the effort.

[5]
J. Church, R. Kiringoda, L. LaGuardia.
Inherited colorectal cancer registries in the United States.
Dis Colon Rectum., 47 (2004), pp. 674-678
REFERENCES
[1]
H.F. Vasen, M.E. Velthuizen, J.H. Kleibeuker, F.H. Menko, F.M. Nagengast, A. Cats, A.E. van der Meulen-de Jong, et al.
Hereditary cancer registries improve the care of patients with a genetic predisposition to cancer: contributions from the Dutch Lynch syndrome registry.
Fam Cancer., 15 (2016), pp. 429-435
[2]
S. Bülow.
Results of national registration of familial adenomatous polyposis.
Gut., 52 (2003), pp. 742-746
[3]
B. Heald, J. Church.
Genetic testing for hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes: a significant change in technology and its clinical implications.
Colorectal Dis., 16 (2014), pp. 942-946
[4]
S. Bülow, T. Berk, K. Neale.
The history of familial adenomatous polyposis.
Fam Cancer, 5 (2006), pp. 213-220
[6]
J.M. Church, G. Casey, Molecular Genetics, A. Colorectal Neoplasia.
Primer for the Clinician –.
2nd edition, Kluwer Academic Publishers, (2003 December),
[7]
K. Tsukada, J.M. Church, D.G. Jagelman, V.W. Fazio, I.C. Lavery.
Systemic Cytotoxic Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy for Desmoid in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.
Dis Colon Rectum, 34 (1991), pp. 1090-1092
[8]
K. Tsukada, J.M. Church, D.G. Jagelman, V.W. Fazio, E. McGannon, C.R. George, et al.
Noncytotoxic drug therapy for intra-abdominal desmoid tumor in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.
Dis Colon Rectum, 35 (1992), pp. 29-33
[9]
J. Church, E. McGannon.
Pregnancy Ameliorates the Clinical Course of Intra-Abdominal Desmoid Tumors in Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.
Dis Colon Rectum, 43 (2000), pp. 445-450
[10]
J. Church, C. Lynch, P. Neary, L. LaGuardia, E. Elayi.
A desmoid tumor-staging system separates patients with intra-abdominal, familial adenomatous polyposis-associated desmoid disease by behavior and prognosis.
Dis Colon Rectum, 51 (2008 Jun), pp. 897-901
[11]
E. Elayi, E. Manilich, J. Church.
Polishing the Crystal Ball: Knowing Genotype Improves Ability to Predict Desmoid Disease in Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.
Dis Colon Rectum, 52 (2009), pp. 1623-1629
[12]
M. Joyce, E. Mignanelli, J. Church.
Ureteric obstruction in familial adenomatous polyposis-associated desmoid disease.
Dis Colon Rectum, 53 (2010), pp. 327-333
[13]
A. Burgess, X. Xhaja, J. Church.
Does intra-abdominal desmoid disease affect patients with an ileal pouch differently than those with an ileorectal anastomosis?..
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, 54 (2011), pp. 1388-1391
[14]
Quintini C. Ward G. Shatnawei A. Xhaja X. Hashimoto K. Steiger E. et al Hammel J. Diago Uso T Burke CA. Church JM. Mortality of intra-abdominal desmoid tumors in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis: a single center review of 154 patients. Annals of Surgery. 255(3):511-6, 2012.
[15]
X. Xhaja, J. Church.
Enterocutaneous fistulae in familial adenomatous polyposis patients with abdominal desmoid disease.
Colorectal Disease., 15 (2013), pp. 1238-1242
[16]
X. Xhaja, J. Church.
Small bowel obstruction in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis related desmoid disease.
Colorectal Disease., 15 (2013), pp. 1489-1492
[17]
J.M. Church, X. Xhaja, S.K. Warrier, L. Laguardia, M. O’Malley, C. Burke, M.F. Kalady.
Desmoid tumors do not prevent proctectomy following abdominal colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, 57 (2014), pp. 343-347
[18]
J. Church, X. Xhaja, L. LaGuardia, M. O’Malley, C. Burke, M. Kalady.
Desmoids and genotype in familial adenomatous polyposis.
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum., 58 (2015), pp. 444-448
[19]
J.M. Church, E. McGannon, S. Hull-Boiner, M.V. Sivak, R. Van Stolk, D.G. Jagelman, et al.
Gastroduodenal Polyps in Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.
Dis Colon Rectum, 35 (1992), pp. 1170-1173
[20]
C. Burke, J. Church, G. Beck.
The Natural History of Upper Gastrointestinal Adenomas in Untreated Patients with Familial Polyposis.
Gastrointest Endosc, 49 (1999), pp. 358-364
[21]
F.J. Alarcon, C.A. Burke, J.M. Church, R.U. Van Stolk.
Familial Adenomatous Polyposis: Efficacy of Endoscopic and Surgical Treatment for Advanced Duodenal Adenomas.
Dis Colon Rectum, 42 (1999), pp. 1533-1536
[22]
Bianchi Laura K., Burke Carol A., Bennett Ana E., Lopez Rocio, Hasson Hennie, Church James M..
Fundic Gland Polyp Dysplasia Is Common in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 6 (2008), pp. 180-185
[23]
M.D. Johnson, R. Mackey, N. Brown, J. Church, C. Burke, R.M. Walsh.
Outcome based on management for duodenal adenomas: sporadic versus familial disease.
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery., 14 (2010), pp. 229-235
[24]
J.M. Church, et al.
Results After Restorative Proctocolectomy and IPAA in Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis and Coexisting Colorectal Cancer.
Brit J Surg, 83 (1996), pp. 1578-1580
[25]
J.M. Church.
Prophylactic Colectomy in Patients with Hereditary Nonpolyposis Colorectal Cancer.
Ann Med, 28 (1996), pp. 479-482
[26]
J.M. Church, V.W. Fazio, I.C. Lavery, J.R. Oakley, J. Milsom, E. McGannon.
Quality of Life Prophylactic Colectomy and Ileorectal Anastomosis in Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.
Dis Colon Rectum, 39 (1996), pp. 1404-1408
[27]
J.W. Milsom, K.A. Ludwig, J.M. Church, A. Garcia-Ruiz.
Laparoscopic Total Abdominal Colectomy with Ileorectal Anastomosis for Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.
Dis Colon Rectum, 40 (1997), pp. 675-678
[28]
J.S. Wu, P. Paul, E.A. McGannon, J.M. Church.
Polyp Number and Surgical Options in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.
Ann Surg, 227 (1998), pp. 57-62
[29]
J.S. Wu, E.S. McGannon, J.M. Church.
Incidence of Neoplastic Polyps in the Ileal Pouch of Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis after Restorative Proctocolectomy.
Dis Colon Rectum, 41 (1998), pp. 552-557
[30]
J. Church, C. Burke, E. McGannon, O. Pastean, B. Clark.
The Risk of Rectal Cancer in Patients after Colectomy and Ileo-Rectal Anastomosis for Familial Adenomatous Polyposis: Not as High as We Think.
Dis Colon Rectum, 46 (2003), pp. 1175-1181
[31]
J. Church, C. Burke, E. McGannon, O. Pastean, B. Clark.
Predicting Polyposis Severity by Proctoscopy: How Reliable is it?.
Dis Colon Rectum, 44 (2001), pp. 1249-1254
[32]
F.H. Remzi, J.M. Church, J. Bast, I.C. Lavery, S.A. Strong, T.L. Hull, G.J.C. Harris, C.P. Delaney, M.G. O’Riordain, E.A. Mcgannon, V.W. Fazio.
Mucosectomy vs. Stapled Ileal Pouch – Anal Anastomosis in Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.
Dis Colon Rectum, 44 (2001), pp. 1590-1596
[33]
J. Church, C. Burke, E. McGannon, O. Pastean, B. Clark.
Risk of rectal cancer in patients after colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis: a function of available surgical options.
Dis Colon Rectum, 46 (2003 Sep), pp. 1175-1181
[34]
B.S. Ooi, F.H. Remzi, T. Gramlich, J.M. Church, M. Preen, V.W. Fazio.
Anal transitional zone cancer after restorative proctocolectomy and ileoanal anastomosis in familial adenomatous polyposis: report of two cases.
Dis Colon Rectum, 46 (2003 Oct), pp. 1418-1423
[35]
J. Church.
In which patients do I perform IRA, and why?.
Fam Cancer., 5 (2006), pp. 237-240
[36]
R.E. Lovegrove, H.S. Tilney, A.G. Heriot, A.C. von Roon, T. Athanasiou, J. Church, V.W. Fazio, P.P. Tekkis.
A comparison of adverse events and functional outcomes after restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis and ulcerative colitis.
Dis Colon Rectum., 49 (2006 Sep), pp. 1293-1306
[37]
A.B. Erkek, J.M. Church, F.H. Remzi.
Age-related analysis of functional outcome and quality of life after restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis.
J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 22 (2007), pp. 710-714
[38]
A. da Luz Moreira, J.M. Church, C.A. Burke.
The evolution of prophylactic colorectal surgery for familial adenomatous polyposis.
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum., 52 (2009), pp. 1481-1486
[39]
Y. Ozdemir, M.F. Kalady, E. Aytac, R.P. Kiran, H.H. Erem, J.M. Church, F.H. Remzi.
Anal transitional zone neoplasia in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis after restorative proctocolectomy and IPAA: incidence, management, and oncologic and functional outcomes.
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum., 56 (2013), pp. 808-814
[40]
R. Van Dalen, J. Church, E. McGannon, S. Fay, C. Burke, B. Clark.
Patterns of surgery in patients belonging to Amsterdam-positive families.
Dis Colon Rectum, 46 (2003 May), pp. 617-620
[41]
Kalady MF. McGannon E. Vogel JD. Manilich E. Fazio VW. Church JM. Risk of colorectal adenoma and carcinoma after colectomy for colorectal cancer in patients meeting Amsterdam criteria. Annals of Surgery. 252(3):507-11.
[42]
M.F. Kalady, J.M. Church.
Prophylactic colectomy: Rationale, indications, and approach.
Journal of Surgical Oncology., 111 (2015 Jan), pp. 112-117
[43]
N.D. Perrier, J.A. van Heerden, J.R. Goellner, E.D. Williams, H. Gharib, P. Marchesa, J.M. Church, V.W. Fazio, D.R. Larson.
Thyroid Cancer in Patients with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis.
World J Surg, 22 (1998), pp. 738-743
[44]
Jarrar AM. Milas M. Mitchell J. Laguardia L. A-Z ‘malley M. Berber E. Siperstein A. Burke C. Church JM. Screening for thyroid cancer in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. Ann Surg 2011; 253(3):515-21.
[45]
X. Feng, M. Milas, M. O’Malley, L. LaGuardia, E. Berber, J. Jin, R. Metzger, J. Mitchell, J. Shin, C.A. Burke, M. Kalady, J. Church, A. Siperstein.
Characteristics of benign and malignant thyroid disease in familial adenomatous polyposis patients and recommendations for disease surveillance.
Thyroid., 25 (2015), pp. 325-332
[46]
O’Malley M. LaGuardia L. Kalady MF. Parambil J. Heald B. Eng C. Church J. Burke CA The prevalence of hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia in juvenile polyposis syndrome. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. 55(8):886-92.
[47]
M. Oncel, F.H. Remzi, J.M. Church, J.R. Goldblum, M. Zutshi, V.W. Fazio.
Course and follow-up of solitary Peutz-Jeghers polyps: a case series.
Int J Colorect Dis, 18 (2003 Jan), pp. 33-35
[48]
M. Oncel, F.H. Remzi, J.M. Church, J.T. Connor, V.W. Fazio.
Benefits of “Clean sweep” in Peutz-Jehger's patients.
Colorectal Dis, 6 (2004 Sep), pp. 332-335
[49]
M. Oncel, J.M. Church, F.H. Remzi, V.W. Fazio.
Colonic surgery in patients with juvenile polyposis syndrome: a case series.
Dis Colon Rectum., 48 (2005), pp. 49-55
discussion 55-6
[50]
Z. Levi, H.N. Baris, I. Kedar, Y. Niv, A. Geller, E. Gal, R. Gingold, et al.
Upper and Lower Gastrointestinal Findings in PTEN Mutation-Positive Cowden Syndrome Patients Participating in an Active Surveillance Program.
Clin Transl Gastroenterol., 17 (2011 Nov), pp. e5
doi: 10.1038/ctg.2011.4
[51]
T. Plesec, K. Brown, C. Allen, C. A. Burke, J. Church, M. Kalady, et al.
Clinicopathological features of a kindred with SCG5-GREM1-associated hereditary mixed polyposis syndrome.
Human Pathology., 60 (2017), pp. 75-81
[52]
Church J, Heald B, Burke C, Kalady M. Understanding MYH-associated neoplasia.
[53]
Dis Colon Rectum. 2012 Mar;55(3):359-62.
[54]
J.M. Church.
Clinical Implications of Recent Advances in the Molecular Biology of Colorectal Cancer.
J Pelvic Surg, 8 (2002), pp. 40-46
[55]
J.G. Guillem, W.C. Wood, J.F. Moley, A. Berchuck, B.Y. Karlan, D.G. Mutch, R.F. Gagel, J. Weitzel, M. Morrow, B.L. Weber, F. Giardiello, M.A. Rodriguez-Bigas, J. Church, S. Gruber, K. Offit, ASCO; SSO.
ASCO/SSO review of current role of risk-reducing surgery in common hereditary cancer syndromes.
J Clin Oncol., 24 (2006 Oct 1), pp. 4642-4660
[56]
B. Heald, J. Church, T. Plesec, C.A. Burke.
Detecting and managing hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes in your practice.
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine., 79 (2012), pp. 787-796
[57]
Rex DK. Ahnen DJ. Baron JA. Batts KP. Burke CA. Burt RW. et al. Serrated lesions of the colorectum: review and recommendations from an expert panel. American Journal of Gastroenterology. 107(9):1315-29.
[58]
J.M. Church.
Polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis: a new, dominantly inherited syndrome of hereditary colorectal cancer predisposition.
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum., 57 (2014), pp. 396-397
[59]
J. Church.
Molecular Genetics of Colorectal cancer.
Seminars in Colorectal Surgery, 27 (2016), pp. 172-175
[60]
J. Church, C. Simmang.
Practice parameters for the treatment of patients with dominantly inherited colorectal cancer (familial adenomatous polyposis and hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer).
Diseases Colon Rectum, 46 (2003 Aug), pp. 1001-1012
[61]
S.M. Weissman, R. Burt, J. Church, S. Erdman, H. Hampel, S. Holter, K. Jasperson, et al.
Identification of individuals at risk for Lynch syndrome using targeted evaluations and genetic testing: National Society of Genetic Counselors and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Colorectal Cancer joint practice guideline.
Journal of Genetic Counseling., 21 (2012), pp. 484-493
[62]
S. Syngal, R.E. Brand, J.M. Church, F.M. Giardiello, H.L. Hampel, R.W. Burt.
ACG Clinical Guideline: Genetic Testing and Management of Hereditary Gastrointestinal Cancer Syndromes.
American Journal of Gastroenterology., 110 (2015 Feb), pp. 223-262

The authors declare no conflicts of interest, in relation to this article.

Opciones de artículo
Herramientas