The management of gastric cancer has become increasingly complex, highlighting the importance of clinical guidelines to ensure standardized care. The Second Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer was developed to guide clinical practice across the country.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the degree of implementation of the 2nd Brazilian Consensus recommendations in cancer reference centers in Brazil.
This multicenter study involved 18 cancer centers that prospectively collected data over a one-year period. Notably, 21 key statements from the Consensus were assessed. Adherence was defined as following the recommendation in more than 80% of applicable cases.
Of the 21 statements, 11 (52.4%) met the predefined adherence threshold. The selective use of endoscopic ultrasound and PET-CT was consistent with the recommendations. However, diagnostic laparoscopy was underutilized, performed in only 24.7% of patients. Preoperative nutritional therapy, another key recommendation, was provided in just 42% of cases. D2 lymphadenectomy was performed in 79.8% of surgeries, but only 63.3% of specimens included ≥25 lymph nodes, the recommended minimum for adequate staging. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) was performed in approximately 25% of early distal tumors but was rarely used in advanced proximal tumors. Despite not being recommended for early stage tumors, omentectomy and bursectomy were still performed in a significant number of T1/T2 cases. Preoperative chemotherapy was used in 35.4% of distal tumors ≥IB and 54.3% of proximal tumors, showing partial adherence to this recommendation.
Just over half of the II Brazilian Consensus recommendations were implemented in routine practice. There was strong adherence to D2 lymphadenectomy and MIS for early distal tumors. However, there is still room for improvement in areas such as diagnostic laparoscopy, nutritional support, adequate lymph node retrieval, and using more neoadjuvant chemotherapy to enhance care and follow national guidelines.
The development of consensus statements and clinical guidelines supports decision-making in clinical practice. However, recommendations formulated by experts may not always reflect real-world clinical practice. In this study, 21 key statements from the 2nd Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer were evaluated across multiple cancer reference centers. It was found that, in 10 of these statements, current clinical practice diverged from the consensus recommendations.
Some consensus statements may be revised in future editions to better reflect the realities of clinical practice in the national context. To enhance adherence to the recommendations, broad dissemination of the study results is essential, alongside the implementation of educational initiatives and institutional policies aimed at promoting guideline compliance. These measures may contribute to closing the gap between consensus recommendations and everyday clinical practice, ultimately improving patient outcomes.
BACKGROUND: In Brazil, gastric cancer is the fourth most common malignancy among men and sixth among women. The cause is multivariate and the risks are well known. It has prognosis and treatment defined by the location and staging of the tumor and number of lymph nodes resected and involved. AIM: The Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer promoted by ABCG was designed with the intention to issue guidelines that can guide medical professionals to care for patients with this disease. METHODS: Were summarized and answered 43 questions reflecting consensus or not on diagnosis and treatment that may be used as guidance for its multidisciplinary approach. The method involved three steps. Initially, 56 digestive surgeons and related medical specialties met to formulate the questions that were sent to participants for answers on scientific evidence and personal experience. Summaries were presented, discussed and voted in plenary in two other meetings. They covered 53 questions involving: diagnosis and staging (six questions); surgical treatment (35 questions); chemotherapy and radiotherapy (seven questions) and anatomopathology, immunohistochemistry and perspective (five questions). It was considered consensus agreement on more than 70% of the votes in each item. RESULTS: All the answers were presented and voted upon, and in 42 there was consensus. CONCLUSION: It could be developed consensus on most issues that come with the care of patients with gastric cancer and they can be transformed in guidelines.
The II Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer by the Brazilian Gastric Cancer Association (ABCG) was recently published. On this occasion, several experts in gastric cancer expressed their opinion before the statements presented.
To present the ABCG Guidelines (part 1) regarding the diagnosis, staging, endoscopic treatment and follow-up of gastric cancer patients.
To forge these Guidelines, the authors carried out an extensive and current review regarding each statement present in the II Consensus, using the Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library and SciELO databases with the following descriptors: gastric cancer, staging, endoscopic treatment and follow-up. In addition, each statement was classified according to the level of evidence and degree of recommendation.
Of the 24 statements, two (8.3%) were classified with level of evidence A, 11 (45.8%) with B and 11 (45.8%) with C. As for the degree of recommendation, six (25%) statements obtained grade of recommendation 1, nine (37.5%) recommendation 2a, six (25%) 2b and three (12.5%) grade 3.
The guidelines presented here are intended to assist professionals working in the fight against gastric cancer with relevant and current information, granting them to be applied in the daily medical practice.
Since the publication of the first Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer (GC) in 2012 carried out by the Brazilian Gastric Cancer Association, new concepts on diagnosis, staging, treatment and follow-up have been incorporated.
This new consensus is to promote an update to professionals working in the fight against GC and to provide guidelines for the management of patients with this condition.
Fifty-nine experts answered 67 statements regarding the diagnosis, staging, treatment and prognosis of GC with five possible alternatives: 1) fully agree; 2) partially agree; 3) undecided; 4) disagree and 5) strongly disagree A consensus was adopted when at least 80% of the sum of the answers “fully agree” and “partially agree” was reached. This article presents only the responses of the participating experts. Comments on each statement, as well as a literature review, will be presented in future publications.
Of the 67 statements, there was consensus in 50 (74%). In 10 declarations, there was 100% agreement.
The gastric cancer treatment has evolved considerably in recent years. This consensus gathers consolidated principles in the last decades, new knowledge acquired recently, as well as promising perspectives on the management of this disease.
Incidental gallbladder cancer is defined as a cancer discovered by histological examination after cholecystectomy. It is a potentially curable disease. However, some questions related to their management remain controversial and a defined strategy is associated with better prognosis.
To develop the first evidence-based consensus for management of patients with incidental gallbladder cancer in Brazil.
Sixteen questions were selected, and 36 Brazilian and International members were included to the answer them. The statements were based on current evident literature. The final report was sent to the members of the panel for agreement assessment.
Intraoperative evaluation of the specimen, use of retrieval bags and routine histopathology is recommended. Complete preoperative evaluation is necessary and the reoperation should be performed once final staging is available. Evaluation of the cystic duct margin and routine 16b1 lymph node biopsy is recommended. Chemotherapy should be considered and chemoradiation therapy if microscopically positive surgical margins. Port site should be resected exceptionally. Staging laparoscopy before reoperation is recommended, but minimally invasive radical approach only in specialized minimally invasive hepatopancreatobiliary centers. The extent of liver resection is acceptable if R0 resection is achieved. Standard lymph node dissection is required for T2 tumors and above, but common bile duct resection is not recommended routinely.
It was possible to prepare safe recommendations as guidance for incidental gallbladder carcinoma, addressing the most frequent topics of everyday work of digestive and general surgeons.
Developed by Surya MKT