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.
The esophageal cancer is one of the most common and aggressive worldwide. Recently, the AJCC changed the staging system, considering, among others, the important role of the lymph node metastasis on the prognosis.
To discuss the applicability of different forms of lymph node staging in a western surgical center.
Four hundred eighty seven patients with esophageal cancer were enrolled. Three staging systems were evaluated, the 6th and the 7th AJCC editions and the Lymph Node Metastatic Ratio.
The majority of the cases were squamous cell carcinoma. The mean lymph node sample was eight. Considering the survival, there was no significant difference between the patients when they were classified by the 7th AJCC edition. Analysis of the Lymph Node Metastatic Ratio, just on the group of patients with 0 to 25%, has shown significant difference (p=0,01). The 6th AJCC edition shows the major significant difference between among the classifications evaluated.
In this specific population, the 7th AJCC edition for esophageal cancer was not able to find differences in survival when just the lymph node analysis was considered.
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.
: The II Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer of the Brazilian Gastric Cancer Association BGCA (Part 1) was recently published. On this occasion, countless specialists working in the treatment of this disease expressed their opinion in the face of the statements presented.
: To present the BGCA Guidelines (Part 2) regarding indications for surgical treatment, operative techniques, extension of resection and multimodal treatment.
To formulate these guidelines, the authors carried out an extensive and current review regarding each declaration present in the II Consensus, using the Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library and SciELO databases initially with the following descriptors: gastric cancer, gastrectomy, lymphadenectomy, multimodal treatment. In addition, each statement was classified according to the level of evidence and degree of recommendation.
: Of the 43 statements present in this study, 11 (25,6%) were classified with level of evidence A, 20 (46,5%) B and 12 (27,9%) C. Regarding the degree of recommendation, 18 (41,9%) statements obtained grade of recommendation 1, 14 (32,6%) 2a, 10 (23,3%) 2b e one (2,3%) 3.
: The guidelines complement of the guidelines presented here allows surgeons and oncologists who work to combat gastric cancer to offer the best possible treatment, according to the local conditions available.
Developed by Surya MKT