降低乳房切除术风险的非遗传适应症:法国国家妇产科医师协会(CNGOF)指南

Carole Mathelin , Emmanuel Barranger , Martine Boisserie-Lacroix , Gérard Boutet , Susie Brousse , Nathalie Chabbert-Buffet , Charles Coutant , Emile Daraï , Yann Delpech , Martha Duraes , Marc Espié , Luc Fornecker , François Golfier , Pascale Grosclaude , Anne Sophie Hamy , Edith Kermarrec , Vincent Lavoué , Massimo Lodi , Élisabeth Luporsi , Christine M Maugard , Xavier Fritel
{"title":"降低乳房切除术风险的非遗传适应症:法国国家妇产科医师协会(CNGOF)指南","authors":"Carole Mathelin ,&nbsp;Emmanuel Barranger ,&nbsp;Martine Boisserie-Lacroix ,&nbsp;Gérard Boutet ,&nbsp;Susie Brousse ,&nbsp;Nathalie Chabbert-Buffet ,&nbsp;Charles Coutant ,&nbsp;Emile Daraï ,&nbsp;Yann Delpech ,&nbsp;Martha Duraes ,&nbsp;Marc Espié ,&nbsp;Luc Fornecker ,&nbsp;François Golfier ,&nbsp;Pascale Grosclaude ,&nbsp;Anne Sophie Hamy ,&nbsp;Edith Kermarrec ,&nbsp;Vincent Lavoué ,&nbsp;Massimo Lodi ,&nbsp;Élisabeth Luporsi ,&nbsp;Christine M Maugard ,&nbsp;Xavier Fritel","doi":"10.1016/j.ibreh.2024.100003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To determine the value of performing a risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) in the absence of a deleterious variant of a breast cancer susceptibility gene, in 4 clinical situations at risk of breast cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>The French National College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (CNGOF) Commission of Senology developed these recommendations. A policy of declaration and monitoring of links of interest was applied throughout the process of making the recommendations. Similarly, the development of these recommendations did not benefit from any funding from a company marketing a health product. The Commission of Senology adhered to the AGREE II (Advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in healthcare) criteria and followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method to assess the quality of the evidence on which the recommendations were based. The potential drawbacks of making recommendations in the presence of poor quality or insufficient evidence were highlighted.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>8 questions on 4 topics, focusing on histological, hereditary (except identified genetic abnormality), radiological (of unrecognized cancer), and radiation (history of Hodgkin's lymphoma) risks were considered. For each situation, it was determined whether performing RRM compared with surveillance would decrease the risk of developing breast cancer and/or increase survival.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The Commission of Senology synthesis and application of the GRADE method resulted in 11 recommendations, 6 with a high level of evidence (GRADE 1+/-) and 5 with a low level of evidence (GRADE 2+/-).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There was significant agreement among the Commission of Senology members on recommendations to improve practices for performing or not performing RRM.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100675,"journal":{"name":"Innovative Practice in Breast Health","volume":"1 ","pages":"Article 100003"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950212824000034/pdfft?md5=bd623db483b14e079371e70f3ab95ce3&pid=1-s2.0-S2950212824000034-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Non-genetic indications for risk reducing mastectomies: Guidelines of the national college of French gynecologists and obstetricians (CNGOF)\",\"authors\":\"Carole Mathelin ,&nbsp;Emmanuel Barranger ,&nbsp;Martine Boisserie-Lacroix ,&nbsp;Gérard Boutet ,&nbsp;Susie Brousse ,&nbsp;Nathalie Chabbert-Buffet ,&nbsp;Charles Coutant ,&nbsp;Emile Daraï ,&nbsp;Yann Delpech ,&nbsp;Martha Duraes ,&nbsp;Marc Espié ,&nbsp;Luc Fornecker ,&nbsp;François Golfier ,&nbsp;Pascale Grosclaude ,&nbsp;Anne Sophie Hamy ,&nbsp;Edith Kermarrec ,&nbsp;Vincent Lavoué ,&nbsp;Massimo Lodi ,&nbsp;Élisabeth Luporsi ,&nbsp;Christine M Maugard ,&nbsp;Xavier Fritel\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ibreh.2024.100003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To determine the value of performing a risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) in the absence of a deleterious variant of a breast cancer susceptibility gene, in 4 clinical situations at risk of breast cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>The French National College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (CNGOF) Commission of Senology developed these recommendations. A policy of declaration and monitoring of links of interest was applied throughout the process of making the recommendations. Similarly, the development of these recommendations did not benefit from any funding from a company marketing a health product. The Commission of Senology adhered to the AGREE II (Advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in healthcare) criteria and followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method to assess the quality of the evidence on which the recommendations were based. The potential drawbacks of making recommendations in the presence of poor quality or insufficient evidence were highlighted.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>8 questions on 4 topics, focusing on histological, hereditary (except identified genetic abnormality), radiological (of unrecognized cancer), and radiation (history of Hodgkin's lymphoma) risks were considered. For each situation, it was determined whether performing RRM compared with surveillance would decrease the risk of developing breast cancer and/or increase survival.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The Commission of Senology synthesis and application of the GRADE method resulted in 11 recommendations, 6 with a high level of evidence (GRADE 1+/-) and 5 with a low level of evidence (GRADE 2+/-).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There was significant agreement among the Commission of Senology members on recommendations to improve practices for performing or not performing RRM.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Innovative Practice in Breast Health\",\"volume\":\"1 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100003\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950212824000034/pdfft?md5=bd623db483b14e079371e70f3ab95ce3&pid=1-s2.0-S2950212824000034-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Innovative Practice in Breast Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950212824000034\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovative Practice in Breast Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950212824000034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的确定在没有乳腺癌易感基因有害变异的情况下,在 4 种乳腺癌高危临床情况下实施降低风险乳房切除术 (RRM) 的价值。在制定建议的整个过程中,采用了申报和监控利益关联的政策。同样,在制定这些建议的过程中,也没有从销售保健产品的公司获得任何资助。生理学委员会遵守 AGREE II(推进医疗保健指南的制定、报告和评估)标准,并采用建议评估、制定和评价分级法(GRADE)评估建议所依据的证据的质量。方法考虑了 4 个主题的 8 个问题,重点是组织学风险、遗传学风险(已确定的基因异常除外)、放射学风险(未确认的癌症)和辐射风险(霍奇金淋巴瘤病史)。对于每种情况,都要确定与监测相比,进行 RRM 是否会降低患乳腺癌的风险和/或提高生存率。结果森学委员会综合并应用 GRADE 方法得出了 11 项建议,其中 6 项证据水平较高(GRADE 1+/-),5 项证据水平较低(GRADE 2+/-)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Non-genetic indications for risk reducing mastectomies: Guidelines of the national college of French gynecologists and obstetricians (CNGOF)

Non-genetic indications for risk reducing mastectomies: Guidelines of the national college of French gynecologists and obstetricians (CNGOF)

Objective

To determine the value of performing a risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) in the absence of a deleterious variant of a breast cancer susceptibility gene, in 4 clinical situations at risk of breast cancer.

Design

The French National College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (CNGOF) Commission of Senology developed these recommendations. A policy of declaration and monitoring of links of interest was applied throughout the process of making the recommendations. Similarly, the development of these recommendations did not benefit from any funding from a company marketing a health product. The Commission of Senology adhered to the AGREE II (Advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in healthcare) criteria and followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method to assess the quality of the evidence on which the recommendations were based. The potential drawbacks of making recommendations in the presence of poor quality or insufficient evidence were highlighted.

Methods

8 questions on 4 topics, focusing on histological, hereditary (except identified genetic abnormality), radiological (of unrecognized cancer), and radiation (history of Hodgkin's lymphoma) risks were considered. For each situation, it was determined whether performing RRM compared with surveillance would decrease the risk of developing breast cancer and/or increase survival.

Results

The Commission of Senology synthesis and application of the GRADE method resulted in 11 recommendations, 6 with a high level of evidence (GRADE 1+/-) and 5 with a low level of evidence (GRADE 2+/-).

Conclusion

There was significant agreement among the Commission of Senology members on recommendations to improve practices for performing or not performing RRM.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信