Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 704

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Guidelines for the clinical management of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP)

Open access
Vasen, H F A, Möslein, G, Alonso, A, Aretz, S, Bernstein, I, Bertario, L, Blanco, I, Bülow, S, Burn, J, Capella, G, Colas, C, Engel, C, Frayling, I, Friedl, W, Hes, F J, Hodgson, S, Järvinen, H, Mecklin, J-P, Møller, P, Myrhøi, T, Nagengast, F M, Parc, Y, Phillips, R, Clark, S K, de Leon, M Ponz, Renkonen-Sinisalo, L, Sampson, J R, Stormorken, A, Tejpar, S, Thomas, H J W, Wijnen, J·2008·Gut

Abstract

Background: Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a well-described inherited syndrome, which is responsible for <1% of all colorectal cancer (CRC) cases. The syndrome is characterised by the development of hundreds to thousands of adenomas in the colorectum. Almost all patients will develop CRC if they are not identified and treated at an early stage. The syndrome is inherited as an autosomal dominant trait and caused by mutations in the APC gene. Recently, a second gene has been identified that also gives rise to colonic adenomatous polyposis, although the phenotype is less severe than typical FAP. The gene is the MUTYH gene and the inheritance is autosomal recessive. In April 2006 and February 2007, a workshop was organised in Mallorca by European experts on hereditary gastrointestinal cancer aiming to establish guidelines for the clinical management of FAP and to initiate collaborative studies. Thirty-one experts from nine European countries participated in these workshops. Prior to the meeting, various participants examined the most important management issues according to the latest publications. A systematic literature search using Pubmed and reference lists of retrieved articles, and manual searches of relevant articles, was performed. During the workshop, all recommendations were discussed in detail. Because most of the studies that form the basis for the recommendations were descriptive and/or retrospective in nature, many of them were based on expert opinion. The guidelines described herein may be helpful in the appropriate management of FAP families. In order to improve the care of these families further, prospective controlled studies should be undertaken.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/gut.2007.136127

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 704

Metadata

Authors
Vasen, H. F. A., Möslein, G., Alonso, A., Aretz, S., Bernstein, I., Bertario, L., Blanco, I., Bülow, S., Burn, J., Capella, G., Colas, C., Engel, C., Frayling, I., Friedl, W., Hes, F. J., Hodgson, S., Järvinen, H., Mecklin, J.-P., Møller, P., Myrhøi, T., Nagengast, F. M., Parc, Y., Phillips, R., Clark, S. K., de Leon, M. P., Renkonen-Sinisalo, L., Sampson, J. R., Stormorken, A., Tejpar, S., Thomas, H. J. W., & Wijnen, J.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2008-01-14
Volume
57
Issue
5
Pages
704-713
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2143590679
Cited by
704
References
0
FWCI
29.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Guidelines for the clinical management of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.2007.136127
The paper
Vasen, H. F. A., Möslein, G., Alonso, A., Aretz, S., Bernstein, I., Bertario, L., Blanco, I., Bülow, S., Burn, J., Capella, G., Colas, C., Engel, C., Frayling, I., Friedl, W., Hes, F. J., Hodgson, S., Järvinen, H., Mecklin, J.-P., Møller, P., . . . Wijnen, J. (2008). Guidelines for the clinical management of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2007.136127

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.