Fig 1.
Flow diagram of the study.
Table 1.
Clinical characteristics.
Fig 2.
(A) Age at the diagnosis of familial adenomatous polyposis; (B) Age at the final follow-up examination.
Fig 3.
Surveillance continuation rate.
Fig 4.
Characteristics of distance to hospital in surveillance.
(A) Surveillance continuation status, ‘Diagnosis’ included cases where surgery was performed following the initial diagnosis. ‘Surveillance’ was defined as starting from the time of surgery; (B) Distance to hospital by each pattern.
Fig 5.
Association between distance to hospital and surveillance.
(A) Distance to hospital at the start of surveillance compared between cases with and without dropout; (B) Distance to hospital at the time of diagnosis compared between the same and the changed hospital group; (C) The rate of surveillance hospital changes at the start of surveillance relative to the distance to the hospital; (D) Surveillance hospital change rates compared by a 40 km threshold.
Fig 6.
Comparison of cumulative risk of FAP-related tumors and survival.
(A–E) Cumulative risk of FAP-related tumors, including (A) colorectal cancer, (B) gastric cancer, (C) duodenal cancer, (D) desmoid tumor, and (E) metachronous rectal cancer; (F) Disease-specific survival. FAP, familial adenomatous polyposis.
Table 2.
Univariate analysis of surveillance dropout.
Table 3.
Details of patients who dropped out of surveillance.
Table 4.
Reasons for surveillance dropout.