BACKGROUND:\ud Early-onset (EO) pediatric inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) seem to be more extensive than those with a later onset. To test this hypothesis, we examined the phenotype and disease course of patients with IBD diagnosis at 0 to 5 years, compared with the ranges 6 to 11 and 12 to 18 years.\ud METHODS:\ud Anatomic locations and behaviors were assessed according to Paris classification in 506 consecutive patients: 224 Crohn's disease, 245 ulcerative colitis, and 37 IBD-unclassified.\ud RESULTS:\ud Eleven percent of patients were in the range 0 to 5 years, 39% in 6 to 11 years, and 50% in 12 to 18 years. Ulcerative colitis was the most frequent diagnosis in EO-IBD and in 6- to 11-year-old group, whereas Crohn's disease was predominant in older children. A classification as IBD-unclassified was more common in the range 0 to 5 years compared with the other groups (P < 0.005). EO Crohn's disease showed a more frequent isolated colonic (P < 0.005) and upper gastrointestinal involvement than later-onset disease. Sixty-two percent of the patients in the 0 to 5 years range had pancolonic ulcerative colitis, compared with 38% of 6 to 11 years (P = 0.02) and 31% of 12-18 years (P = 0.002) range. No statistical difference for family history for IBD was found in the 3-year age groups. Therapies at the diagnosis were similar for all children. However, at latest follow-up, a significantly higher proportion of younger children were under steroids compared with older groups (P < 0.05). Surgical risk did not differ according to age.\ud CONCLUSIONS:\ud EO-IBD exhibits an extensive phenotype and benefit from aggressive treatment strategies, although surgical risk is similar to later-onset disease. A family history for IBD is not common in EO disease

The SurPass is potentially an essential tool for improved and more harmonised follow-up of CCS. It also has the potential to be a useful tool for empowering CCSs to be responsible for their own well-being and preventing adverse events whenever possible. With sufficient commitment on the European level, this solution should increase the capacity to respond more effectively to the needs of European CCS.

Childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors may be at risk for a severe course of COVID-19. Little is known about the clinical course of COVID-19 in CAYA cancer survivors, or if additional preventive measures are warranted. We established a working group within the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group (IGHG) to summarize existing evidence and worldwide recommendations regarding evidence about factors/conditions associated with risk for a severe course of COVID-19 in CAYA cancer survivors, and to develop a consensus statement to provide guidance for healthcare practitioners and CAYA cancer survivors regarding COVID-19.

Background: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care for childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors is essential to preserve health and quality of life (QoL). Evidence-based guidelines are needed to inform optimal surveillance strategies, but many topics are yet to be addressed by the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group (IGHG). Therefore, the PanCareFollowUp Recommendations Working Group collaborated with stakeholders to develop European harmonised recommendations in anticipation of evidence-based IGHG guidelines. Methods: The PanCareFollowUp Recommendations Working Group, consisting of 23 late effects specialists, researchers, and survivor representatives from nine countries, collaborated in the first Europe-wide effort to provide unified recommendations in anticipation of evidencebased guidelines. A pragmatic methodology was used to define recommendations for topics where no evidence-based IGHG recommendations exist. The objective was to describe the surveillance requirements for high-quality care while balancing the different infrastructures and resources across European health care systems. The process included two face-to-face meetings and an external consultation round involving 18 experts from 14 countries. Results: Twenty-five harmonised recommendations for LTFU care were developed collaboratively and address topics requiring awareness only (n Z 6), awareness, history and/or physical examination (n Z 9), or additional surveillance tests (n Z 10). Conclusions: The PanCareFollowUp Recommendations, representing a unique agreement across European stakeholders, emphasise awareness among survivors and health care providers in addition to tailored clinical evaluation and/or surveillance tests. They include existing IGHG guidelines and additional recommendations developed by a pragmatic methodology and will be used in the Horizon 2020efunded PanCareFollowUp project to improve health and QoL of CAYA cancer survivors.