Diagnosis.
| Question | Main responses | Consensus status |
|---|---|---|
| Should oligoprogressive lesions be morphologically verified (biopsy)? | Yes: 6 (60%)No/exceptional: 4 (40%) | Relative agreement |
| Should histology be obtained for molecular analysis? | Select cases: 6 (60%)Always: 4 (40%) | Relative agreement |
| Which imaging methods are standard for the diagnosis of oligoprogressive disease? | CT or PET-CT: 9 (90%)PET-CT only: 1 (10%) | Consensus |
CT: computed tomography scan; PET-CT: positron emission tomography-CT.
The consensus committee would like to thank all the experts who took part in developing the consensus.
DK: Supervision, Writing—original draft, Project administration, Investigation. IO: Investigation, Writing—review & editing. SK: Investigation, Writing—review & editing. NO: Investigation, Writing—review & editing. MD: Investigation, Writing—review & editing. EU: Investigation, Writing—review & editing. DA: Investigation, Writing—review & editing. BB: Investigation, Writing—review & editing. IT: Supervision, Writing—original draft, Project administration, Investigation. TM: Supervision, Writing—original draft, Project administration, Investigation. All authors, as committee members, participated in the preparation of the meeting results questionnaire, data discussion, and article approval.
The authors have no conflicts of interest.
This study was based exclusively on an anonymous survey of expert opinions and did not involve human participants, patient data, biological specimens, or animal research. Therefore, institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee (Asfendiyarov Kazakh National Medical University) approval was not required under applicable national regulations.
Informed consent (including for publication) was obtained from all individual participants.
Informed consent to publication was obtained from relevant participants.
The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
The work was carried out within the framework of the budgetary funding of the Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan [BR24992933] “Development and Implementation of Diagnostic Models, Treatment, and Rehabilitation Techniques for Cancer Patients.” The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
© The Author(s) 2026.
Open Exploration maintains a neutral stance on jurisdictional claims in published institutional affiliations and maps. All opinions expressed in this article are the personal views of the author(s) and do not represent the stance of the editorial team or the publisher.