Search

Limb salvage surgeries utilizing endoprostheses and allografts are performed for a variety of oncologic conditions. These reconstructions can fail and require revision for many reasons, which are outlined and classified into mechanical failures (soft tissue failures, aseptic loosening, structural failure), non-mechanical failures (infection, tumor progression), and pediatric failures (physeal arrest, growth dysplasia). Distinct radiologic and clinical findings define specific failure subtypes but are sparsely illustrated in the radiology literature. Specifically, an understanding of the organizational structure of the failure modes can direct radiologists' search for post-reconstruction complications, enhance an appreciation of their prognostic significance, and facilitate research by standardizing the language and conceptual framework around outcomes. The purpose of this review is to highlight the key radiologic findings and imaging studies of each failure mode in orthopedic oncologic reconstructive surgery in the context of risk factors, failure rates, prognosis and survival statistics, and clinical decision-making regarding chemotherapy, radiation, and revision surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Sarcomas are a heterogeneous group of tumors that arise from mesenchymal tissue, including adipose, bone, cartilage, skeletal muscle, and smooth muscle. Because of their rarity, optimal treatment planning requires discussion among sarcoma-experienced subspecialists. Studies have shown that treatment guided by multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) is associated with better compliance with clinical practice guidelines and, in some cases, increased survival. The role of radiologists in the MTB setting is valuable in assessing disease in patients with sarcoma; however, radiologists' recommendations may differ from the MTB's consensus. This study highlights the discordance between the disease assessment and the clinical recommendations provided by radiologists and MTBs and encourages all radiologists caring for patients with sarcoma to participate in MTBs to best align their interpretations with optimal clinical management and make multidisciplinary aligned recommendations whenever feasible. Multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) facilitate decision-making among subspecialists in the care of oncology patients, but the mechanisms by which they enhance outcomes remain incompletely understood. Our aim was to measure the agreement between sarcoma MTBs and radiology reports' disease assessment and management recommendations. This single-center IRB-approved retrospective study evaluated cases presented at a weekly sarcoma MTB from 1 August 2020 to 31 July 2021. Cases without clinical notes, imaging studies, or radiology reports were excluded. The data collected included the patient's clinical status at the time of the MTB, the treatment response assessment by the MTB and radiologists (stable disease; partial response; complete response; progressive disease/recurrence), and the recommendations of the radiology reports and of the MTB. The agreement between the initial radiologist review and MTB on disease assessment and recommendations was analyzed using kappa statistics. In total, 283 cases met the inclusion criteria. Radiology reports provided recommendations in 34.3% of cases, which were adhered to by the ordering providers in 73.2% of cases. The agreement between MTBs and radiology reports was moderate in disease assessment (86.2% agreement; κ = 0.78; p < 0.0001) and negligible in recommendations (36% agreement; κ = 0.18; p < 0.0001). Radiologists were more likely to assign progressive disease/recurrence than MTBs (54.4% vs. 44.4%; p < 0.001) and to recommend short-term imaging follow-up more commonly than MTBs (46.4% vs. 21.7%; p < 0.001). At a tertiary care center, radiologists' isolated interpretations of imaging findings and management recommendations frequently differ from the MTB's consensus, reflecting the value of multidisciplinary discussions incorporating the patient's clinical status and the available treatment options into the final radiographic assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An increasing amount of molecular imaging studies are ordered each year for an oncologic population that continues to expand and increase in age. The importance of these studies in dictating further care for oncologic patients underscores the necessity of differentiating benign from malignant findings, particularly for a population in whom incidental findings are common. The aim of this review is to provide pictorial examples of benign musculoskeletal pathologies which may be found on molecular imaging and which may be mistaken for malignant processes. Imaging examples are provided in the form of radiographs, bone scintigraphy, computed tomography, and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) scans. Special attention is paid to specific features that help narrow the differential diagnosis and distinguish benign from malignant processes, with the goal of avoiding unnecessary invasive procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

More than 15% of all soft-tissue tumors arise in the hand. Because of the location of these tumors, even small abnormalities may be alarming to patients on presentation. Although the majority of lesions are benign and can be diagnosed solely by history and physical examination, additional imaging workup may be required to confirm a diagnosis or define anatomic extent of involvement. This paper aims to review the basic epidemiology, clinical presentation, imaging findings, and treatment options of the more common soft-tissue tumors of the hand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Angiosarcomas (AS) are rare, highly aggressive sarcomas with limited therapeutic options. Genomic sequencing techniques have identified recurrent genetic abnormalities. Nevertheless, the association of these findings with etiology, site of origin, prognosis, and therapeutic implications is not well understood. We analyzed Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) and Whole Transcriptome Sequencing (WTS) data in a cohort of 143 AS cases. We identified distinct genomic biology according to the AS primary site. Head and neck AS cases primarily have Immunotherapy (IO) response markers and mutations in TP53 and POT1. On the other hand, breast AS is enriched for cell cycle alterations, predominately MYC amplification. Additionally, a microenvironment with abundant immune cells is present in a minority of cases but distributed evenly among primary sites. Our findings can facilitate the design and optimization of therapeutic strategies for AS according to its biology at different primary sites. We performed a retrospective analysis of angiosarcoma (AS) genomic biomarkers and their associations with the site of origin in a cohort of 143 cases. Primary sites were head and neck (31%), breast (22%), extremity (11%), viscera (20%), skin at other locations (8%), and unknown (9%). All cases had Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) data with a 592 gene panel, and 53 cases had Whole Exome Sequencing (WES) data, which we used to study the microenvironment phenotype. The immunotherapy (IO) response biomarkers Tumor Mutation Burden (TMB), Microsatellite Instability (MSI), and PD-L1 status were the most frequently encountered alteration, present in 36.4% of the cohort and 65% of head and neck AS (H/N-AS) (p < 0.0001). In H/N-AS, TMB-High was seen in 63.4% of cases (p < 0.0001) and PDL-1 positivity in 33% of cases. The most common genetic alterations were TP53 (29%), MYC amplification (23%), ARID1A (17%), POT1 (16%), and ATRX (13%). H/N-AS cases had predominantly mutations in TP53 (50.0%, p = 0.0004), POT1 (40.5%, p < 0.0001), and ARID1A (33.3%, p = 0.5875). In breast AS, leading alterations were MYC amplification (63.3%, p < 0.0001), HRAS (16.1%, p = 0.0377), and PIK3CA (16.1%, p = 0.2352). At other sites, conclusions are difficult to generate due to the small number of cases. A microenvironment with a high immune signature, previously associated with IO response, was evenly distributed in 13% of the cases at different primary sites. Our findings can facilitate the design and optimization of therapeutic strategies for AS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: For high-grade soft tissue sarcomas (STS), combined modality treatment with surgery and radiation therapy is the standard of care. The addition of chemotherapy has been shown to decrease the risk of local recurrence and improve survival. Evaluating treatment response with surrogate modalities such as MRI, CT and PET imaging have substantial limitations. Pathologic necrosis of the surgical specimen is a direct indicator of the effect of treatment on tumor cells. Studies in STS and other malignancies have shown that increasing rates of treatment-induced tumor necrosis correlate with improvement of oncological outcomes and survival. However, the relationship between pathologic response and outcomes of specific neoadjuvant treatments for STS remains indeterminate. We hypothesized that sequential neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation yields higher rates of pathologic complete response (pCR) than neoadjuvant radiation or chemotherapy alone. Our results indicate that neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation yields superior pCR compared to other neoadjuvant regimens. (1) Background: Pathologic necrosis of soft tissue sarcomas (STS) has been used to determine treatment response, but its relationship to neoadjuvant treatments remains indeterminate. In this retrospective, single institution study, we hypothesized that neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NA-CRT) yields higher rates of pathologic complete response (pCR) than neoadjuvant radiation (NA-XRT) or chemotherapy (NA-CT) alone. (2) Methods: Patients with extremity STS between 2011–2020 who received neoadjuvant treatment were included. pCR was defined as percent necrosis of the surgical specimen greater than or equal to 90%. (3) Results: 79 patients were analyzed. 51.9% of the population were male with a mean age of 58.4 years. 49.4% identified as Non-Hispanic White. Twenty-six (32.9%) patients achieved pCR while 53 (67.1%) did not. NA-CT (OR 15.82, 95% CI = 2.58–96.9, p = 0.003 in univariate (UVA) and OR 24.7, 95% CI = 2.88–211.2, p = 0.003 in multivariate (MVA), respectively) and NA-XRT (OR 5.73, 95% CI = 1.51–21.8, p = 0.010 in UVA and OR 7.95, 95% CI = 1.87–33.7, p = 0.005 in MVA, respectively) was significantly associated with non- pCR when compared to NA-CRT. The analysis also demonstrated that grade 3 tumors, when using grade 2 as reference, also had significantly higher odds of achieving pCR (OR 0.23, 95% CI = 0.06–0.80, p = 0.022 in UVA and OR 0.16, 95% CI = 0.04–0.70, p = 0.015 in MVA, respectively). (4) Conclusion: NA-CRT yields superior pCR compared to other neoadjuvant regimens. This extends to higher grade tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An increasing amount of molecular imaging studies are ordered each year for an oncologic population that continues to expand and increase in age. The importance of these studies in dictating further care for oncologic patients underscores the necessity of differentiating benign from malignant findings, particularly for a population in whom incidental findings are common. The aim of this review is to provide pictorial examples of benign musculoskeletal pathologies which may be found on molecular imaging and which may be mistaken for malignant processes. Imaging examples are provided in the form of radiographs, bone scintigraphy, computed tomography, and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) scans. Special attention is paid to specific features that help narrow the differential diagnosis and distinguish benign from malignant processes, with the goal of avoiding unnecessary invasive procedures.