Search

Retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcomas (RPS) are rare tumors. Surgery is the mainstay of curative therapy, but local recurrence is common. No recommendations concerning the best management of recurring disease have been developed so far. Although every effort should be made to optimize the initial approach, recommendations to treat recurring RPS will be helpful to maximize disease control at recurrence. An RPS transatlantic working group was established in 2013. The goals of the group were to share institutional experiences, build large multi-institutional case series, and develop consensus documents on the approach to this difficult disease. The outcome of this document applies to recurrent RPS that is nonvisceral in origin. Included are sarcomas of major veins, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma of psoas, ureteric leiomyosarcoma (LMS). Excluded are desmoids-type fibromatosis, angiomyolipoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumors, sarcomas arising from the gut or its mesentery, uterine LMS, prostatic sarcoma, paratesticular/spermatic cord sarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, alveolar/embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma, sarcoma arising from teratoma, carcinosarcoma, sarcomatoid carcinoma, clear cell sarcoma, radiation-induced sarcoma, paraganglioma, and malignant pheochromocytoma. Recurrent RPS management was evaluated from diagnosis to follow-up. It is a rare and complex malignancy that is best managed by an experienced multidisciplinary team in a specialized referral center. The best chance of cure is at the time of primary presentation, but some patients may experience prolonged disease control also at recurrence, when the approach is optimized and follows the recommendations contained herein. International collaboration is critical for adding to the present knowledge. A transatlantic prospective registry has been established.

While they account for one-fifth of new cancer cases, rare cancers are difficult to study. A higher than average degree of uncertainty should be accommodated for clinical as well as for population-based decision making. Rules of rational decision making in conditions of uncertainty should be rigorously followed and would need widely informative clinical trials. In principle, any piece of new evidence would need to be exploited in rare cancers. Methodologies to explicitly weigh and combine all the available evidence should be refined, and the Bayesian logic can be instrumental to this end. Likewise, Bayesian-design trials may help optimize the low number of patients liable to be enrolled in clinical studies on rare cancers, as well as adaptive trials in general, with their inherent potential of flexibility when properly applied. While clinical studies are the mainstay to test hypotheses, the potential of electronic patient records should be exploited to generate new hypotheses, to create external controls for future studies (when internal controls are unpractical), to study effectiveness of new treatments in real conditions. Framework study protocols in specific rare cancers to stepwisely test sets of new agents, as from the early post-phase I development stage, should be encouraged. Also the compassionate and the off-label settings should be exploited to generate new evidence, and flexible regulatory innovations such as adaptive licensing could convey new agents early to rare cancer patients, while generating evidence. Though validation of surrogate end points is problematic in rare cancers, the use of an updated notion of tumor response may be of great value in the single patient to optimize the use of therapies, all the more the new ones. Disease-based communities, involving clinicians and patients, should be regularly consulted by regulatory bodies when setting their policies on drug approval and reimbursement in specific rare cancers ., While they account for one-fifth of new cancer cases, rare cancers are difficult to study. A higher than average degree of uncertainty should be accommodated for clinical as well as for population-based decision making. Rules of rational decision making in conditions of uncertainty should be rigorously followed and would need widely informative clinical trials. In principle, any piece of new evidence would need to be exploited in rare cancers. Methodologies to explicitly weigh and combine all the available evidence should be refined, and the Bayesian logic can be instrumental to this end. Likewise, Bayesian-design trials may help optimize the low number of patients liable to be enrolled in clinical studies on rare cancers, as well as adaptive trials in general, with their inherent potential of flexibility when properly applied. While clinical studies are the mainstay to test hypotheses, the potential of electronic patient records should be exploited to generate new hypotheses, to create external controls for future studies (when internal controls are unpractical), to study effectiveness of new treatments in real conditions. Framework study protocols in specific rare cancers to sequentially test sets of new agents, as from the early post-phase I development stage, should be encouraged. Also the compassionate and the off-label settings should be exploited to generate new evidence, and flexible regulatory innovations such as adaptive licensing could convey new agents early to rare cancer patients, while generating evidence. Though validation of surrogate end points is problematic in rare cancers, the use of an updated notion of tumor response may be of great value in the single patient to optimize the use of therapies, all the more the new ones. Disease-based communities, involving clinicians and patients, should be regularly consulted by regulatory bodies when setting their policies on drug approval and reimbursement in specific rare cancers.

Solitary fibrous tumors of the pleura represent a rare clinicopathological entity: 456 cases only have been reported since 1991. A interesting case of solitary fibrous tumor of the pleura is described here, because it turned up in a female patient followed up for a bilateral breast cancer and so with the exact determination of the period of beginning. The complex morphological picture is illustrated in relation to other cases reported in the literature. Immunohistochemical results are stressed, particularly as regards the coexpression of vimentin and desmin without necrosis and the low number of mitosis. As there are no criteria to determine the possible aggressive or malignant behaviour of the tumor, surgical resection of the lesion is indispensable both to resolve the diagnosis and to carry out the only proposable therapy.

Cancer care; Curriculum; Surgical oncology Cuidado del cancer; Plan de estudios; Oncología quirúrgica Cura del càncer; Pla d'estudis; Oncologia quirúrgica Introduction Surgical oncology is a defined specialty within the European Board of Surgery within the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Variation in training and specialization still occurs across Europe. There is a need to align the core knowledge needed to fulfil the criteria across subspecialities in surgical oncology. Material and methods The core curriculum, established in 2013, was developed with contributions from expert advisors from within the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) and related subspeciality experts. Results The current version reiterates and updates the core curriculum structure needed for current and future candidates who plans to train for and eventually sit the European fellowship exam for the European Board of Surgery in Surgical Oncology. The content included is not intended to be exhaustive but, rather to give the candidate an idea of expectations and areas for in depth study, in addition to the practical requirements. The five elements included are: Basic principles of oncology; Disease site specific oncology; Generic clinical skills; Training recommendations, and, lastly; Eligibility for the EBSQ exam in Surgical Oncology. Conclusions As evidence-based care for cancer patients evolves through research into basic science, translational research and clinical trials, the core curriculum will evolve, mature and adapt to deliver continual improvements in cancer outcomes for patients.

Malnutrition in cancer patients in both prevalence and degree depends primarily on tumor stage and site. Preoperative malnutrition in surgical patients is a frequent problem and is associated with prolonged hospital stay, a higher rate of postoperative complications, higher re-admission rates, and a higher incidence of postoperative death. Given the focus on the cancer and its cure, nutrition is often neglected or under-evaluated, and this despite the availability of international guidelines for nutritional care in cancer patients and the evidence that nutritional deterioration negatively affects survival. Inadequate nutritional support for cancer patients should be considered ethically unacceptable; prompt nutritional support must be guaranteed to all cancer patients, as it can have many clinical and economic advantages. Patients undergoing multimodal oncological care are at particular risk of progressive nutritional decline, and it is essential to minimize the nutritional/metabolic impact of oncological treatments and to manage each surgical episode within the context of an enhanced recovery pathway. In Europe, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) and routine nutritional assessment are only partially implemented because of insufficient awareness among health professionals of nutritional problems, a lack of structured collaboration between surgeons and clinical nutrition specialists, old dogmas, and the absence of dedicated resources. Collaboration between opinion leaders dedicated to ERAS from both the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO) and the ERAS Society was born with the aim of promoting nutritional assessment and perioperative nutrition with and without an enhanced recovery program. The goal will be to improve awareness in the surgical oncology community and at institutional level to modify current clinical practice and identify optimal treatment options. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.

Aim To evaluate the “state of art” of clinical role of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy procedure in patients affected by differentiated thyroid carcinoma. Methods All papers cited on PubMed/MEDLINE until June 2005, published in English, and referred to the key words “sentinel lymph node biopsy” AND “thyroid carcinoma” OR “thyroid cancer” were reviewed for the purpose of the present study. Results The first method used for SLN biopsy in thyroid carcinoma patients was the vital blue dye technique. This technique had some disadvantages as: (a) risk of disruption of the lymphatic channels deriving from the thyroid cancer; (b) difficulty in disclosing SLN lying outside the central compartment; (c) parathyroid glands can take up blue dye and, thus, can be misinterpreted as lymph nodes. Some of the above cited disadvantages were overcome by using the lymphoscintigraphy and intraoperative gamma probe technique. A combination of the blue dye and gamma probe technique has also been proposed with synergic results. Conclusion The reported advantages of the SLN biopsy in small differentiated thyroid carcinoma patients can be resumed as follows: (a) better selection of patients who would benefit from compartment oriented nodal dissection; (b) more accurate lymph node staging; (c) better selection of patients who can require 131I treatment after surgery (SLN positive for metastasis); (d) better identification of SLN located out of the central compartment.