the standard of care for stage iii nsclc in the era of immunotherapy an italian national survey on the current pattern of care among italian thoracic oncologists

n/

Stereotactic radiotherapy for lung oligometastases

30–60% of cancer patients develop lung metastases, mostly from primary tumors in the colon-rectum, lung, head and neck area, breast and kidney. Nowadays, stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) is considered the ideal modality for treating pulmonary metastases. When lung metastases are suspected, complete disease staging includes a total body computed tomography (CT) and/or positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scan. PET-CT has higher specificity and sensitivity than a CT scan when investigating mediastinal lymph nodes, diagnosing a solitary lung lesion and detecting distant metastases. For treatment planning, a multi-detector planning CT scan of the entire chest is usually performed, with or without intravenous contrast media or esophageal lumen opacification, especially when central lesions have to be irradiated. Respiratory management is recommended in lung SRT, taking the breath cycle into account in planning and delivery. For contouring, co-registration and/or matching planning CT and diagnostic images (as provided by contrast enhanced CT or PET-CT) are useful, particularly for central tumors. Doses and fractionation schedules are heterogeneous, ranging from 33 to 60 Gy in 3–6 fractions. Independently of fractionation schedule, a BED10 > 100 Gy is recommended for high local control rates. Single fraction SRT (ranges 15–30 Gy) is occasionally administered, particularly for small lesions. SRT provides tumor control rates of up to 91% at 3 years, with limited toxicities. The present overview focuses on technical and clinical aspects related to treatment planning, dose constraints, outcome and toxicity of SRT for lung metastases.

Effectiveness of cricoid pressure in preventing gastric aspiration during rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Cricoid pressure is considered to be the gold standard means of preventing aspiration of gastric content during Rapid Sequence Intubation (RSI). Its effectiveness has only been demonstrated in cadaveric studies and case reports. No randomised controlled trials comparing the incidence of gastric aspiration following emergent RSI, with or without cricoid pressure, have been performed. If improperly applied, cricoid pressure increases risk to the patient. The clinical significance of aspiration in the emergency department is unknown. This randomised controlled trial aims to; 1. Compare the application of the 'ideal" amount of force (30 - 40 newtons) to standard, unmeasured cricoid pressure and 2. Determine the incidence of clinically defined aspiration syndromes following RSI using a fibrinogen degradation assay previously described.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>212 patients requiring emergency intubation will be randomly allocated to either control (unmeasured cricoid pressure) or intervention groups (30 - 40 newtons cricoid pressure). The primary outcome is the rate of aspiration of gastric contents (determined by pepsin detection in the oropharyngeal/tracheal aspirates or treatment for aspiration pneumonitis up to 28 days post-intubation). Secondary outcomes are; correlation between aspiration and lowest pre-intubation Glasgow Coma Score, the relationship between detection of pepsin in trachea and development of aspiration syndromes, complications associated with intubation and grade of the view on direct largyngoscopy.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The benefits and risks of cricoid pressure application will be scrutinised by comparison of the incidence of aspiration and difficult or failed intubations in each group. The role of cricoid pressure in RSI in the emergency department and the use of a pepsin detection as a predictor of clinical aspiration will be evaluated.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): <a href="http://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12611000587909.aspx">ACTRN12611000587909</a></p

Beliefs and preferences regarding biological treatments for severe asthma

Background: Severe asthma is a serious condition with a significant burden on patients' morbidity, mortality, and quality of life. Some biological therapies targeting the IgE and interleukin-5 (IL5) mediated pathways are now available. Due to the lack of direct comparison studies, the choice of which medication to use varies. We aimed to explore the beliefs and practices in the use of biological therapies in severe asthma, hypothesizing that differences will occur depending on the prescribers’ specialty and experience. Methods: We conducted an online survey composed of 35 questions in English. The survey was circulated via the INterasma Scientific Network (INESNET) platform as well as through social media. Responses from allergists and pulmonologists, both those with experience of prescribing omalizumab with (OMA/IL5) and without (OMA) experience with anti-IL5 drugs, were compared. Results: Two hundred eighty-five (285) valid questionnaires from 37 countries were analyzed. Seventy-on percent (71%) of respondents prescribed biologics instead of oral glucocorticoids and believed that their side effects are inferior to those of Prednisone 5 mg daily. Agreement with ATS/ERS guidelines for identifying severe asthma patients was less than 50%. Specifically, significant differences were found comparing responses between allergists and pulmonologists (Chi-square test, p &lt; 0.05) and between OMA/IL5 and OMA groups (p &lt; 0.05). Conclusions: Uncertainties and inconsistencies regarding the use of biological medications have been shown. The accuracy of prescribers to correctly identify asthma severity, according to guidelines criteria, is quite poor. Although a substantial majority of prescribers believe that biological drugs are safer than low dose long-term treatment with oral steroids, and that they must be used instead of oral steroids, every effort should be made to further increase awareness. Efficacy as disease modifiers, biomarkers for selecting responsive patients, timing for outcomes evaluation, and checks need to be addressed by further research. Practices and beliefs regarding the use of asthma biologics differ between the prescriber's specialty and experience; however, the latter seems more significant in determining beliefs and behavior. Tailored educational measures are needed to ensure research results are better integrated in daily practice

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

A comprehensive overview of radioguided surgery using gamma detection probe technology

The concept of radioguided surgery, which was first developed some 60 years ago, involves the use of a radiation detection probe system for the intraoperative detection of radionuclides. The use of gamma detection probe technology in radioguided surgery has tremendously expanded and has evolved into what is now considered an established discipline within the practice of surgery, revolutionizing the surgical management of many malignancies, including breast cancer, melanoma, and colorectal cancer, as well as the surgical management of parathyroid disease. The impact of radioguided surgery on the surgical management of cancer patients includes providing vital and real-time information to the surgeon regarding the location and extent of disease, as well as regarding the assessment of surgical resection margins. Additionally, it has allowed the surgeon to minimize the surgical invasiveness of many diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, while still maintaining maximum benefit to the cancer patient. In the current review, we have attempted to comprehensively evaluate the history, technical aspects, and clinical applications of radioguided surgery using gamma detection probe technology