[Practice guideline 'Diagnostic techniques for soft tissue tumours and treatment of soft tissue sarcomas (revision)'],[Practice guideline 'Diagnostic techniques for soft tissue tumours and treatment of soft tissue sarcomas (revision)']

Item does not contain fulltextMembers of the Dutch working group on soft tissue tumours developed an up-to-standard evidence-based multidisciplinary clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis of soft tissue tumours and the treatment and follow-up of soft tissue sarcomas, in cooperation with the Dutch Association of Comprehensive Cancer Centres and the Dutch Institute for Healthcare Improvement. A soft tissue sarcoma is defined as every non-epithelial tumour that does not originate in haematopoietic or lymphatic system, central nervous system or bone. The guideline lists 'alarm signals' to raise awareness of malignancy and recommends consulting a multidisciplinary team. Non-invasive imaging has to be completed before proceeding to any invasive (diagnostic) procedure or assessment of dissemination. Aspiration cytology can be useful for differentiating between sarcoma and other malignancies. A definite diagnosis is obtained by means of image-guided needle biopsy. Tumours will be classified according to the World Health Organization and graded according to the Federation Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer. Surgical excision with a tumour free margin of 2 cm is the core of therapy, taking into account vital structures when necessary. In case of small superficial tumours (diameter < or = 3 cm) excision biopsy may be justified. Radiotherapy is almost always necessary and certainly indicated when wide margins are impossible even after re-resection. In the case of primary metastatic disease, an individual decision should be taken after multi-disciplinary consultation concerning the possibility of curative or palliative treatment. Neither neo-adjuvant nor adjuvant chemotherapy is standard. Chemotherapy may be useful in metastatic disease. The guideline advises referring patients who are eligible for chemotherapy to a centre and that they should be included in a study protocol

An 8 week periodized mesocycle leading to a national level weightlifting competition

Item does not contain fulltex

EUS is superior for detection of pancreatic lesions compared with standard imaging in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: In multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1), pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) are the leading MEN1-related cause of death. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate EUS and (11)C-5-hydroxytryptophan positron emission tomography ((11)C-5-HTP PET), compared with the recommended screening techniques in MEN1 patients for early detection of pNETs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Tertiary-care university medical center. PATIENTS: This study involved 41 patients with a proven MEN1 mutation or with one MEN1 manifestation and a mutation carrier as a first-degree family member, with recent screening by abdominal CT or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS). INTERVENTIONS: EUS by using a linear Pentax echoendoscope and Hitachi EUB-525 and (11)C-5-HTP PET. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Patient-based and lesion-based positivity for pNET was calculated for all imaging techniques. The McNemar test was used to compare the yield of the 4 imaging techniques. RESULTS: In 35 of 41 patients, 107 pancreatic lesions were detected in total. EUS detected 101 pancreatic lesions in 34 patients, (11)C-5-HTP PET detected 35 lesions in 19 patients, and CT/MRI + SRS detected 32 lesions in 18 patients (P < .001). (11)C-5-HTP PET performed similarly to CT/MRI + SRS and better compared with SRS only (13 lesions in 12 patients), both at a patient-based and lesion-based level (P < .05). LIMITATIONS: Single-center study. CONCLUSION: EUS is superior to CT/MRI + SRS for pancreatic lesion detection in patients with MEN1. In this setting, (11)C-5-HTP PET is not useful. We recommend EUS as the first-choice pancreas imaging technique in patients with MEN1. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR1668.)