Predictive role of node-rads score in patients with prostate cancer candidates for radical prostatectomy with extended lymph node dissection: comparative analysis with validated nomograms

Background and objectives: The Reporting and Data System (RADS) have been used in the attempts to standardize the results of oncological scans in different scenarios, such as lymph nodes, adding configuration criteria to size determination. We analyze the predictive value of preoperative Node-RADS determination at imaging for pelvic lymph node (PLN) involvement in cases of prostate cancer (PC) considered for radical prostatectomy (RP) with extended lymph node dissection (eLND) and we compare it with validate predictive nomograms (MSKCC, Briganti and Gandaglia). Methods: 150 patients with a histological diagnosis of PC (high risk or intermediate with an estimated risk for pN+ higher than 5% using the Briganti or 7% using the Gandaglia nomogram) submitted for RP with an ePLND from 2018 and 2021 were retrospectively examined. Node-RADS determination was performed in all cases using the preoperative magnetic resonance (MR), performed by a radiologist blinded for pathologic results and compared with the MSKCC, Briganti 2012, Gandaglia 2017 and Gandaglia 2019 nomograms. Results: PLN involvement at final pathology (pN+) was found in 36/150 (24.0%) of cases and the mean percentage of positive LNs in pN+ cases was 15.90 ± 13.40. The mean number of PLNs removed at RP was similar (p = 0.188) between pN0 (23.9 ± 8.0) and pN+ (25.3 ± 8.0) cases. Considering a Node RADS 4-5 positive and a Node RADS 1-2 negative, the PPV was 100% and the NPV was 79.6%. A Node RADS score 4-5 showed a lower sensitivity (0.167 versus 0.972, 1.000, 0.971, 0.960 respectively), a higher specificity (1.000 versus 0.079, 0.096, 0.138, 0.186 respectively) and a similar AUC (0.583 versus 0.591, 0.581, 0.574, 0.597 respectively) when compared to MSKCC, Briganti 2012, Gandaglia 2017 and Gandaglia 2019 nomograms. Conclusions: Our evaluation suggests that Node RADS score, combining configuration criteria to size determination could improve specificity in terms of pathologic PLN prediction but a very low sensitivity has been also described

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Survey of neonatal respiratory care and surfactant administration in very preterm infants in the Italian Neonatal Network.

INTRODUCTION: Variation of respiratory care is described between centers around the world. The Italian Neonatal Network (INN), as a national group of the Vermont-Oxford Network (VON) allows to perform a wide analysis of respiratory care in very low birth weight infants. METHODS: We analyzed the dataset of infants enrolled in the INN in 2009 and 2010 and, for surfactant administration only, from 2006 to 2010 from 83 participating centers. All definitions are those of the (VON). A questionnaire analysis was also performed with a questionnaire on centers practices. RESULTS: We report data for 8297 infants. Data on ventilator practices and outcomes are outlined. Variation for both practices and outcome is found. Trend in surfactant administration is also analyzed. CONCLUSIONS. The great variation across hospitals in all the surveyed techniques points to the possibility of implementing potentially better practices with the aim of reducing unwanted variation. These data also show the power of large neonatal networks in identifying areas for potential improvement