The Impact of Multidisciplinary Team Meetings on Patient Management in Oncologic Thoracic Surgery: A Single-Center Experience

Colorectal Cancer Pulmonary Metastasectomy: When, Why and How

Colorectal cancer is the third-most-diagnosed cancer in males and in females, representing 8% of estimated new cases, and the third cause of cancer-related death in both sexes, accounting for 9% of cancer deaths in men and 8% in women. About 20% of patients diagnosed with CRC present metastatic disease. Although lung metachronous or synchronous metastatic spread without other involved sites has been reported in only a small proportion of patients, considering that this tumor is frequently diagnosed, the clinical approach to CRC pulmonary metastases represents a major issue for thoracic surgeons and CRC oncologists. Among patients diagnosed with pulmonary metastases from CRC, about 9-12% are eligible for local treatments with radical intent, including surgical resection, SBRT (stereotactic body radiation therapy) and ablation therapy. Due to the lack of randomized controlled trials among different local strategies, there is no definitive evidence about the optimal approach, although surgical resection is considered the most effective therapeutic option in this clinical scenario. Oncological achievement of primary radical resection, the biology of primary tumor and metastatic sites, disease free interval and or progression free survival are independent prognostic factors which make it possible to define a cohort of patients which might significantly benefit from pulmonary metastasectomy.

Body CT examinations in oncologic patients: the impact of subspecialty radiology on radiation exposure in the clinical practice. A quality care study

PURPOSES

The primary objective of this retrospective study was to assess whether the CT dose delivered to oncologic patients was different in a subspecialty radiology department, compared to a general radiology department. The secondary explorative objective was to assess whether the objective image quality of CT examinations was different in the two settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Chest and abdomen CT scans performed for oncologic indications were selected from a general radiology department and a subspecialty radiology department. By using a radiation dose management platform, we extracted and compared CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP) both for each phase and for the entire CT exams. For objective image quality evaluation, we calculated the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) at the level of the liver and of the aorta. A P-value < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

A total of 7098 CT examinations were included. CTDIvol was evaluated in 12,804 phases; DLP in 10,713 phases and in 6714 examinations. The CTDIvol and DLP overall were significantly lower in the subspecialty radiology department compared to the general radiology department CTDI median (IQR) 5.19 (3.91-7.00) and 5.51 (4.17-7.72), DLP median and IQR of 490.0 (342.4-710.6) and 503.4 (359.9-728.8), p < 0.001 and p = 0.01, respectively. The objective image quality showed no significant difference in the general and subspecialty radiology departments, with median and IQR of 4.03 (2.82-5.51) and 3.84 (3.09-4.94) for SNRLiv (p = 0.58); 4.81 (2.70-7.62) and 4.34 (3.05-6.25) for SNRAo (p = 0.30); 0.83 (0.20-1.89) and 1.00 (0.35-1.57) for CNRLiv (p = 0.99); 2.23 (0.09-3.83) and 1.01 (0.15-2.84) for CNRAo (p = 0.24) with SNRLiv (p = 0.58), SNRAo (p = 0.30), CNRLiv (p = 0.99) and CNRAo (p = 0.24).

CONCLUSION

In a subspecialty radiology department, CT protocols are optimized compared to a general radiology department leading to lower doses to oncologic patients without significant objective image quality degradation.

Multi-omics integrative modelling for stereotactic body radiotherapy in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: clinical trial protocol of the MONDRIAN study

BACKGROUND

Currently, main treatment strategies for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (ES-NSCLC) disease are surgery or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), with successful local control rates for both approaches. However, regional and distant failure remain critical in SBRT, and it is paramount to identify predictive factors of response to identify high-risk patients who may benefit from more aggressive approaches. The main endpoint of the MONDRIAN trial is to identify multi-omic biomarkers of SBRT response integrating information from the individual fields of radiomics, genomics and proteomics.

METHODS

MONDRIAN is a prospective observational explorative cohort clinical study, with a data-driven, bottom-up approach. It is expected to enroll 100 ES-NSCLC SBRT candidates treated at an Italian tertiary cancer center with well-recognized expertise in SBRT and thoracic surgery. To identify predictors specific to SBRT, MONDRIAN will include data from 200 patients treated with surgery, in a 1:2 ratio, with comparable clinical characteristics. The project will have an overall expected duration of 60 months, and will be structured into five main tasks: (i) Clinical Study; (ii) Imaging/ Radiomic Study, (iii) Gene Expression Study, (iv) Proteomic Study, (v) Integrative Model Building.

DISCUSSION

Thanks to its multi-disciplinary nature, MONDRIAN is expected to provide the opportunity to characterize ES-NSCLC from a multi-omic perspective, with a Radiation Oncology-oriented focus. Other than contributing to a mechanistic understanding of the disease, the study will assist the identification of high-risk patients in a largely unexplored clinical setting. Ultimately, this would orient further clinical research efforts on the combination of SBRT and systemic treatments, such as immunotherapy, with the perspective of improving oncological outcomes in this subset of patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was prospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05974475).

Minimum Volume Standards for Surgical Care of Early-Stage Lung Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

Multiple stakeholders have advocated for minimum volume standards for complex surgical procedures. The Leapfrog Group recommends that patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receive surgical resection at hospitals that perform at least 40 lung resections annually. However, the cost-effectiveness of this paradigm is unknown.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed on 90-day and 5-year horizons for patients with clinical stage I NSCLC undergoing surgical resection at hospitals stratified by Leapfrog standard. Model inputs were derived from either the literature or a propensity score-matched cohort using the National Cancer Database. For the 5-year horizon, we simulated using a Markov model with 1-year cycle. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated to evaluate cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

For the 90-day horizon, resection at a Leapfrog hospital was more costly ($25 567 vs $25 530) but had greater utility (0.185 vs 0.181 quality-adjusted life-years), resulting in an ICER of 10 506. Similarly, for the 5-year horizon, resection at a Leapfrog hospital was more costly ($26 600 vs $26 495) but more effective (3.216 vs 3.122 quality-adjusted life-years), resulting in an ICER of 1108. When the costs for long-distance travel, lodging, and loss of productivity for caregivers were factored in, the ICER was 20 499 during the 5-year horizon for resection at Leapfrog hospitals. Using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000, resection at a Leapfrog hospital remained cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving surgery for clinical stage I NSCLC at hospitals that meet Leapfrog volume standards is cost-effective. Payers and policymakers should consider supporting patient and caregiver travel to higher volume institutions for lung cancer surgery.

State of the art and new perspectives in surgical treatment of lung cancer: a narrative review

Background and Objective

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and its incidence has increased over the past two decades. The standard care for stage I, stage II, and selected cases of stage IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is surgical resection; in some cases, patients may be offered adjuvant systemic therapy after surgical resection. Patients with lung cancer presenting with distant metastases belong to stage IV: in this setting, some carefully selected patients may benefit from surgery within a multimodality approach.

Methods

We performed a comprehensive, non-systematic review of the latest literature to define the present role of surgery in lung cancer treatment.

Key Content and Findings

The literature review disclosed a pivotal role of surgery in early stage lung cancer and a complimentary role in locally advanced lung cancer; in very selected cases, surgery might be considered in oligometastatic disease.

Conclusions

Surgical treatment of lung cancer still plays a pivotal role in early stages of the disease while, in locally advanced stages, it may contribute to improve overall survival in combination with medical treatments and radiotherapy. More recently, an effective role of surgery has been advocated in carefully selected oligometastatic patients with encouraging initial results.

The Role of Surgery in High-Grade Neuroendocrine Cancer: Indications for Clinical Practice

Pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors (pNET) represent a particular type of malignant lung cancers and can be divided into well-differentiated low-grade NET and poorly-differentiated high-grade NET. Typical and atypical carcinoids belong to the first group while large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas (LCNEC) and small-cell lung cancers (SCLC) belong to the second one. The aim of this mini-review is to focus on the role of surgical therapy for high grade neuroendocrine tumors. SCLC has the worst prognosis among all lung cancer neoplasms: in fact, the two-year survival rate is about 5% and median survival usually ranges between 15 and 20 months. The surgical treatment of SCLC has thus infrequently been judged as a valuable aspect of the therapeutic approach, the gold standard treatment being a combination of platinum-based chemotherapy and radiotherapy. As LCNEC are rare, there is a lack of extensive literature and randomized clinical trials, therefore the curative approach is still controversial. Current treatment guidelines suggest treating LCNEC by surgical resection in non-metastatic stages and recommend adjuvant chemotherapy according to SCLC protocol. Upfront surgery is suggested in early stages (from I to IIB), a multimodality approach is recommended in locally advanced stages (III) while surgery is not recommended in stage IV LCNEC. The rate of surgical resection is quite low, particularly for SCLC, ranging from 1 to 6% in limited diseases; lobectomy with radical lymphadenectomy is considered the gold standard surgical procedure in the case of limited disease SCLC and resectable LCNEC; pneumonectomy, although reported as an effective tool, should be avoided in the light of local and distant recurrence rates.

Do oncologists prefer subspecialty radiology reports? A quality care study

Background

The main objective was to assess whether CT reports of radiologists subspecialized in oncologic imaging respond better to oncological referrals than reports from general radiologists. The secondary objective was to assess differences in ratings between a senior and junior oncologist. Two hundred radiological reports pertaining to oncological patients were retrospectively selected of which 100 each were written by subspecialized radiologists and general radiologists, respectively. The senior and junior oncologists each rated all CT reports using a Likert scale from 1 to 5 (1 = very poor, 5 = excellent) for the following information: anatomical details; interpretation of findings; need for further explanations; appropriateness of conclusions; overall satisfaction. Comparisons between ratings assigned to reports from generalist radiologists and subspecialty radiologists were performed using the Mann–Whitney U test. Agreement between both oncologists was assessed through Gwet's coefficient.

Results

For all but two of the five items obtained from the senior oncologist, oncologists' ratings were significantly higher for subspecialty radiologists' reports (p < 0.01); mean values from both oncologists were generally higher for subspecialty reports (p < 0.001). Agreement between the senior and junior oncologist in the rating of reports from general and subspecialty radiologists was either moderate to substantial (0.5986–0.6788) or substantial to almost perfect (0.6958–0.8358).

Conclusions

According to a senior and junior oncologist, CT reports performed by subspecialized radiologists in oncologic imaging are clearer, more accurate, and more appropriate in the interpretation and conclusions compared to reports written by general radiologists. Likewise, the overall satisfaction of the oncologist from a subspecialized radiologist report is higher.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13244-021-01007-4.

Prognostic Value of the Hemoglobin/Red Cell Distribution Width Ratio in Resected Lung Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The ratio of hemoglobin to red cell distribution width (HRR) has been described as an effective prognostic factor in several types of cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic role of preoperative HRR in resected-lung-adenocarcinoma patients.

METHODS

We enrolled 342 consecutive patients. Age, sex, surgical resection, adjuvant treatments, pathological stage, preoperative hemoglobin, red cell distribution width, and their ratio were recorded for each patient.

RESULTS

Mean age was 66 years (SD: 9.0). There were 163 females (47.1%); 169 patients (49.4%) had tumors at stage I, 71 (20.8%) at stage II, and 102 (29.8%) at stage III. In total, 318 patients (93.0%) underwent lobectomy, and 24 (7.0%) pneumonectomy. Disease-free survival multivariable analysis disclosed an increased hazard ratio (HR) of relapse for preoperative HRR lower than 1.01 (HR = 2.20, 95%CI: (1.30-3.72), p = 0.004), as well as for N1 single-node (HR = 2.55, 95%CI: (1.33-4.90), p = 0.005) and multiple-level lymph node involvement compared to N0 for both N1 (HR = 9.16, 95%CI:(3.65-23.0), p < 0.001) and N2 (HR = 10.5, 95%CI:(3.44-32.2, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Pre-operative HRR is an effective prognostic factor of disease-free survival in resected-lung-adenocarcinoma patients, together with the level of pathologic node involvement.