"Green Oncology": the Italian medical oncologists' challenge to reduce the ecological impact of their clinical activity.

For decades Western medicine has followed a biomedical model based on linear thinking and an individualized, disease-oriented doctor-patient relationship. Today this framework must be replaced by a biopsychosocial model based on complexity theory and a person-oriented medical team-patient relationship, taking into account the psychological and social determinants of health and disease. However, the new model is already proving no longer adequate or appropriate, and current events are urging us to develop an ecological model in which the medical team takes into account both individual illness and population health as a whole, since we are all part of the biosphere. In recent years, the rising costs of cancer treatment have raised a serious issue of economic sustainability. As the population of our planet, we now need to rapidly address this issue, and everyone of us must try to reduce their ecological footprint, measured as CO2 production. Medical oncologists need to reduce the ecological footprint of their professional activity by lowering the consumption of economic resources and avoiding environmental damage as much as possible. This new paradigm is endorsed by the Italian College of Hospital Medical Oncology Directors (CIPOMO). A working group of this organization has drafted the "Green Oncology Position Paper": a proposal of Italian medical oncology (in accordance with international guidelines) that oncologists, while aiming for the same end results, make a commitment toward the more appropriate management of health care and the careful use of resources in order to protect the environment and the ecosphere during the daily exercise of their professional activities.

Italian Survey on adjuvant treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (ISA).

BACKGROUND: A recent pooled analysis of randomized trials indicated significant improvement in overall survival from cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), depending on disease stage (only in stages II and III) and PS (≤ 1). Post-operative radiotherapy (RT) is optional for pN2 tumours. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To evaluate opinions and daily clinical practice of Italian Oncologists about adjuvant treatment of NSCLC, a 46-item questionnaire was delivered via e-mail. RESULTS: Seventy-eight physicians from 68 Centers (out of 98 contacted) returned their questionnaire. Seventy-four, 86, 94, and 78% of them give the indication for adjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIA, IIB, IIIA, and IIIB disease, respectively and 14% in stage IB disease. Stage, PS, and age are taken into consideration evaluating adjuvant approach by 97, 95 and 73%, respectively. Cisplatin-vinorelbine (64%) and cisplatin-gemcitabine (33%), for 4 cycles (81%), are the preferred regimens, while 32% use different regimens. Ninety-two percent indicate RT in pN2 disease and/or positive resection margins. Real Number of patients Needed to Treat (NNT) is probably not completely known/understood and/or used by physicians. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial adherence between clinical daily practice in Italy and scientific progresses is described in this paper, even with some discordances regarding the most appropriate adjuvant chemotherapy regimen.

Radical resection of a giant, invasive and symptomatic malignant Solitary Fibrous Tumour (SFT) of the pleura.

Solitary Fibrous Tumours (SFTs) of the pleura are rare neoplasms, with unpredictable biological behaviour. Although usually benign, malignant SFTs are described, and they are often associated with large, necrotic and locally invasive tumours. Radical resection represents the treatment of choice in all cases; recurrences are uncommon, and redo-surgery should be considered. The case of a giant, invasive, radically resected malignant SFT, is described. The role of postoperative radiotherapy, to reduce the risk of recurrence, is also discussed.

Cisplatin and gemcitabine in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a phase II study.

Aims of this study were to evaluate the activity and toxicity of gemcitabine and cisplatin combination in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Patients with histologically proven MPM, < 75 years of age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) < or = 2, and measurable MPM were eligible. Patients received gemcitabine 1250 mg/m intravenously on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 75 mg/m on day 2, every 21 days, for a maximum of 6 cycles. From May 1999 to May 2001, 35 chemonaive patients (median age, 61 years) were enrolled. A total of 177 cycles were administered (median 5 cycles; range 1 to 6). One patient was not evaluable for response and toxicity. Nine (26%) patients had partial responses, 11 (32%) patients had progressive disease, and 14 (41%) stable disease. Median survival for all patients was 13 months. Median progression-free survival was 8 months. Grade 3 (World Health Organization) nausea and vomiting occurred in 35% of patients. Grade 3/4 anemia, grade 3/4 thrombocythemia, and grade 3/4 neutropenia were assessed in 24%, 52%, and 61% of patients, respectively. All other side effects were mild. In conclusion, gemcitabine-cisplatin combination seems to be moderately active in MPM. Furthermore, at this dose and schedule, the toxicity profile could be acceptable.