[The art of war as applied to pediatric gliomas: Know your enemy]. / L'art de la guerre appliqué aux DIPG - Connais ton ennemi.

Pediatric brain cancers represent the most frequent solid tumors and the leading cause of cancer-driven mortality in children. Pediatric High Grade Gliomas display a very poor prognosis. Among these, DIPG (Diffuse Intrinsic Pontine Gliomas), localized to the brain stem, cannot benefit from a total exeresis due to this critical location and to their highly infiltrating nature. Radiotherapy remains the standard treatment against these tumors for almost five decades, and attempts to improve the prognosis of patients with chemotherapy or targeted therapies have failed. Thanks to the rise of high throughput sequencing, the knowledge of molecular alterations in pediatric gliomas strongly progressed and allowed to highlight distinct biomolecular entities and to establish more accurate diagnoses. In this review, we summarize this new information and the perspectives that it brings for clinical strategies.

TITLE: L'art de la guerre appliqué aux DIPG - Connais ton ennemi. ABSTRACT: Les tumeurs cérébrales pédiatriques représentent la principale cause de mortalité par cancer chez l'enfant. Alors que l'exérèse complète a une valeur pronostique dans certains gliomes de haut grade, les DIPG (diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas) ne peuvent en bénéficier du fait d'une localisation critique au niveau du tronc cérébral et de leur caractère infiltrant. La radiothérapie demeure le traitement de référence contre ces tumeurs depuis bientôt cinquante ans, et les tentatives pour améliorer le pronostic vital des patients à l'aide de chimiothérapies ou de thérapies ciblées se sont révélées infructueuses. La connaissance des altérations moléculaires dans ces gliomes a fortement progressé cette dernière décennie, grâce aux progrès du séquençage à haut débit. Cela a permis de révéler des entités distinctes au niveau moléculaire et de préciser des diagnostics discriminants. Dans cette revue, nous faisons le point sur ces nouvelles connaissances et les perspectives qu'elles apportent en termes de stratégies cliniques.

Ten-year trends in iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis treatment and referral pathways.

OBJECTIVES: Iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis is associated with an increased risk of developing post-thrombotic syndrome resulting in reduced quality of life. As there is debate about best management practices, this study aimed to examine the referral and treatment pathways for patients presenting with iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis over an 11-year period at our institution. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients diagnosed with lower limb deep vein thrombosis between 2010 and 2020. Ultrasound report findings were reviewed for the presence of iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis with acute, occlusive, or proximal clot. Multiple factors were extracted, including patient demographics, risk factors, diagnostic methods, interventions, referrals, and details of follow-up. The CaVenT and ATTRACT trials studied the benefit of thrombolysis in the early phase of iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis management as compared to anticoagulation alone. An analysis was conducted of patients requiring thrombolysis to determine whether these trials impacted physician practice patterns for thrombolysis. Data were organized and examined by year for trends in treatment and referral pathways. RESULTS: The review yielded 2792 patients assessed for lower limb deep venous thrombosis by ultrasound. Four hundred and sixty-seven (16.7%) patients were confirmed to have an occlusive iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis. The average age was 62.7 years (18-101 years). Half (50.4%) of the patients were male. The most common etiology for clot was malignancy-induced hypercoagulable state (39.0%). There was no difference in incidence of iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis diagnosed by ultrasound per year, with an average of 42.5 per year and a peak of 61. There was a trend towards increased rates of computed tomography imaging, ranging between 9.1% and 52.9%. The rate thrombolysis per year ranged between 1.8% and 8.9%, with a range of 4.3% (n = 20) to 8.9% (n = 5) in 2018. The use of pharmacomechanical thrombolysis increased, from 25% (n = 1) in 2010-2012 to 87.5% (n = 7) in 2018-2020. The rate of inferior vena cava filter insertion alone decreased from 18.2% in 2010 (n = 4) to 5.9% (n = 1) in 2020. The length of thrombolysis treatment also decreased, from 100% of patients (n = 4) receiving treatment duration greater than 24 h in 2010-2012 to 0% (n = 0) in 2018-2020. About 45% of patients receiving thrombolysis (n = 9) had venous stenting. No difference in treatment outcomes were observed, with greater than 87.5% of patients reaching intermediate to full resolution of clot burden. No patients experienced intracranial hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this analysis highlight the change in practice in our institution over time. The low rate of intervention likely reflects the current lack of consensus in published guidelines. It is important for future work to elicit the most appropriate management pathways for patients with iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis.

Major fall in urgent skin cancer referrals during the COVID-19 outbreak.

The SARS-CoV-2 cornovirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly affected referrals of new suspected cancers from primary care to specialist services in the National Health Service (NHS) across the UK.  Amongst the many factors causing delay, such as fear and uncertainty about COVID-19 transmission, reluctance to seek medical attention for cancer sypmtoms and avoiding additional pressure on NHS services, we anticipate a surge in urgent skin cancer referrals to our plastic surgery service as we enter a post-COVID recovery phase.  On the basis of previous referral data and statistical forecasting, we share our predicted numbers against our actual number of urgent skin cancer referrals for the COVID-19 period and, based on this analysis, encourage all cancer services to prepare and allocate resources appropriately for the busy months to follow.

Restitution of the NHS breast reconstruction service during the recovery phase of the Covid 19 pandemic.

During the recovery restitution phase of the coronavirus pandemic, breast reconstruction teams have faced particular challenges to restarting this essential service. This is due to the length and complexity of the surgery, along with the demands on healthcare staff. The Royal College of Surgeons have classified immediate breast reconstruction as priority 2 and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence have provided a pre-operative pathway for resumption of elective procedures. We therefore describe our experience in restarting our service for providing a breast reconstruction service from the 29th June 2020.

Dramatic Changes in Oncology Care Pathways During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The French ONCOCARE-COV Study.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have affected cancer management. We aimed to evaluate changes in every oncology care pathway essential step, from screening to treatment, during the pandemic. Monthly oncological activity differences between 2019 and 2020 (screening tests, histopathological analyzes, multidisciplinary tumor board meetings (MTBMs), diagnostic announcement procedures (DAPs), and treatments were calculated in two French areas experiencing different pandemic intensity (Reims and Colmar). COVID-19 has had a dramatic impact in terms of screening (-86% to -100%), diagnosis (-39%), and surgical treatment (-30%). This global decrease in all essential oncology care pathway steps contrasted with the relative stability of chemotherapy (-9%) and radiotherapy use (-16%). Outbreak occurred earlier and with more intensity in Colmar but had a comparable impact in both areas regarding MTMBs and DAPs. The current ONCOCARE-COV study is still in progress and with a longer follow-up to analyze postlockdown situation.

Reopening Endoscopy after the COVID-19 Outbreak: Indications from a High Incidence Scenario.

.

Emotional Distress During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Psycho-Oncology Perspective.

Patients with cancer represent a vulnerable population and are at greater risk of developing serious complications as a result of a COVID-19 infection. In response, oncology societies around the world have proposed changes to their standards of care. These changes have helped guide health care providers in prioritizing clinical management of patients with cancer: identifying situations in which urgent intervention is needed and those that can be triaged until the risk of infection has lessened.

Reflections from London's Level-1 Major Trauma Centres during the COVID crisis.

Emergence of the Covid-19 pandemic resulted in dramatic changes in global healthcare provision. Resources were redirected across all healthcare sectors to support the treatment of viral pneumonia with resultant effects on other essential services. We describe the impact of this on the provision of major trauma care in a major capital city.

Is it Possible to Safely Maintain a Regular Vascular Practice During the COVID-19 Pandemic?

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the protocol adopted during the emergency phase of the COVID-19 pandemic to maintain elective activity in a vascular surgery unit while minimising the risk of contamination to both patients and physicians, and the impact of this activity on the intensive care (IC) resources. METHODS: The activity of a vascular surgery unit was analysed from 8 March to 8 April 2020. Surgical activity was maintained only for acute or elective procedures obeying priority criteria. The preventive screening protocol consisted of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) for all patients and physicians with symptoms and for unprotected contact infected cases, and serological physician evaluations every 15 days. Patients treated in the acute setting were considered theoretically infected and the necessary protective devices were used. The number of patients and the possible infection of physicians were evaluated. The number and type of interventions and the need for post-operative IC during this period were compared with those in the same periods in 2018 and 2019. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-one interventions were performed, of which 34 (23%) were acute/emergency. The total number of interventions was similar to those performed in the same periods in 2019 and 2018: 150 (33, of which 22% acute/emergency) and 117 (29, 25% acute/emergency), respectively. IC was necessary after 6% (17% in 2019 and 20% in 2018) of elective operations and 33% (11) of acute/emergency interventions. None of the patients treated electively were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection during hospitalisation. Of the 34 patients treated in acute/emergency interventions, five (15%) were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection. It was necessary to screen 14 (47%) vascular surgeons with NPS after contact with infected colleagues, but none for unprotected contact with patients; all were found to be negative on NPS and serological evaluation. CONCLUSION: A dedicated protocol allowed maintenance of regular elective vascular surgery activity during the emergency phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, with no contamination of patients or physicians and minimal need for IC resources.

Alternative Multidisciplinary Management Options for Locally Advanced NSCLC During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Global Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is currently accelerating. Patients with locally advanced NSCLC (LA-NSCLC) may require treatment in locations where resources are limited, and the prevalence of infection is high. Patients with LA-NSCLC frequently present with comorbidities that increase the risk of severe morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. These risks may be further increased by treatments for LA-NSCLC. Although guiding data is scarce, we present an expert thoracic oncology multidisciplinary (radiation oncology, medical oncology, surgical oncology) consensus of alternative strategies for the treatment of LA-NSCLC during a pandemic. The overarching goals of these approaches are the following: (1) reduce the number of visits to a health care facility, (2) reduce the risk of exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2, (3) attenuate the immunocompromising effects of lung cancer therapies, and (4) provide effective oncologic therapy. Patients with resectable disease can be treated with definitive nonoperative management if surgical resources are limited or the risks of perioperative care are high. Nonoperative options include chemotherapy, chemoimmunotherapy, and radiation therapy with sequential schedules that may or may not affect long-term outcomes in an era in which immunotherapy is available. The order of treatments may be on the basis of patient factors and clinical resources. Whenever radiation therapy is delivered without concurrent chemotherapy, hypofractionated schedules are appropriate. For patients who are confirmed to have COVID-19, usually, cancer therapies may be withheld until symptoms have resolved with negative viral test results. The risk of severe treatment-related morbidity and mortality is increased for patients undergoing treatment for LA-NSCLC during the COVID-19 pandemic. Adapting alternative treatment strategies as quickly as possible may save lives and should be implemented through communication with the multidisciplinary cancer team.

Scarce-Resource Allocation and Patient Triage During the COVID-19 Pandemic: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

The COVID-19 pandemic and its sequelae have created scenarios of scarce medical resources, leading to the prospect that health care systems have faced or will face difficult decisions about triage, allocation, and reallocation. These decisions should be guided by ethical principles and values, should not be made before crisis standards have been declared by authorities, and, in most cases, will not be made by bedside clinicians. Do not attempt resuscitation and withholding and withdrawing decisions should be made according to standard determination of medical appropriateness and futility, but there are unique considerations during a pandemic. Transparent and clear communication is crucial, coupled with dedication to provide the best possible care to patients, including palliative care. As medical knowledge about COVID-19 grows, more will be known about prognostic factors that can guide these difficult decisions.

Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Precision Medicine Era: From Treatment Stage Migration to Therapeutic Hierarchy.

Treatment allocation is extremely complex in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) because this neoplasm arises, in most cases, in patients with cirrhosis and additional comorbidities. The "stage hierarchy" approach, which involves linking each stage (or substage) of the disease to a specific treatment, has become the main proposed treatment strategy for the clinical management of HCC, particularly in the West. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) scheme serves as the main example of the application of this strategy. In an attempt to increase the plasticity of the "stage hierarchy" approach as well as its adaptability to the requirements of real-world clinical practice, the latest versions of European and American guidelines have introduced certain relevant elements of flexibility, which were not intrinsic to the original BCLC scheme. These elements are as follows: the "treatment stage migration" strategy, which allows moving to another treatment (generally the one that is associated with the subsequent stage) if the approach linked with the current stage proves to be unfeasible, and the "treatment stage alternative" approach, which proposes further therapeutic options for each BCLC-defined stage. In regard to most of the solid cancers, another potential strategy is to consider the treatment decision to be hierarchically dictated by the efficacy of each therapy with complete or partial independence from the tumor stage. This concept of "therapeutic hierarchy" has been historically endorsed by the Asia-Pacific treatment algorithm as well as by the recent Italian multisociety guidelines. The present review provides a critical analysis of the different conceptual approaches to HCC management, highlighting their advantages and disadvantages and focusing on the remarkable differences between the stage-guided and the hierarchical strategies.

Knock on the right door. How we are treating the patient with acute myocardial infarction / Bata na porta certa. Como estamos tratando o paciente com infarto agudo do miocárdio

Background: To reduce mortality of acute myocardial infarction, medical care must be provided within the first hours of the event. Objective: To identify the "front door" to medical care of acute coronary patients and the time elapsed between patients'admission and performance of myocardial reperfusion in the public health system of the city of Joinville, Brazil. Methods: The study was a retrospective analysis of the medical records of 112 consecutive patients diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction by coronary angiography. We identified the place of the first medical contact and calculated the time between admission to this place and admission to the referral hospital, as well as the time until coronary angiography, with or without percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. A descriptive analysis of data was made using mean and standard deviation, and a p < 0.05 was set as statistically significant. Results: Only 16 (14.3%) patients were admitted through the cardiology referral unit. Door-to-angiography time was shorter than 90 minutes in 50 (44.2%) patients and longer than 270 minutes in 39 (34.5%) patients. No statistically significant difference was observed in door-to-angiography time between patients transported directly to the referral hospital and those transferred from other health units (p < 0.240). Considering the time between pain onset and angiography, only 3 (2.9%) patients may have benefited from myocardial reperfusion performed within less than 240 minutes. Conclusion: Management of patients with acute myocardial infarction is not in conformity with current guidelines for the treatment of this condition. The structure of the healthcare system should be urgently modified so that users in need of emergency services receive adequate care in accordance with local conditions