Immunotherapy Assessment: A New Paradigm for Radiologists.

Immunotherapy denotes an exemplar change in an oncological setting. Despite the effective application of these treatments across a broad range of tumors, only a minority of patients have beneficial effects. The efficacy of immunotherapy is affected by several factors, including human immunity, which is strongly correlated to genetic features, such as intra-tumor heterogeneity. Classic imaging assessment, based on computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which is useful for conventional treatments, has a limited role in immunotherapy. The reason is due to different patterns of response and/or progression during this kind of treatment which differs from those seen during other treatments, such as the possibility to assess the wide spectrum of immunotherapy-correlated toxic effects (ir-AEs) as soon as possible. In addition, considering the unusual response patterns, the limits of conventional response criteria and the necessity of using related immune-response criteria are clear. Radiomics analysis is a recent field of great interest in a radiological setting and recently it has grown the idea that we could identify patients who will be fit for this treatment or who will develop ir-AEs.

Risk Management Activities in a Lung Cancer Multidisciplinary Team at a Comprehensive Cancer Center: Results of a Prospective Analysis.

PURPOSE: The objective of the study was to highlight sources of harm that could negatively affect the lung cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) activities to reduce the level of risk of each factor. METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was used by a board of multi-health care professionals of the lung cancer MDT to identify the main processes, subprocesses, and risk factors of the multidisciplinary pathway of patients with lung cancer. A semiquantitative matrix was built with a five-point scale for probability of harm (likelihood) and severity of harm (consequences) according to the international risk management standards (ISO 31000-2018). The risk level was calculated by multiplying likelihood × consequences. Mitigation strategies have been identified and applied by the MDT to reduce risks to acceptable levels. RESULTS: Three main processes (outpatient specialist visit, MDT discussion, and MDT program implementation), eight related subprocesses, and 16 risk factors were identified. Four risk factors (25%) were related to outpatient specialist visit, seven (43.75%) to case discussion, and five (31.25%) to program implementation. Overall, two risk factors were assigned a low-risk level (12.5%), 11 a moderate-risk level (68.75%), one (6.25%) a high-risk level, and two (12.5%) a very high-risk level. After the implementation of mitigation measures, the new semiquantitative risk analysis showed a reduction in almost all hazardous situations: two risk factors (12.5%) were given a very low level, six (37.5%) a low level, seven (43.75%) a moderate level, and one (6.25%) a very high level. CONCLUSION: An interdisciplinary risk assessment analysis is applicable to MDT activities by using an ad hoc risk matrix: if the hazard is identified and monitored, the risk could be reduced and managed in a short time.

Imaging Assessment of Interval Metastasis from Melanoma.

Interval metastasis is a particular metastatic category of metastatic localizations in the lymph nodes in patients with melanoma. Interval nodes are generally located at nonregional lymphatic stations placed along the pathway of the spread of melanoma, such as the epitrochlear lymph node station, the popliteal fossa, and the retroareolar station. Imaging techniques for evaluation of patients with interval metastasis from melanoma diseases include ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), lymphoscintigraphy (LS), and positron emission tomography (PET). A literature review was conducted through a methodical search on the Pubmed and Embase databases. The evaluation of lymph node metastases represents a critical phase in the staging and follow-up of melanoma patients. Therefore, a thorough knowledge of the imaging methods available and the interactions between the clinician and the radiologist are essential for making the correct choice for individual patients, for a better management, and to improve treatment and survival.

Multimodality Imaging Assessment of Desmoid Tumors: The Great Mime in the Era of Multidisciplinary Teams.

Desmoid tumors (DTs), also known as desmoid fibromatosis or aggressive fibromatosis, are rare, locally invasive, non-metastatic soft tissue tumors. Although histological results represent the gold standard diagnosis, imaging represents the fundamental tool for the diagnosis of these tumors. Although histological analysis represents the gold standard for diagnosis, imaging represents the fundamental tool for the diagnosis of these tumors. DTs represent a challenge for the radiologist, being able to mimic different pathological conditions. A proper diagnosis is required to establish an adequate therapeutic approach. Multimodality imaging, including ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), should be preferred. Different imaging techniques can also guide minimally invasive treatments and monitor their effectiveness. The purpose of this review is to describe the state-of-the-art multidisciplinary imaging of DTs; and its role in patient management.