Diagnosis of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder in solid organ transplant recipients - BCSH and BTS Guidelines.

A joint working group established by the Haemato-oncology subgroup of the British Committee for Standards in Haematology (BCSH) and the British Transplantation Society (BTS) has reviewed the available literature and made recommendations for the diagnosis and management of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) in adult recipients of solid organ transplants. This review details the risk factors predisposing to development, initial features and diagnosis. It is important that the risk of developing PTLD is considered when using post transplant immunosuppression and that the appropriate investigations are carried out when there are suspicions of the diagnosis. These must include tissue for histology and computed tomography scan to assess the extent of disease. These recommendations have been made primarily for adult patients, there have been some comments made with regard to paediatric practice.

Management of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder in adult solid organ transplant recipients - BCSH and BTS Guidelines.

A joint working group established by the Haemato-oncology subgroup of the British Committee for Standards in Haematology (BCSH) and the British Transplantation Society (BTS) has reviewed the available literature and made recommendations for the diagnosis and management of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder in adult recipients of solid organ transplants. This review details the therapeutic options recommended including reduction in immunosuppression (RIS), transplant organ resection, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Effective therapy should be instituted before progressive disease results in declining performance status and multi-organ dysfunction. The goal of treatment should be a durable complete remission with retention of transplanted organ function with minimal toxicity.

What will be the radiotherapy machine capacity required for optimal delivery of radiotherapy in Scotland in 2015?

AIMS: Lack of radiotherapy capacity has been cited as a reason for poor cancer outcomes reported in the United Kingdom. This modelling study was conducted to ensure sufficient capacity in the future and to aid health service planning. METHODS: The predicted changes in the incidence of each cancer type to 2015 were calculated using the age-period-cohort technique. To develop the model the indications for radiotherapy now and in 2015 were established, as were the fractionation schedules for each clinical scenario. The optimal radiotherapy utilisation rates and required radiotherapy capacity were estimated for 2005 and for 2015. RESULTS: Cancer incidence is expected to rise by 18.9% by 2015. In Scotland, the estimated optimal radiotherapy utilisation rate during initial management is 44.2-47.9%. The model suggested that currently for optimal delivery, the capacity for 195,300-256,300 fractions is required. Due to predicted changes in the patient population, it is anticipated that requirements will increase to between 276,400 and 354,200 fractions per annum by 2015. Based on the current working practices, this is a 20-54% increase in current capacity, or from 5 to 6-7.6 machines per million head of population. CONCLUSIONS: In order to meet the current and projected demand, a marked increase in the provision of radiotherapy machine capacity will be required in Scotland by 2015.

Use of Maximum Intensity Projections (MIPs) for target outlining in 4DCT radiotherapy planning.

INTRODUCTION: Four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) is currently being introduced to radiotherapy centers worldwide, for use in radical radiotherapy planning for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A significant drawback is the time required to delineate 10 individual CT scans for each patient. Every department will hence ask the question if the single Maximum Intensity Projection (MIP) scan can be used as an alternative. Although the problems regarding the use of the MIP in node-positive disease have been discussed in the literature, a comprehensive study assessing its use has not been published. We compared an internal target volume (ITV) created using the MIP to an ITV created from the composite volume of 10 clinical target volumes (CTVs) delineated on the 10 phases of the 4DCT. METHODS: 4DCT data was collected from 14 patients with NSCLC. In each patient, the ITV was delineated on the MIP image (ITV_MIP) and a composite ITV created from the 10 CTVs delineated on each of the 10 scans in the dataset. The structures were compared by assessment of volumes of overlap and exclusion. RESULTS: There was a median of 19.0% (range, 5.5-35.4%) of the volume of ITV_10phase not enclosed by the ITV_MIP, demonstrating that the use of the MIP could result in under-treatment of disease. In contrast only a very small amount of the ITV_MIP was not enclosed by the ITV_10phase (median of 2.3%, range, 0.4-9.8%), indicating the ITV_10phase covers almost all of the tumor tissue as identified by MIP. Although there were only two Stage I patients, both demonstrated very similar ITV_10phase and ITV_MIP volumes. These findings suggest that Stage I NSCLC tumors could be outlined on the MIP alone. In Stage II and III tumors the ITV_10phase would be more reliable. CONCLUSIONS: To prevent under-treatment of disease, the MIP image can only be used for delineation in Stage I tumors.