Search

The communication of scientific knowledge to patients and society as a whole has never been more central than in modern times. Thanks to the recent pandemic, it has become evident how Scientific Communication (SC) has evolved over time, increasingly diverging from common language. However, it is also clear that it must be properly used by healthcare professionals to avoid comprehension issues that could be severe for the audience. Presently, science and technology are at the heart of progress and innovation; therefore, the proper dissemination of accurate yet accessible information to the population is vital to ensure that no one is left behind and to promote cohesive social advancement. This review aims to analyze the notions of SC and Scientific Method (SM), examining the relationships between them and providing suggestions on how to integrate them properly in both a broader context and the specific field of communication with oncology patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest No conflict, (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Liquid biopsy has gained increasing interest in the growing era of precision medicine as minimally invasive technique. Recent findings demonstrated that detecting minimal or molecular residual disease (MRD) in NSCLC is a challenging matter of debate that need multidisciplinary competencies, avoiding the overtreatment risk along with achieving a significant survival improvement. This review aims to provide practical consideration for solving data interpretation questions about MRD in NSCLC thanks to the close cooperation between biologists and oncology clinicians. We discussed with a translational approach the critical point of view from benchside, bedside and bunchside to facilitate the future applicability of liquid biopsy in this setting. Herein, we defined the clinical significance of MRD, focusing on relevant practical consideration about advantages and disadvantages, speculating on future clinical trial design and standardization of MRD technology., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The development of innovative technologies and the advances in the genetics and genomics, have offered new opportunities for personalized treatment in oncology. Although the selection of the patient based on the molecular characteristics of the neoplasm has the potential to revolutionize the therapeutic scenario of oncology, this approach is extremely challenging. The access, homogeneity, and economic sustainability of the required genomic tests should be warranted in the clinical practice, as well as the specific scientific and clinical expertise for the choice of medical therapies. All these elements make essential the collaboration of different specialists within the Molecular Tumor Boards (MTBs). In this position paper, based on experts' opinion, the AIOM-SIAPEC/IAP-SIBioC-SIC-SIF-SIGU-SIRM Italian Scientific Societies critically discuss the available molecular profiling technologies, the proposed criteria for the selection of patients candidate for evaluation by the MTB, the criteria for the selection and analysis of biological samples, and the regulatory and pharmaco-economic issues., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

The personalized medicine is in a rapidly evolving scenario. The identification of actionable mutations is revolutionizing the therapeutic landscape of tumors. The morphological and histological tumor features are enriched by the extensive genomic profiling, and the first tumor-agnostic drugs have been approved regardless of tumor histology, guided by predictive and druggable genetic alterations. This new paradigm of "mutational oncology", presents a great potential to change the oncologic therapeutic scenario, but also some critical aspects need to be underlined. A process governance is mandatory to ensure the genomic testing accuracy and homogeneity, the economic sustainability, and the regulatory issues, ultimately granting the possibility of translating this model in the "real world". In this position paper, based on experts' opinion, the AIOM-SIAPEC-IAP-SIBIOC-SIF Italian Scientific Societies revised the new agnostic biomarkers, the diagnostic technologies available, the current availability of agnostic drugs and their present indication., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

The introduction of checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treatment landscape, resulted in improvements in overall survival (OS) in metastatic patients. Brain metastases (BMs) are a specific metastatic site of interest representing a predictive factor of poor prognosis. Patients with BMs were usually excluded from prospective clinical trials in the past. Despite recent evidence suggest the efficacy and safety of ICIs, the BMs treatment remains a challenge; the immunotherapy responsiveness seems to be multifactorial and dependent on several factors, such as the genetic intratumor heterogeneity and the immunosuppressive role of the brain tumor microenvironment. This review, starting from the immunological background in RCC BMs, provide an overview of the upcoming evidence from clinical trials, address the issues related to the neuroradiological immunotherapy response evaluation and, with a look to the future, describes how the epigenetic modulation of immune evasion could represent a background for new therapeutic strategies., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Brain metastases (BMs) are frequently associated with HER2+ breast cancer (BC). Their management is based on a multi-modal strategy including both local treatment and systemic therapy. Despite therapeutic advance, BMs still have an adverse impact on survival and quality of life and the development of effective systemic therapy to prevent and treat BMs from HER2 + BC represents an unmet clinical need. Trastuzumab-based therapy has long been the mainstay of systemic therapy and over the last two decades other HER2-targeted agents including lapatinib, pertuzumab and trastuzumab emtansine, have been introduced in the clinical practice. More recently, novel agents such as neratinib, tucatinib and trastuzumab deruxtecan have been developed, with interesting activity against BMs. Further research is needed to better elucidate the best sequence of these agents and their combination with local treatment., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Zoledronic Acid is a bisphosphonate used in a 4-week schedule for the treatment of bone metastases. Some randomized trials supported its role also when administered every 12 weeks., Methods: we performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis in order to evaluate the two different schedules in terms of skeletal morbidity rate (SMR), skeletal related events (SRE) and adverse events (AEs)., Results: our results showed a clinical difference favouring the 12-week schedule in terms of AEs (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.06-1.29). No signifcant differences were found for SMR (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84-1.13) and SRE (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.89-1.16)., Conclusions: Our findings support in clinical practice the 12-week schedule an alternative to the standard 4-week schedule in advanced breast and prostate cancer, in particular when the clinical comorbidities of the patients suggest a higher risk of renal failure or hypocalcaemia., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

The current availability of new Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase (PARP)-inhibitors for the treatment of ovarian cancer patients independently of the presence of a BRCA pathogenic variant, together with the validation of somatic test for the analysis of BRCA1/2 genes, involves the need to optimise the guidelines for BRCA testing. The AIOM-SIGU-SIBIOC-SIAPEC-IAP Italian Scientific Societies, in this position paper, recommend the implementation of BRCA testing with 2 main objectives: the first is the identification of ovarian cancer patients with higher probability of benefit from specific anticancer treatments (test for response to therapy); the second goal, through BRCA testing in the family members of ovarian cancer patients, is the identification of carriers of pathogenic variant, who have inheredited predisposition to cancer development (test for cancer risk). These individuals with increased risk of cancer, should be encouraged to participate in dedicated high-risk surveillance clinics and specific risk-reducing measures (primary and/or secondary prevention programs)., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive tumor of the pleura with a poor prognosis. The most active first-line regimens are platinum compounds and pemetrexed. There is no standard second-line treatment in MPM. Advances in the understanding of tumor molecular biology have led to the development of several targeted treatments, which have been evaluated in clinical trials. Unfortunately none of the explored targeted treatments can currently be recommended as routine treatment in MPM. We reviewed the biological pathways involved in MPM, the clinical trials about targeted therapy, and possible related mechanisms of resistance. We suggest that specific genetic markers are needed as targets of selective therapy. By this way the selection of patients based on the molecular profile may facilitate a therapeutic strategy that allows the use of the most appropriate drug for each patient., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)