Mesenchymal neoplasms with NTRK and other kinase gene alterations

Kinase alterations are increasingly recognised as oncogenic drivers in mesenchymal tumours. Infantile fibrosarcoma and the related renal tumour, congenital mesoblastic nephroma, were among the first solid tumours shown to harbour recurrent tyrosine kinase fusions, with the canonical ETV6::NTRK3 fusion identified more than 20 years ago. Although targeted testing has long been used in diagnosis, the advent of more robust sequencing techniques has driven the discovery of kinase alterations in an array of mesenchymal tumours. As our ability to identify these genetic alterations has improved, as has our recognition and understanding of the tumours that harbour these alterations. Specifically, this study will focus upon mesenchymal tumours harbouring NTRK or other kinase alterations, including tumours with an infantile fibrosarcoma-like appearance, spindle cell tumours resembling lipofibromatosis or peripheral nerve sheath tumours and those occurring in adults with a fibrosarcoma-like appearance. As publications describing the histology of these tumours increase so, too, do the variety kinase alterations reported, now including NTRK1/2/3, RET, MET, RAF1, BRAF, ALK, EGFR and ABL1 fusions or alterations. To date, these tumours appear locally aggressive and rarely metastatic, without a clear link between traditional features used in histological grading (e.g. mitotic activity, necrosis) and outcome. However, most of these tumours are amenable to new targeted therapies, making their recognition of both diagnostic and therapeutic import. The goal of this study is to review the clinicopathological features of tumours with NTRK and other tyrosine kinase alterations, discuss the most common differential diagnoses and provide recommendations for molecular confirmation with associated treatment implications.     

Treatment of multiple adjacent RT 1 gingival recessions with the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) technique and a collagen matrix or palatal connective tissue graft: 9-year results of a split-mouth randomized clinical trial

Clinical Oral Investigations - To evaluate t he long-term outcomes following treatment of RT 1 multiple adjacent gingival recessions (MAGR) using the modified coronally advanced tunnel (MCAT) with...     

Update PONV – Was gibt es Neues bei der Prophylaxe und Therapie von postoperativer Übelkeit und postoperativem Erbrechen?

Die Anaesthesiologie - Auch wenn für Anästhesiologen über Jahrzehnte die Prophylaxe und Therapie postoperativer Schmerzen im Rahmen des postoperativen Patientenkomforts an vorderster...     

A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PurposeUnderstanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.ResultsAcross the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.ConclusionWe describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.