Citations

Abstract Background Sinonasal neoplasms, whether benign and malignant, pose a significant challenge to clinicians and represent a model area for multidisciplinary collaboration in order to optimize patient care. The International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Sinonasal Tumors (ICSNT) aims to summarize the best available evidence and presents 48 thematic and histopathology‐based topics spanning the field. Methods In accordance with prior International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology documents, ICSNT assigned each topic as an Evidence‐Based Review with Recommendations, Evidence‐Based Review, and Literature Review based on the level of evidence. An international group of multidisciplinary author teams were assembled for the topic reviews using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses format, and completed sections underwent a thorough and iterative consensus‐building process. The final document underwent rigorous synthesis and review prior to publication. Results The ICSNT document consists of four major sections: general principles, benign neoplasms and lesions, malignant neoplasms, and quality of life and surveillance. It covers 48 conceptual and/or histopathology‐based topics relevant to sinonasal neoplasms and masses. Topics with a high level of evidence provided specific recommendations, while other areas summarized the current state of evidence. A final section highlights research opportunities and future directions, contributing to advancing knowledge and community intervention. Conclusion As an embodiment of the multidisciplinary and collaborative model of care in sinonasal neoplasms and masses, ICSNT was designed as a comprehensive, international, and multidisciplinary collaborative endeavor. Its primary objective is to summarize the existing evidence in the field of sinonasal neoplasms and masses.

140 Background: High-risk prostate cancer (HRPC) is a challenging disease and the role of surgery is often considered in the context of a multimodal approach but patients with positive section margins (R1) disease have not always the same cancer-specific survival (CSS). The current study aims to analyze current postoperative pathological features in order to predict CSS of HRPC patients with R1, but with negative lymph nodes (pN0), treated with surgery. Methods: From a multi-institutional retrospective cohort of 5,876 HRPC patients treated by radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection, 1541 patients with pN0 and R1 were selected. Following surgery, adjuvant EBRT and/or ADT were delivered according to institutional protocols. Patients were subdivided into four groups according to pT stage (pT≥3 and pT<3) and p-Gleason score (pGS≥8 and pGS<8). Kaplan-Meier plots with log-rank tests and a Cox proportional hazards model were applied to study CSS. All significance levels were set at 0.05. MedCalc was used for all statistical analyses. Results: Median age at surgery was 66 years (42-89). Of all patients, 399 (25.9%) had GS≥8 and 999 (64.8%) had pT≥3 at definitive histopathology. Patients were classified as COMBO groups: C1 (423; 27.4%; GS<8,pT<3), C2 (674; 43.7%; GS<8, pT≥3), C3 (83; 5.4%; GS≥8, pT<3), C4 (362; 23.5%; GS≥8, pT≥3). Adjuvant EBRT and ADT, respectively, were delivered in C1 3%/5%, C2 15%/21%, C3 21%/20%, C4 28%/40%. Kaplan-Meier plots demonstrated statistically different 10-yr CSS between groups: C1 97%, C2 93.8%, C3 85.1% and C4 77.3% (p<0.0001). COMBO groups were also compared using a Cox model and results are shown in the Table. Conclusions: COMBO groups demonstrated to be able to subdivide margin-positive, pN0 HRPC into 4 demarcated groups with significantly different CSS. This subdivision could be considered an easy-to-use tool which can help for counseling patients for adjuvant treatment strategies. [Table: see text]

114 Background: High-risk prostate cancer (HRPC) is a challenging disease and the role of surgery is often considered in the context of a multimodal approach. The indication for adjuvant therapy after surgery for HRPC patients who have specimen-confined disease (R0, pN0, <pT3b) is still difficult. The current study aims to analyze postoperative pathological features which help to predict CSS in specimen-confined HRPC and thus may aid in the decision to administer adjuvant EBRT or ADT. Methods: From a multi-institutional retrospective cohort of 5876 HRPC patients treated by radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection, 1391 patients with specimen-confined disease were selected. Following surgery, adjuvant EBRT and/or ADT were delivered according to institutional protocols. Patients were subdivided into four groups according to pT stage (pT≥3 and pT<3) and final Gleason score (GS≥8 and GS<8). Kaplan-Meier plots with log-rank tests and a Cox proportional hazards model were applied to study CSS. All significance levels were set at 0.05. MedCalc was used for all statistical analyses. Results: Median age was 65 years (43-84). Of all patients, 346 (24.9%) had GS≥8 and 794 (57.1%) had pT≥3 at definitive histopathology. Patients were classified into COMBO groups: C1 (478; 34.4%; GS<8,pT<3), C2 (567; 40.8%; GS<8, pT≥3), C3 (119; 8.6%; GS≥8, pT<3), C4 (227; 16.3%; GS≥8, pT≥3). Adjuvant EBRT and ADT, respectively, were delivered in C1 2%/2%, C2 15%/22%, C3 3%/10%, C4 18%/25%. Kaplan Meier plots demonstrated statistically different 10-yr CSS between groups: C1 97.4%, C2 95.2%, C3 89.9% and C4 84.4% (p<0.0001). COMBO groups were also compared using a Cox model and results are shown in the Table. Conclusions: COMBO groups demonstrated to be able to subdivide specimen-confined HRPC into 4 demarcated groups with significantly different CSS. This subdivision could be considered an easy-to-use tool which can help for counseling patients for adjuvant treatment strategies. [Table: see text]