The role of the EORTC pathologist in clinical trials: achievements and perspectives. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer

Guidelines for cellular and molecular pathology content in clinical trial protocols: the SPIRIT-Path extension

The 2013 SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) Statement provides evidence-based recommendations for the minimum content to be included in a clinical trial protocol. Assessment of biospecimens is often required for trial eligibility or as part of an outcome evaluation, and precision molecular approaches are increasingly used in trial design. However, cellular and molecular pathology practices within trials have not been codified or formalised. We developed international consensus reporting guidelines for cellular and molecular pathology content in clinical trial protocols (the SPIRIT-Path extension) using an international Delphi process, which assesses candidate items generated from a previous systematic review, followed by an expert consensus meeting. 74 individuals from five continents responded, including clinicians, statisticians, laboratory scientists, patient advocates, funders, industry representatives, journal editors, and regulators. The SPIRIT-Path guidelines recommend 14 additional items (seven extensions to the SPIRIT checklist and seven elaborations) that should be addressed in trial protocols containing pathology content, alongside the SPIRIT 2013 Statement items. SPIRIT-Path recommends that protocols should document the individuals, processes, and standards for all cellular and molecular pathology components of the trial, including all stages of the specimen pathway and any digital pathology methods, with specific consideration of the value of trial data and biological tissues for additional translational studies.

Quality of pathology reports for advanced ovarian cancer: are we missing essential information? An audit of 479 pathology reports from the EORTC-GCG 55971/NCIC-CTG OV13 neoadjuvant trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the quality of surgical pathology reports of advanced stage ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer. This quality assurance project was performed within the EORTC-GCG 55971/NCIC-CTG OV13 study comparing primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval debulking surgery.

METHODS

Four hundred and seventy nine pathology reports from 40 institutions in 11 different countries were checked for the following quality indicators: macroscopic description of all specimens, measuring and weighing of major specimens, description of tumour origin and differentiation.

RESULTS

All specimens were macroscopically described in 92.3% of the reports. All major samples were measured and weighed in 59.9% of the reports. A description of the origin of the tumour was missing in 20.5% of reports of the primary debulking group and in 23.4% of the interval debulking group. Assessment of tumour differentiation was missing in 10% of the reports after primary debulking and in 20.8% of the reports after interval debulking. Completeness of reports is positively correlated with accrual volume and adversely with hospital volume or type of hospital (academic versus non-academic). Quality of reports differs significantly by country.

CONCLUSION

This audit of ovarian cancer pathology reports reveals that in a substantial number of reports basic pathologic data are missing, with possible adverse consequences for the quality of cancer care. Specialisation by pathologists and the use of standardised synoptic reports can lead to improved quality of reporting. Further research is needed to better define pre- and post-operative diagnostic criteria for ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Exogenous agents that target transmembrane domains of proteins

Although membrane proteins account for approximately one third of all proteins encoded in the human genome, the functions and structures of their transmembrane domains are much less understood than the water-soluble regions. A major hurdle in studying these transmembrane domains is the lack of appropriate exogenous agents that can be used as specific probes. Despite the daunting challenges, major strides have recently been made in targeting the transmembrane domains of a variety of membrane proteins. High affinity and selectivity have been achieved in model biophysical systems, membranes of bacteria, and mammalian cells.

Malignant melanoma and bone resorption

The cellular and humoral mechanisms accounting for osteolysis in skeletal metastases of malignant melanoma are uncertain. Osteoclasts, the specialised multinucleated cells that carry out bone resorption, are derived from monocyte/macrophage precursors. We isolated tumour-associated macrophages (TAMs) from metastatic (lymph node/skin) melanomas and cultured them in the presence and absence of osteoclastogenic cytokines and growth factors. The effect of tumour-derived fibroblasts and melanoma cells on osteoclast formation and resorption was also analysed. Melanoma TAMs (CD14+/CD51-) differentiated into osteoclasts (CD14-/CD51+) in the presence of receptor activator for nuclear factor kappaB ligand (RANKL) and macrophage-colony stimulating factor. Tumour-associated macrophage-osteoclast differentiation also occurred via a RANKL-independent pathway when TAMs were cultured with tumour necrosis factor-alpha and interleukin (IL)-1alpha. RT-PCR showed that fibroblasts isolated from metastatic melanomas expressed RANKL messenger RNA and the conditioned medium of cultured melanoma fibroblasts was found to be capable of inducing osteoclast formation in the absence of RANKL; this effect was inhibited by the addition of osteoprotegerin (OPG). We also found that cultured human SK-Mel-29 melanoma cells produce a soluble factor that induces osteoclast differentiation; this effect was not inhibited by OPG. Our findings indicate that TAMs in metastatic melanomas can differentiate into osteoclasts and that melanoma fibroblasts and melanoma tumour cells can induce osteoclast formation by RANKL-dependent and RANKL-independent mechanisms, respectively.