Quo vadis Radiomics? Bibliometric analysis of 10-year Radiomics journey.

OBJECTIVES: Radiomics is the high-throughput extraction of mineable and-possibly-reproducible quantitative imaging features from medical imaging. The aim of this work is to perform an unbiased bibliometric analysis on Radiomics 10 years after the first work became available, to highlight its status, pitfalls, and growing interest. METHODS: Scopus database was used to investigate all the available English manuscripts about Radiomics. R Bibliometrix package was used for data analysis: a cumulative analysis of document categories, authors affiliations, country scientific collaborations, institution collaboration networks, keyword analysis, comprehensive of co-occurrence network, thematic map analysis, and 2021 sub-analysis of trend topics was performed. RESULTS: A total of 5623 articles and 16,833 authors from 908 different sources have been identified. The first available document was published in March 2012, while the most recent included was released on the 31st of December 2021. China and USA were the most productive countries. Co-occurrence network analysis identified five words clusters based on top 50 authors' keywords: Radiomics, computed tomography, radiogenomics, deep learning, tomography. Trend topics analysis for 2021 showed an increased interest in artificial intelligence (n = 286), nomogram (n = 166), hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 125), COVID-19 (n = 63), and X-ray computed (n = 60). CONCLUSIONS: Our work demonstrates the importance of bibliometrics in aggregating information that otherwise would not be available in a granular analysis, detecting unknown patterns in Radiomics publications, while highlighting potential developments to ensure knowledge dissemination in the field and its future real-life applications in the clinical practice. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This work aims to shed light on the state of the art in radiomics, which offers numerous tangible and intangible benefits, and to encourage its integration in the contemporary clinical practice for more precise imaging analysis. KEY POINTS: • ML-based bibliometric analysis is fundamental to detect unknown pattern of data in Radiomics publications. • A raising interest in the field, the most relevant collaborations, keywords co-occurrence network, and trending topics have been investigated. • Some pitfalls still exist, including the scarce standardization and the relative lack of homogeneity across studies.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy and outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with cancer: a joint analysis of OnCovid and ESMO-CoCARE registries.

BACKGROUND: As management and prevention strategies against COVID-19 evolve, it is still uncertain whether prior exposure to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) affects COVID-19 severity in patients with cancer. METHODS: In a joint analysis of ICI recipients from OnCovid (NCT04393974) and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) CoCARE registries, we assessed severity and mortality from SARS-CoV-2 in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with cancer and explored whether prior immune-related adverse events (irAEs) influenced outcome from COVID-19. FINDINGS: The study population consisted of 240 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between January 2020 and February 2022 exposed to ICI within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis, with a 30-day case fatality rate (CFR30) of 23.6% (95% CI 17.8 to 30.7%). Overall, 42 (17.5%) were fully vaccinated prior to COVID-19 and experienced decreased CFR30 (4.8% vs 28.1%, p=0.0009), hospitalization rate (27.5% vs 63.2%, p<0.0001), requirement of oxygen therapy (15.8% vs 41.5%, p=0.0030), COVID-19 complication rate (11.9% vs 34.6%, p=0.0040), with a reduced need for COVID-19-specific therapy (26.3% vs 57.9%, p=0.0004) compared with unvaccinated patients. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-fitted multivariable analysis, following a clustered-robust correction for the data source (OnCovid vs ESMO CoCARE), confirmed that vaccinated patients experienced a decreased risk of death at 30 days (adjusted OR, aOR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.69).Overall, 38 patients (15.8%) experienced at least one irAE of any grade at any time prior to COVID-19, at a median time of 3.2 months (range 0.13-48.7) from COVID-19 diagnosis. IrAEs occurred independently of baseline characteristics except for primary tumor (p=0.0373) and were associated with a significantly decreased CFR30 (10.8% vs 26.0%, p=0.0462) additionally confirmed by the IPTW-fitted multivariable analysis (aOR 0.47, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.67). Patients who experienced irAEs also presented a higher median absolute lymphocyte count at COVID-19 (1.4 vs 0.8 109 cells/L, p=0.0098). CONCLUSION: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination reduces morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 in ICI recipients. History of irAEs might identify patients with pre-existing protection from COVID-19, warranting further investigation of adaptive immune determinants of protection from SARS-CoV-2.

COVID-19 Sequelae and the Host Proinflammatory Response: An Analysis From the OnCovid Registry.

BACKGROUND: Fifteen percent of patients with cancer experience symptomatic sequelae, which impair post-COVID-19 outcomes. In this study, we investigated whether a proinflammatory status is associated with the development of COVID-19 sequelae. METHODS: OnCovid recruited 2795 consecutive patients who were diagnosed with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 infection between February 27, 2020, and February 14, 2021. This analysis focused on COVID-19 survivors who underwent a clinical reassessment after the exclusion of patients with hematological malignancies. We evaluated the association of inflammatory markers collected at COVID-19 diagnosis with sequelae, considering the impact of previous systemic anticancer therapy. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Of 1339 eligible patients, 203 experienced at least 1 sequela (15.2%). Median baseline C-reactive protein (CRP; 77.5 mg/L vs 22.2 mg/L, P < .001), lactate dehydrogenase (310 UI/L vs 274 UI/L, P = .03), and the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR; 6.0 vs 4.3, P = .001) were statistically significantly higher among patients who experienced sequelae, whereas no association was reported for the platelet to lymphocyte ratio and the OnCovid Inflammatory Score, which includes albumin and lymphocytes. The widest area under the ROC curve (AUC) was reported for baseline CRP (AUC = 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63 to 0.69), followed by the NLR (AUC = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.61) and lactate dehydrogenase (AUC = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.61). Using a fixed categorical multivariable analysis, high CRP (odds ratio [OR] = 2.56, 95% CI: 1.67 to 3.91) and NLR (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.10) were confirmed to be statistically significantly associated with an increased risk of sequelae. Exposure to chemotherapy was associated with a decreased risk of sequelae (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.91), whereas no associations with immune checkpoint inhibitors, endocrine therapy, and other types of systemic anticancer therapy were found. CONCLUSIONS: Although the association between inflammatory status, recent chemotherapy and sequelae warrants further investigation, our findings suggest that a deranged proinflammatory reaction at COVID-19 diagnosis may predict for sequelae development.

Interaction between thrombin potential and age on early clinical outcome in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Patients with Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) have haemostatic dysfunction and are at higher risk of thrombotic complications. Although age is a major risk factor for outcome impairment in COVID-19, its impact on coagulative patterns here is still unclear. We investigated the association of Endogenous Thrombin Potential (ETP) with thrombotic and haemorrhagic events according to different ages in patients admitted for COVID-19. A total of 27 patients with COVID-19-related pneumonia, without need for intensive care unit admission or mechanical ventilation at hospital presentation, and 24 controls with non-COVID-19 pneumonia were prospectively included. ETP levels were measured on admission. Patients were evaluated for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, transient ischemic attack, venous thromboembolism) and bleeding complications [according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) definition] during in-hospital stay. COVID-19 patients had similar ETP levels compared to controls (AUC 93 ± 24% vs 99 ± 21%, p = 0.339). In the COVID-19 cohort, patients with in-hospital MACE showed lower ETP levels on admission vs those without (AUC 86 ± 14% vs 95 ± 27%, p = 0.041), whereas ETP values were comparable in patients with or without bleeding (AUC 82 ± 16% vs 95 ± 26%, p = 0.337). An interaction between age and ETP levels for both MACE and bleeding complications was observed, where a younger age was associated with an inverse relationship between ETP values and adverse event risk (pint 0.018 for MACE and 0.050 for bleeding). Patients with COVID-19 have similar thrombin potential on admission compared to those with non-COVID-19 pneumonia. In younger COVID-19 patients, lower ETP levels were associated with a higher risk of both MACE and bleeding.

Clinical outcome with different doses of low-molecular-weight heparin in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

A pro-thrombotic milieu and a higher risk of thrombotic events were observed in patients with CoronaVirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Accordingly, recent data suggested a beneficial role of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), but the optimal dosage of this treatment is unknown. We evaluated the association between prophylactic vs. intermediate-to-fully anticoagulant doses of enoxaparin and in-hospital adverse events in patients with COVID-19. We retrospectively included 436 consecutive patients admitted in three Italian hospitals. Outcome according to the use of prophylactic (4000 IU) vs. higher (> 4000 IU) daily dosage of enoxaparin was evaluated. The primary end-point was in-hospital death. Secondary outcome measures were in-hospital cardiovascular death, venous thromboembolism, new-onset acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and mechanical ventilation. A total of 287 patients (65.8%) were treated with the prophylactic enoxaparin regimen and 149 (34.2%) with a higher dosing regimen. The use of prophylactic enoxaparin dose was associated with a similar incidence of all-cause mortality (25.4% vs. 26.9% with the higher dose; OR at multivariable analysis, including the propensity score: 0.847, 95% CI 0.400-0.1.792; p = 0.664). In the prophylactic dose group, a significantly lower incidence of cardiovascular death (OR 0.165), venous thromboembolism (OR 0.067), new-onset ARDS (OR 0.454) and mechanical intubation (OR 0.150) was observed. In patients hospitalized for COVID-19, the use of a prophylactic dosage of enoxaparin appears to be associated with similar in-hospital overall mortality compared to higher doses. These findings require confirmation in a randomized, controlled study.

Radiotherapy in COVID-19 patient affected by multiple myeloma: a case report.

In COVID-19 pandemic, cancer patients may be vulnerable for their immunological status and need of immunosuppressive anti-neoplastic treatments. Choosing the best treatment option in COVID-19 positive cancer patients is still a challenging issue. We report the case of a 62-year-old woman diagnosed with multiple myeloma and affected by COVID-19. After the diagnosis of multiple myeloma in January 2019, the patient underwent first line therapy followed by bone marrow autologous stem cell transplantation, achieving a complete response in September 2019. In March 2020, the patient showed intrathoracic progression of the disease, resulting in a severe dysphagia and concomitant positivity to SARS-CoV-2 swab test, cough, fever, and dyspnea related to the involvement of the lung parenchyma as shown by CT-scan. After her admittance to a COVID-19 dedicated inward, she was administered oral hydroxychloroquine and darunavir-cobicistat for 7 days with stabilization of her general clinical conditions. For the worsening of dysphagia, after multidisciplinary discussion, it was decided to deliver radiotherapy to the mediastinal and paravertebral mass with 8 Gy single fraction. After 5 days, her clinical conditions improved, with reduction of dysphagia. The CT confirmed a partial response with reduction of the mass of about 50%. Viral clearance was confirmed by triple negative search for SARS-CoV-2 on nasopharyngeal swabs, one month after first documentation of positivity. Unfortunately, the patient died three months later due to a pulmonary mycotic infection causing respiratory failure. To our knowledge, this case report describes the first experience of mediastinal radiotherapy in a COVID-19 patient affected by myeloma reported in the literature. In case of clinical indication, even in presence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, radiotherapy can be safely delivered and might be considered a treatment option as shown by our experience in this challenging case of intrathoracic myeloma.

Running a Radiation Oncology Department at the Time of Coronavirus: An Italian Experience.

Starting from Wuhan, China, SARS-CoV-2 has been a catastrophic epidemic involving many countries worldwide. After China, Italy has been heavily affected, and severe measures to limit the spread of the virus have been taken in the last weeks. Radiation oncology departments must guarantee optimal cancer treatments even in such a challenging scenario of an ongoing aggressive epidemic. Adopted preventive measures and recommendations are highlighted for patients, professionals, and clinical operations to minimize the risk of infection while safely treating patients with cancer.

A review of the international early recommendations for departments organization and cancer management priorities during the global COVID-19 pandemic: applicability in low- and middle-income countries.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by a new virus that has never been identified in humans before. COVID-19 caused at the time of writing of this article, 2.5 million cases of infections in 193 countries with 165,000 deaths, including two-third in Europe. In this context, Oncology Departments of the affected countries had to adapt quickly their health system care and establish new organizations and priorities. Thus, numerous recommendations and therapeutic options have been reported to optimize therapy delivery to patients with chronic disease and cancer. Obviously, while these cancer care recommendations are immediately applicable in Europe, they may not be applicable in certain emerging and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In this review, we aimed to summarize these international guidelines in accordance with cancer types, making a synthesis for daily practice to protect patients, staff and tailor anti-cancer therapy delivery taking into account patients/tumour criteria and tools availability. Thus, we will discuss their applicability in the LMICs with different organizations, limited means and different constraints.

Skull-base surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: the Italian Skull Base Society recommendations.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is highly contagious with devastating impacts for healthcare systems worldwide. Medical staff are at high risk of viral contamination and it is imperative to know what personal protective equipment (PPE) is appropriate for each situation. Furthermore, elective clinics and operations have been reduced in order to mobilize manpower to the acute specialties combating the outbreak; appropriate differentiation between patients who require immediate care and those who can receive telephone consultation or whose treatment might viably be postponed is therefore crucial. Italy was 1 of the earliest and hardest-hit European countries and therefore the Italian Skull Base Society board has promulgated specific recommendations based on consensus best practices and the literature, where available. Only urgent surgical operations are recommended and all patients should be tested at least twice (on days 4 and 2 prior to surgery). For positive patients, procedures should be postponed until after swab test negativization. If the procedure is vital to the survival of the patient, filtering facepiece 3 (FFP3) and/or powered air purifying respirator (PAPR) devices, goggles, full-face visor, double gloves, water-resistant gowns, and protective caps are mandatory. For negative patients, use of at least an FFP2 mask is recommended. In all cases the use of drills, which promote the aerosolization of potentially infected mucous particles, should be avoided. Given the potential neurotropism of SARS-CoV-2, dura handling should be minimized. It is only through widely-agreed protocols and teamwork that we will be able to deal with the evolving and complex implications of this new pandemic.

Running a Radiation Oncology Department at the Time of Coronavirus: An Italian Experience.

Starting from Wuhan, China, SARS-CoV-2 has been a catastrophic epidemic involving many countries worldwide. After China, Italy has been heavily affected, and severe measures to limit the spread of the virus have been taken in the last weeks. Radiation oncology departments must guarantee optimal cancer treatments even in such a challenging scenario of an ongoing aggressive epidemic. Adopted preventive measures and recommendations are highlighted for patients, professionals, and clinical operations to minimize the risk of infection while safely treating patients with cancer.