Adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients seem to be in a sort of no-man's land, halfway between the two different worlds of pediatric and adult medical oncology and bearing the brunt, in terms of inclusion in clinical trials and quality of professional care, of the lack of integration between these two worlds. This article discusses the different organization models of care used in pediatric oncology (mainly family-focused) and in adult medical oncology (disease-focused). There is a growing awareness that these models are not ideally suited to the complex needs of AYA patients, which require a different, new, patient-focused multidisciplinary approach. A comprehensive, multipronged effort is required to bridge the gap in the care of AYA patients, with the ultimate challenge of creating a new discipline, AYA oncology. In this article, we review the experiences of AYA oncology programs in Europe, North America, and Australia, focusing on similarities and differences in strategy, as well as the major challenges and opportunities faced by these programs. Among the most important factors for the successful establishment of an AYA oncology service are the degree of engagement of both pediatric and adult medical oncologists, the philanthropic support of powerful charities, and the role of dedicated professionals across a range of disciplines in driving the development of services for AYA patients.

This prospective study stratified patients by surgical resection (complete = NED vs incomplete = ED) and centrally reviewed histology (World Health Organization [WHO] grade II vs III). WHO grade II/NED patients received focal radiotherapy (RT) up to 59.4 Gy with 1.8 Gy/day. Grade III/NED received 4 courses of VEC (vincristine, etoposide, cyclophosphamide) after RT. ED patients received 1–4 VEC courses, second-look surgery, and 59.4 Gy followed by an 8-Gy boost in 2 fractions on still measurable residue. NED children aged 1–3 years with grade II tumors could receive 6 VEC courses alone. From January 2002 to December 2014, one hundred sixty consecutive children entered the protocol (median age, 4.9 y; males, 100). Follow-up was a median of 67 months. An infratentorial origin was identified in 110 cases. After surgery, 110 patients were NED, and 84 had grade III disease. Multiple resections were performed in 46/160 children (28.8%). A boost was given to 24/40 ED patients achieving progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates of 58.1% and 68.7%, respectively, in this poor prognosis subgroup. For the whole series, 5-year PFS and OS rates were 65.4% and 81.1%, with no toxic deaths. On multivariable analysis, NED status and grade II were favorable for OS, and for PFS grade II remained favorable. In a multicenter collaboration, this trial accrued the highest number of patients published so far, and results are comparable to the best single-institution series. The RT boost, when feasible, seemed effective in improving prognosis. Even after multiple procedures, complete resection confirmed its prognostic strength, along with tumor grade. Biological parameters emerging in this series will be the object of future correlatives and reports.

The objective of this guideline is to aid clinicians in making individual salvage treatment plans for pediatric and adolescent patients with first relapse or refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). While salvage with standard dose chemotherapy followed by high dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant is often considered the standard of care in adult practice, pediatric practice adopts a more individualized risk stratified and response adapted approach to salvage treatment with greater use of non‐transplant salvage. Here, we present on behalf of the EuroNet Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma group, evidence and consensus‐based guidelines for standardized diagnostic, prognostic and response procedures to allocate children and adolescents with R/R cHL to stratified salvage treatments.

Background: EBV produces miRNAs with important functions in cancer growth, tumor invasion and host immune surveillance. The discovery of EBV miR-BARTs is recent, and most of their functions are still unknown. Nonetheless, some new studies underline their key roles in EBV-associated malignancies.Main body: In EBV-associated tumors, the expression profile of miR-BARTs varies according to the cell type, autophagic process and signals received from the tumor microenvironment. By the same way of interest is the interaction between tumor cells and the tumor environment by the release of selected EBV miR-BARTs in addition to the tumor proteins trough tumor exosomes.Conclusion: In this review, we discuss new findings regarding EBV miR-BARTs in Hodgkin lymphoma and gastric cancer. The recent discovery that miRNAs are released by exosomes, including miR-BARTs, highlights the importance of tumor and microenvironment interplay with more specific effects on the host immune response.