Rhabdomyosarcoma, although rare, is the most frequent soft tissue sarcoma in children and adolescents. It can present as a mass at nearly any site in the body, with most common presentations in the head and neck, genitourinary tract and extremities. The optimal diagnostic approach and management of rhabdomyosarcoma require a multidisciplinary team with multimodal treatment, including chemotherapy and local therapy. Survival has improved over the last decades; however, further improvement in management is essential with current 5-year overall survival ranging from 35% to 100%, depending on disease and patient characteristics. In the full patient journey, from diagnosis, staging, management to follow-up after therapy, the paediatric radiologist and nuclear physician are essential members of the multidisciplinary team. Recently, guidelines of the European paediatric Soft tissue sarcoma Study Group, the Cooperative Weichteilsarkom Studiengruppe and the Oncology Task Force of the European Society of Paediatric Radiology (ESPR), in an ongoing collaboration with the International Soft-Tissue Sarcoma Database Consortium, provided guidance for high-quality imaging. In this educational paper, given as a lecture during the 2022 postgraduate ESPR course, the multi-disciplinary team of our national paediatric oncology centre presents the journey of two patients with rhabdomyosarcoma and discusses the impact on and considerations for the clinical (paediatric) radiologist and nuclear physician. The key learning points of the guidelines and their implementation in clinical practice are highlighted and up-to-date insights provided for all aspects from clinical suspicion of rhabdomyosarcoma and its differential diagnosis, to biopsy, staging, risk stratification, treatment response assessment and follow-up.

The CLEFT-Q includes 12 independently functioning scales that measure appearance (face, nose, nostrils, teeth, lips, jaws), health-related quality of life (psychological, social, school, speech distress), and speech function, and an eating/drinking checklist. Previous qualitative research revealed that the CLEFT-Q has content validity in noncleft craniofacial conditions. This study aimed to examine the psychometric performance of the CLEFT-Q in an international sample of patients with a broad range of facial conditions. Data were collected between October 2016 and December 2019 from 2132 patients aged 8 to 29 years with noncleft facial conditions. Rasch measurement theory (RMT) analysis was used to examine Differential Item Function (DIF) by comparing the original CLEFT-Q sample and the new FACE-Q craniofacial sample. Reliability and validity of the scales in a combined cleft and craniofacial sample (n=4743) were examined. DIF was found for 23 CLEFT-Q items when the datasets for the two samples were compared. When items with DIF were split by sample, correlations between the original and split person locations showed that DIF had negligible impact on scale scoring (correlations ≥0.995). In the combined sample, RMT analysis led to the retention of original content for ten CLEFT-Q scales, modification of the Teeth scale, and the addition of an Eating/Drinking scale. Data obtained fit with the Rasch model for 11 scales (exception School, p=0.04). Person Separation Index and Cronbach alpha values met the criteria. The scales described in this study can be used to measure outcomes in children and young adults with cleft and noncleft craniofacial conditions.

The FACE-Q Craniofacial Module is a patient-reported outcome measure designed for patients aged 8 to 29 years with conditions associated with a facial difference. In part 1, we describe the psychometric findings for the original CLEFT-Q scales tested in patients with cleft and noncleft facial conditions. The aim of this study was to examine psychometric performance of new FACE-Q Craniofacial Module scales. Data were collected between December 2016 and December 2019 from patients aged 8 to 29 years with conditions associated with a visible or functional facial difference. Rasch measurement theory (RMT) analysis was used to examine psychometric properties of each scale. Scores were transformed from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) for tests of construct validity. 1495 participants were recruited with a broad range of conditions (e.g., birthmarks, facial paralysis, craniosynostosis, craniofacial microsomia, etc.) RMT analysis resulted in the refinement of 7 appearance scales (Birthmark, Cheeks, Chin, Eyes, Forehead, Head Shape, Smile), two function scales (Breathing, Facial), and an Appearance Distress scale. Person separation index and Cronbach alpha values met criteria. Three checklists were also formed (Eye Function, and Eye and Face Adverse Effects). Significantly lower scores on eight of nine scales were reported by participants whose appearance or functional difference was rated as a major rather than minor or no difference. Higher appearance distress correlated with lower appearance scale scores. The FACE-Q Craniofacial Module scales can be used to collect and compare patient reported outcomes data in children and young adults with a facial condition.

Introduction: Radiotherapy is essential for achieving and maintaining local control in head and neck rhabdomyosarcoma (HNRMS) patients. However, radiotherapy may cause outgrowth disturbances of facial bone and soft tissue, resulting in facial asymmetry. The aim of this study was to develop a method to visualize and measure facial asymmetry in HNRMS survivors using three‐dimensional (3D) imaging techniques.Methods: Facial deformity was evaluated in a multidisciplinary clinical assessment of 75 HNRMS survivors, treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT, n = 26) or Ablative surgery, MOulage brachytherapy, and REconstruction (AMORE, n = 49). Individual facial asymmetry was measured using 3D photogrammetry and expressed in a raw asymmetry index and a normalized sex–age–ethnicity‐matched asymmetry signature weight. Facial asymmetry was also compared between British and Dutch controls and between survivors and their matched controls.Results: Facial asymmetry was more pronounced with increasing age (P < 0.01) in British controls compared with Dutch controls (P = 0.04). Survivors developed more facial asymmetry than matched controls (P < 0.001). The clinical assessment of facial deformity correlated with the raw asymmetry index (r = 0.60, P < 0.001).Discussion: 3D imaging can be used for objective measurement of facial asymmetry in HNRMS survivors. The raw asymmetry index correlated with a clinical assessment of facial deformity. Comparisons between treatment groups seemed inappropriate given the differences in facial asymmetry between British and Dutch controls. In future studies, pretreatment images could act as matched controls for posttreatment evaluation.

Although survival after rhabdosarcoma treatment has improved over the years, one third of patients still develop locoregional relapse. This review aims to highlight developments pertaining to staging and local treatment of specific RMS tumor sites, including head and neck, chest/trunk, bladder-prostate, female genito-urinary, perianal, and extremity sites.

Background: Head and neck rhabdomyosarcoma (HNRMS) survivors are at risk to develop adverse events (AEs). The impact of these AEs on psychosocial well‐being is unclear. We aimed to assess psychosocial well‐being of HNRMS survivors and examine whether psychosocial outcomes were associated with burden of therapy.Procedure: Sixty‐five HNRMS survivors (median follow‐up: 11.5 years), treated in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom between 1990 and 2010 and alive ≥2 years after treatment visited the outpatient multidisciplinary follow‐up clinic once, in which AEs were scored based on a predefined list according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Survivors were asked to complete questionnaires on health‐related quality of life (HRQoL; PedsQL and YQOL‐FD), self‐perception (KIDSCREEN), and satisfaction with appearances (SWA). HRQoL and self‐perception scores were compared with reference values, and the correlation between physician‐assessed AEs and psychosocial well‐being was assessed.Results: HNRMS survivors showed significantly lower scores on PedsQL school/work domain (P ≤ 0.01, P = 0.02, respectively), YQOL‐FD domains negative self‐image and positive consequences (P ≤ 0.01, P = 0.04, respectively) compared with norm data; scores on negative consequences domain were significantly higher (P = 0.03). Over 50% of survivors negatively rated their appearances on three or more items. Burden of AEs was not associated with generic HRQoL and self‐perception scores, but was associated with disease‐specific QoL (YQOL‐FD).Conclusion: In general, HRQoL in HNRMS survivors was comparable to reference groups; however, survivors did report disease‐specific consequences. We therefore recommend including specific questionnaires related to difficulties with facial appearance in a systematic monitoring program to determine the necessity for tailored care.