Metastatic spine disease (MSD) and metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) are major causes of permanent neurological damage and long-term disability for cancer patients. The development of MSD is pathophysiologically framed by a cooperative interaction between general mechanisms of bone growth and specific mechanisms of spinal metastases (SM) expansion. SM most commonly affects the thoracic spine, even though multiple segments may be affected concomitantly. The great majority of SM are extradural, while intradural-extramedullary and intramedullary metastases are less frequently seen. The management of patients with SM is particularly complex and challenging, with multiple factors—such as the spinal stability status, primary tumor radio and chemosensitivity, cancer biological burden, patient performance status and comorbidities, and patient’s oncological prognosis—influencing the clinical decision-making process. Different frameworks were developed in order to systematize and support this process. A multidisciplinary, personalized approach, enriched by the expertise of each involved specialty, is crucial. We reviewed the most recent evidence and proposed an updated algorithmic approach to patients with MSD according to the clinical scenario of each patient. A flowchart-based approach offers an evidence-based management of MSD, providing a valuable clinical decision tool in a context of high uncertainty and quick-acting need.

Oral squamous cell carcinoma is the most common malignant epithelial neoplasm affecting the oral cavity. While surgical resection is the cornerstone of a multimodal curative approach, some tumors are deemed recurrent or metastatic (R/M) and often not suitable for curative surgery. This mainly occurs due to the extent of lesions or when surgery is expected to result in poor functional outcomes. Amongst the main non-surgical therapeutic options for oral squamous cell carcinoma are radiotherapy, chemotherapy, molecular targeted agents, and immunotherapy. Depending on the disease setting, these therapeutic approaches can be used isolated or in combination, with distinct efficacy and side effects. All these factors must be considered for treatment decisions within a multidisciplinary approach. The present article reviews the evidence regarding the treatment of patients with R/M oral squamous cell carcinoma. The main goal is to provide an overview of available treatment options and address future therapeutic perspectives.

The EORTC-1219/DAHANCA-29 trial investigated whether adding nimorazole to accelerated radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy improves locoregional control of locally advanced head and neck cancer. As part of the trial's RT quality assurance (RTQA) program, individual case review (ICR) of RT plans was performed to assess protocol compliance and treatment planning quality. Nineteen centers submitted RT plans for central review. The trial mandated prospective ICR (p-ICR) for the first five patients per institution, with subsequent plans reviewed retrospectively or as optional p-ICR. Plans were reviewed by radiation oncologists and medical physicists. Plans deemed unacceptable in p-ICR were resubmitted for review, whereas retrospective ICR (r-ICR) cases were reviewed once. Plans were categorized as "Acceptable as per protocol," "Acceptable variation," or "Unacceptable variation.". RT plans for all 194 randomized patients were reviewed, with 174p-ICRs and 44 r-ICRs. The delineation acceptability rate for p-ICR improved from 69% at the first submission to 93% at final review. p-ICR had an 18% higher acceptance rate (90%) compared to r-ICR (73%). Dose and plan acceptability remained high (97%) at both first and final submission, with minimal differences between p-ICR and r-ICR. P-ICR significantly improved CTV delineation quality, ensuring higher protocol compliance and treatment planning accuracy. p-ICRs are recommended for complex treatments, tailored to the performance of individual sites.

Appendicular soft tissue sarcoma (aSTS) is a group of highly heterogeneous tumors of mesenchymal origin for which standard care usually includes surgical resection with or without radiation therapy. The main goal of surgical treatment in aSTS is to achieve wide tumor resection with negative margins while promoting the best function possible for the affected limb. Orthoplastic surgery represents the concept of a multidisciplinary approach comprising a synergistic collaboration between orthopedic and plastic surgeons. The development of this philosophy allows us to push forward the concept of limb salvage surgery for sarcomas, even when dealing with extremely complex cases. Reconstruction techniques integrated with orthoplastic principles range from simple to highly complex surgeries. Vascularized auto- or allo-graft tissue transfers illustrate how far reconstruction options can go, allowing for repair of large soft tissue defects or even restoration of muscle function in key anatomic segments after oncological resection. The reported experience with orthoplastic philosophy in aSTS suggests that it is a feasible and reproducible strategy that can achieve limb salvage rates above 90%, optimal oncologic local control characterized by more than 95% of wide margin resection, and improved functional and esthetic results. Most patients with aSTS treated under orthoplastic principles present good-to-excellent postoperative Musculoskeletal Oncology Society (MSTS) scores, confirming the advantages of this comprehensive approach. While there is significant experience with the orthoplastic approach for trauma cases, the road still needs to be paved for musculoskeletal oncologic reconstruction. Nonetheless, the results are promising and could inspire a wider adoption of structured orthoplastic protocols for sarcoma patient care. Herein, the authors explore the current practice regarding the application of collaborative orthoplastic approaches for the management of appendicular soft tissue sarcomas, reporting on outcomes and elaborating on future trends.