Search

Background: Rhabdomyosarcomas are the most common soft tissue sarcoma in children, and pediatric alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (ARMS) prognosis has improved based on cooperative studies. However, in adults, ARMS is significantly rarer, has poorer outcomes, and currently lacks optimal treatment strategies. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcome of an adult ARMS population with different front-line systemic chemotherapies and determine if any chemotherapy regimen is associated with improved survival. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective study of histologically confirmed fusion-positive ARMS patients over 18 years of age, who were treated at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) from 2004 to 2021 and received systemic chemotherapy. Descriptive clinical statistics were performed, including staging, front-line chemotherapy, multimodal therapy usage, response rates, and survival analyses. Results: 49 ARMS patients who received upfront chemotherapy were identified. Locoregional treatments included radiotherapy (RT) alone (29%, n = 14), surgery alone (10%, n = 5), or both (45%, n = 22). Median overall survival (OS) for the entire cohort was 3.6 years, and the overall response rate to systemic therapy was 89%. No chemotherapy regimen showed OS benefit, specifically analyzing the pediatric-based vincristine, actinomycin-D, cyclophosphamide (VAC) or adult-based vincristine, doxorubicin, ifosfamide (VDI) regimens, even when controlled for other clinical risk factors. Conclusion: In this single-center contemporary series, adult ARMS patient outcomes remain poor. There was no statistically significant OS difference in patients who did or did not receive adult or pediatric based ARMS regimens, although a high overall response rate to chemotherapy was seen across the entire cohort. Based on these observations, further randomized prospective studies are necessary to delineate which frontline chemotherapy regimen is most beneficial in this rare adult cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: A multidisciplinary group researched and defined criteria to describe a sarcoma specialist treatment center or network. The project is led by Sarcoma Patient Advocacy Global Network (SPAGN), involves patient groups from around the world and is supported by clinical specialists and leading researchers. The paper identifies Core Principles and Key Features which define a specialist center/network. They are supported by evidence and experience. A primary aim is that new patients and their families can identify a specialist center which can provide curative treatment. A secondary aim is that countries where specialist treatment is not yet available can identify what they have to achieve to meet that ambition. The Core Principles allow a center or network to attain accreditation as a Sarcoma Intelligent Specialist Network. The Key Features are more aspirational and are expressed in a way that allows local needs, legal considerations and budgetary pressures to be taken into account. This is the first time an expert multidisciplinary group has defined specialism in cancer treatment in a worldwide context. The management of sarcomas in specialist centers delivers significant benefits. In much of the world, specialists are not available, and the development of expertise is identified as a major need. However, the terms 'specialist' or 'expert' center are rarely defined. Our objective is to offer a definition for patient advocates and a tool for healthcare providers to underpin improving the care of people with sarcoma. SPAGN developed a discussion paper for a workshop at the SPAGN 2023 Conference, attended by 75 delegates. A presentation to the Connective Tissue Oncology Society (CTOS) and further discussion led to this paper. Core Principles were identified that underlie specialist sarcoma care. The primary Principle is the multi-disciplinary team discussing every patient, at first diagnosis and during treatment. Principles for optimal sarcoma management include accurate diagnosis followed by safe, high-quality treatment, with curative intent. These Principles are supplemented by Features describing areas of healthcare, professional involvement, and service provision and identifying further research and development needs. These allow for variations because of national or local policies and budgets. We propose the term 'Sarcoma Intelligent Specialist Network' to recognize expertise wherever it is found in the world. This provides a base for further discussion and local refinement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hypofractionated radiation therapy regimens should not be used as standard of care for localized soft tissue sarcoma.

Background: Moderately hypofractionated, preoperative radiotherapy in patients with soft tissue sarcomas (HYPORT-STS; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03819985) investigated a radiobiologically equivalent, moderately hypofractionated course of preoperative radiotherapy (RT) 15 × 2.85 Gy in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Here, the authors report longer term follow-up to update local control and report late toxicities, as well as functional and patient-reported outcomes., Methods: HYPORT-STS was a single-center, open-label, single-arm, prospective phase 2 clinical trial that enrolled 120 eligible adult patients with localized STS of the extremities or superficial trunk between 2018 and 2021. Patients received a 3-week course of preoperative RT followed by surgery 4-8 weeks later. End points and follow-up were analyzed from the date of surgery., Results: The median follow-up was 43 months (interquartile range, 37-52 months), and the 4-year local recurrence-free survival rate was 93%. Overall RT-related late toxicities improved with time from local therapy (p < .001), and few patients had grade ≥2 toxicities (9%; n = 8 of 88) at 2 years. These included: 2% grade ≥2 skin toxicity, 2% fibrosis, 3% lymphedema, and 1% joint stiffness. Four patients (3%) had bone fractures. Both functional outcomes, as measured by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Rating Scale (p < .001), and quality of life, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (p < .001), improved with time from treatment, and both measures were better in follow-up at 2 years compared with baseline., Conclusions: Long-term follow up suggests that moderately hypofractionated preoperative RT for patients with STS is safe and effective. Higher grade late toxicities affect a minority of patients. Late toxicities decrease over time, whereas functional outcomes and health-related quality of life seem to improve with more time from combined modality treatment., (© 2024 American Cancer Society.)