Search

Background: The administration of adjuvant imatinib during 3 years is indicated after resection of primary localized GIST at high risk of recurrence, but many patients relapse afterwards., Methods: IMADGIST (NCT02260505) was a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase III study evaluating the maintenance of imatinib for 3 more years (6-year arm) compared with interruption (3-year arm) from the day of randomization, conducted in the French Sarcoma Group. The primary endpoint was intent-to-treat disease-free survival. Secondary endpoints included overall survival, time to imatinib resistance, response after imatinib reintroduction at relapse, and safety., Results: From 24 December 2014 to 4 April 2023, 136 patients aged ≥18 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2, with a localized gastrointestinal stromal tumor with an R0 or R1 surgery, and a risk of tumor recurrence ≥35% according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk classification were randomized in 14 centers. Sixty-five patients were randomized to the 3-year arm versus 71 to the 6-year arm. There were 68 males and females. Primary sites were gastric and small bowel in 60 (44%) and 64 (47%) patients, respectively. Respectively, 52 (38%) and 71 (52%) patients had a risk of relapse of 35%-70% and >70%. With a median follow-up of 55 months (interquartile range 46-59 months) after randomization, disease-free survival was significantly superior in the 6-year arm [hazard ratio: 0.40 (0.20-0.69), P = 0.0008]. Time to imatinib resistance, survival, adverse events, and quality of life were not different in the two arms., Conclusions: Three additional years of adjuvant imatinib reduces the risk of relapse in patients who have received 3 years of adjuvant imatinib with an acceptable tolerance., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: We investigated the impact of the implementation of a network of reference centers for sarcomas (NETSARC) on the care and survival of sarcoma patients in France since 2010., Patients and Methods: NETSARC (netsarc.org) is a network of 26 reference sarcoma centers with specialized multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs), funded by the French National Cancer Institute (INCa) since 2010. Its aims are to improve the quality of diagnosis and care of sarcoma patients. Patients' characteristics, treatments, and outcomes are collected in a nationwide database. The objective of this analysis was to compare the survival of patients in three periods: 2010-2012 (non-exhaustive), 2013-2015, and 2016-2020., Results: A total of 43 975 patients with sarcomas, gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), or connective tissue tumors of intermediate malignancy were included in the NETSARC+ database since 2010 (n = 9266 before 2013, n = 12 274 between 2013 and 2015, n = 22 435 in 2016-2020). Median age was 56 years, 50.5% were women, and 13.2% had metastasis at diagnosis. Overall survival was significantly superior in the period 2016-2020 versus 2013-2015 versus 2010-2012 for the entire population, for patients >18 years of age, and for both metastatic and non-metastatic patients in univariate and multivariate analyses (P < 0.0001). Over the three periods, we observed a significantly improved compliance to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) nationwide: the proportion of patients biopsied before surgery increased from 62.9% to 72.6%; the percentage of patients presented to NETSARC MDTBs before first surgery increased from 31.7% to 44.4% (P < 0.0001). The proportion of patients with R0 resection on first surgery increased (from 36.1% to 46.6%), while R2 resection rate decreased (from 10.9% to 7.9%), with a better compliance and improvement in NETSARC centers., Conclusions: The implementation of the national reference network for sarcoma was associated with an improvement of overall survival and compliance to guidelines nationwide in sarcoma patients. Referral to expert networks for sarcoma patients should be encouraged, though a better compliance to CPGs can still be achieved., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Conventional cytotoxic drugs are not effective in alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS). Immune checkpoint (programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1) inhibitors (ICIs) are promising drugs in ASPS. A worldwide registry explored the efficacy of ICI in ASPS., Materials and Methods: Data from adult patients diagnosed with ASPS and treated with ICI for advanced disease in expert sarcoma centers from Europe, Australia and North America were retrospectively collected, including demographics and data related to treatments and outcome., Results: Seventy-six ASPS patients, with a median age at diagnosis of 25 years (range 3-61 years), were registered. All patients received ICI for metastatic disease. Immunotherapy regimens consisted of monotherapy in 38 patients (50%) and combination in 38 (50%) (23 with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor). Among the 68 assessable patients, there were 3 complete responses and 34 partial responses, translating into an overall response rate of 54.4%. After a median follow-up of 36 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 32-40 months] since the start of immunotherapy, 45 (59%) patients have progressed on ICI, with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 16.3 months (95% CI 8-25 months). Receiving ICI in first line (P = 0.042) and achieving an objective response (P = 0.043) correlated with a better PFS. Median estimated overall survival (OS) from ICI initiation has not been reached. The 12-month and 24-month OS rates were 94% and 81%, respectively., Conclusions: This registry constitutes the largest available series of ASPS treated with ICI. Our results suggest that the ICI treatment provides long-lasting disease control and prolonged OS in patients with advanced ASPS, an ultra-rare entity with limited active therapeutic options., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Although frequent in NSCLC, patients with brain metastases (BMs) are often excluded from immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) trials. We evaluated BM outcome in a less-selected NSCLC cohort., Methods: Data from consecutive patients with advanced ICI-treated NSCLC were collected. Active BMs were defined as new and/or growing lesions without any subsequent local treatment before the start of ICI treatment. Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Multivariate analyses were performed by using a Cox proportional hazards model and logistic regression., Results: A total of 1025 patients were included; the median follow-up time from start of ICI treatment was 15.8 months. Of these patients, 255 (24.9%) had BMs (39.2% active, 14.3% symptomatic, and 27.4% being treated with steroids). Disease-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (ds-GPA) score was known for 94.5% of patients (35.7% with a score of 0-1, 58.5% with a score of 1.5-2.5, and 5.8% with a score of 3). The ORRs with BM versus without BM were similar: 20.6% (with BM) versus 22.7% (without BM) (p = 0.484). The intracranial ORR (active BM with follow-up brain imaging [n = 73]) was 27.3%. The median progression-free survival times were 1.7 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5-2.1) and 2.1 (95% CI: 1.9-2.5) months, respectively (p = 0.009). Of the patients with BMs, 12.7% had a dissociated cranial-extracranial response and two (0.8%) had brain pseudoprogression. Brain progression occurred more in active BM than in stable BM (54.2% versus 30% [p < 0.001]). The median OS times were 8.6 months (95% CI: 6.8-12.0) with BM and 11.4 months (95% CI: 8.6-13.8) months with no BM (p = 0.035). In the BM subgroup multivariate analysis, corticosteroid use (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.37) was associated with poorer OS, whereas stable BMs (HR = 0.62) and higher ds-GPA classification (HR = 0.48-0.52) were associated with improved OS., Conclusion: In multivariate analysis BMs are not associated with a poorer survival in patients with ICI-treated NSCLC. Stable patients with BM without baseline corticosteroids and a good ds-GPA classification have the best prognosis., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Phase I experts recommend revisiting dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) definition to include chronic and cumulative toxicities induced by new molecularly targeted therapies. Patient's assessment of late toxicities' tolerability is, however, unknown., Materials and Methods: A prospective survey on adverse events (AEs) tolerability on 23 National Cancer InstituteCommon Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event, Version 4 (NCI-CTCAE.v4) items was conducted at Gustave Roussy's Phase I department. Patients' maximum tolerability duration was recorded at baseline, during trial and at trial completion. Results were compared with the corresponding physicians' survey., Results: 52 patients enrolled in 27 Phase I trials between May 2014 and November 2015 completed 102 forms. At baseline, the most feared G2/G3 AEs were haematuria (74%), vomiting (71%) and hyperglycemia (64%)/dry mouth (94%), hyperglycemia (92%) and vomiting (92%). At trial completion, the most feared G2/G3 AEs were personality change (83.3%), haematuria (82%) and fever (80%)/dry mouth, fever and dizziness (100% each). Tolerability score did not differ over time. More previous treatments and occurrence of severe AEs were associated with better tolerability at study completion (p=0.0234 and p=0.0153, respectively, in multivariate analysis). Patient's tolerability differed from physician's assessment., Conclusion: AEs considered intolerable by patients are toxicities that directly impact their quality of life and differ from those feared by physicians or included in DLT definition. Patient-reported tolerability of AEs may help in optimising drug development., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.