Search

Background: Reference centers (RCs) are a key point for improving the survival of patients with soft-tissue sarcomas (STS). The aim of this study was to evaluate selected items in the management of patients with STS, comparing results between RC and local hospitals (LHs)., Materials and Methods: Diagnostic and therapeutic data from patients diagnosed between January 2004 and December 2011 were collected. Correlation with outcome was performed., Results: A total of 622 sarcomas were analyzed, with a median follow-up of 40 months. Imaging of primary tumor preoperatively (yes vs. no) correlated with a higher probability of free surgical margins (77.4% versus 53.7%; p = .006). The provenance of the biopsy (RC vs. LH) significantly affected relapse-free survival (RFS; 3-year RFS 66% vs. 46%, respectively; p = .019). Likewise, 3-year RFS was significantly worse in cases with infiltrated (55.6%) or unknown (43.4%) microscopic surgical margins compared with free margins (63.6%; p < .001). Patients managed by RCs had a better 3-year overall survival compared with those managed by LHs (82% vs. 70.4%, respectively; p = .003). Perioperative chemotherapy in high-risk STS, more frequently administered in RCs than in LHs, resulted in significantly better 3-year RFS (66% vs. 44%; p = .011). In addition, patients with stage IV disease treated in RCs survived significantly longer compared with those in LHs (30.4 months vs. 18.5 months; p = .036)., Conclusion: Our series indicate that selected quality-of-care items were accomplished better by RCs over LHs, all with significant prognostic value in patients with STS. Early referral to an RC should be mandatory if the aim is to improve the survival of patients with STS., Implications for Practice: This prospective study in patients diagnosed with soft-tissue sarcoma shows the prognostic impact of reference centers in the management of these patients. The magnitude of this impact encompasses all steps of the process, from the initial management (performing diagnostic biopsy) to the advanced disease setting. This is the first prospective evidence showing improvement in outcomes of patients with metastatic disease when they are managed in centers with expertise. This study provides extra data supporting referral of patients with sarcoma to reference centers., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2018.)

Background Sorafenib is a potent targeted-therapy that blockades angiogenesis and has demonstrated activity against some sarcoma subtypes. Preclinical studies suggested that treatment with sorafenib plus cytotoxic agents could result in additive efficacy. Methods Patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma, with or without anthracycline pretreatment were included. Patients received oral sorafenib 400 mg twice daily starting on Day +2, ifosfamide 2.0 g/m2 iv infusion lasting 4 h on days 1, 2 and 3 with concurrent mesna 400 mg/m 2 every three weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity or up to a maximum of 6 cycles of ifosfamide (sorafenib could be continued until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity). Primary objective was progression-free rate (PFR) at 3 and 6 months; secondary objectives were overall response rate (ORR), Progression-free survival (PFS), Overall survival (OS) and safety. This article reports the phase II part of a phase I/II clinical trial. Results Thirty-five patients were enrolled. PFR at 3 and 6 months was 66% (95% CI 48-81) and 37% (95% CI 22-55). Six patients (17%) achieved partial response and 17 (49%) stable disease. Median PFS was 4.8 months (CI 95% 1.94-6.36) and overall survival 16.2 months (95% CI 8.75-NA). Conclusion Treatment with sorafenib plus ifosfamide achieved a significant clinical benefit with an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma resistant to anthracyclines, which warrants a more detailed study in randomized clinical trials.

Background: Gemcitabine plus sirolimus enhances apoptosis in vitro and increases anti-tumor efficacy in vivo in soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) models., Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the activity and toxicity of the combination of gemcitabine plus sirolimus in patients with STS after failure of standard chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: Advanced STS patients, previously treated with doxorubicin and/or ifosfamide, were included in this single-arm phase II study. Patients received gemcitabine 800 mg/m 2 intravenously (iv) at 10 mg/m 2 /min on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks plus sirolimus 5 mg daily orally (po). After enrolment of the first 12 patients, the study protocol was amended due to toxicity and the starting dose of sirolimus was reduced to 3 mg daily po. Archival tumor samples were analyzed for extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1 and 2 (ERK1/2) expression and correlated with outcome. The primary endpoint was progression-free rate (PFR) at 3 months., Results: From May 2012 to May 2013, 28 patients were enrolled at eight centers. PFR at 3 and 6 months was 44% and 20%, respectively, with 12 patients being free of progression at 3 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.85 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-2.97) and median overall survival (OS) was 9.2 months (95% CI 5.8-12.5). No responses were observed. The most common grade 3-4 hematologic toxicities were neutropenia (48%) and leukopenia (41%) and the most frequent grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities were infection (18.5%), transaminitis (15%), fatigue (11%), and pneumonitis (11%). ERK1/2 expression was significantly correlated with PFS (p = 0.026)., Conclusions: The combination of gemcitabine and sirolimus is an active treatment in STS. Further investigation is warranted. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01684449.

Purpose: Doxorubicin and trabectedin are considered active drugs in soft tissue sarcoma (STS). The combination of both drugs was hypothesized to be advantageous and safe on the basis of preclinical evidence and a previous phase I trial, respectively. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of trabectedin plus doxorubicin with doxorubicin as first-line treatment of advanced STS patients., Patients and Methods: In this open-label randomized phase II trial, the main end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Trabectedin 1.1 mg/m(2) in a 3-hour infusion plus doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) as the experimental arm and doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2) as the control arm were administered for up to six cycles. Translational research was planned to correlate the expression of apoptotic and DNA repair genes with clinical outcome., Results: In 115 randomly assigned patients, the median PFS was 5.5 months in the control arm and 5.7 months in the experimental arm (hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.71; P = .45) in the intent-to-treat analysis. The trial was stopped for futility after the interim analysis, because the results in the experimental arm showed the risk reduction for the main end point to be < 9.64%. The proportion of patients with grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia, asthenia, and liver toxicity was significantly higher in the experimental arm. FAS and p53 were shown to be prognostic factors for PFS (7.0 months if FAS+ and p53-; 3.4 months if FAS+/p53+ or FAS-/p53-; and 0.7 months if FAS- and p53+; P < .001) and for overall survival., Conclusion: Trabectedin plus doxorubicin did not show superiority over doxorubicin alone as first-line treatment of advanced STS. The prognostic role of apoptotic key genes, FAS and p53, was shown to be robust enough to continue this research line., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) constitute an uncommon and heterogeneous group of tumours, which require a complex and specialized multidisciplinary management. The diagnostic approach should include imaging studies and core needle biopsy performed prior to undertaking surgery. Wide excision is the mainstay of treatment for localized sarcoma, and associated preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy should be administered in high-risk patients. Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a modest improvement in survival in a meta-analysis and constitutes a standard option in selected patients with high-risk STS. In metastatic patients, surgery must be evaluated in selected cases. In the rest of patients, chemotherapy and, in some subtypes, targeted therapy often used in a sequential strategy constitutes the treatment of election. Despite important advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology of the disease, the advances achieved in therapeutic results may be deemed still insufficient. Moreover, due to the rarity and complexity of the disease, the results in clinical practice are not always optimal. For this reason, the Spanish Group for Research on Sarcoma (GEIS) has developed a multidisciplinary clinical practice guidelines document, with the aim of facilitating the diagnosis and treatment of these patients in Spain. In the document, each practical recommendation is accompanied by level of evidence and grade of recommendation on the basis of the available data.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are the most common mesenchymal soft tissue sarcoma of the gastrointestinal tract. Correct diagnosis with thorough use of pathologic and molecular tools of GIST mutations has been of the foremost importance. GIST are usually (95 %) KIT positive and harbor frequent KIT or platelet-derived growth factor receptor α-activating mutations. This deep molecular understanding has allowed the correct classification into risk groups with implications regarding prognosis, essential use in the development of targeted therapies and even response prediction to this drugs. Treatment has been evolving and an update to include lessons learned from recent trials in advanced disease as well as controversies in the adjuvant setting that are changing daily practice, is reviewed here. An effort from the Spanish Group for Sarcoma Research with investigators from the group has been undertaken to launch this third version of the GIST guidelines and provide a practical means for the different disciplines that treat this complex disease.

Patients with localized high-risk soft tissue sarcomas (STS) of the limbs and trunk wall still have a considerable metastatic recurrence rate of more than 50%, in spite of adjuvant chemotherapy. This drug-ceiling effect of chemotherapy in sarcoma setting could be explained, at least partially, by multidrug resistance (MDR) mechanisms. The aim of this study was to ascertain whether mRNA and protein expression of ABCB1 (P-glycoprotein), ABCC1 (MRP1), and GSTA1 (glutathione S-transferase pi) was prognostic in localized high-risk STS. Immunohistochemistry and reverse transcriptase-PCR studies were performed from biopsies at the time of diagnosis. Patients of this series were prospectively enrolled into a phase III trial that compared three versus five cycles of epirubicin plus ifosfamide. The series of 102 patients found 41 events of recurrence and 37 of death with a median follow-up of 68 months. In univariate analysis, variables with a statistically significant relationship with relapse-free survival (RFS) were: MRP1 expression (5-year RFS rate of 23% in positive cases and 63% in negative cases, P = 0.029), histology (5-year RFS rate of 74% in undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma and 43% in synovial sarcoma, P = 0.028), and ABCC1 expression (5-year RFS rate of 33% in overexpression and 65% in downregulation, P = 0.012). Combined ABCC1/MRP1 was the only independent prognostic factor for both RFS (HR = 2.704, P = 0.005) and overall survival (HR = 2.208, P = 0.029). ABCC1/MRP1 expression shows robust prognostic relevance in patients with localized high-risk STS treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy, which is the standard front line treatment in STS. This finding deserves attention as it points to a new targetable protein in STS.

Purpose: To assess the activity and toxicity of the combination of gemcitabine plus dacarbazine (DTIC) in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) in a randomized, multicenter, phase II study using DTIC alone as a control arm., Patients and Methods: Patients with previously treated advanced STS were randomly assigned to receive either fixed-dose rate gemcitabine (10 mg/m2/min) at 1800 mg/m2 followed by DTIC at 500 mg/m2 every 2 weeks, or DTIC alone at 1200 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The primary end point of the study was progression-free rate (PFR) at 3 months., Results: From November 2005 to September 2008, 113 patients were included. PFR at 3 months was 56% for gemcitabine plus DTIC versus 37% for DTIC alone (P = .001). Median progression-free survival was 4.2 months versus 2 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.86; P = .005), and median overall survival was 16.8 months versus 8.2 months (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.90; P = .014); both favored the arm of gemcitabine plus DTIC. Gemcitabine plus DTIC was also associated with a higher objective response or higher stable disease rate than was DTIC alone (49% v 25%; P = .009). Severe toxicities were uncommon, and treatment discontinuation for toxicity was rare. Granulocytopenia was the more common serious adverse event, but febrile neutropenia was uncommon. Asthenia, emesis, and stomatitis were the most frequent nonhematologic effects., Conclusion: The combination of gemcitabine and DTIC is active and well tolerated in patients with STS, providing in this phase II randomized trial superior progression-free survival and overall survival than DTIC alone. This regimen constitutes a valuable therapeutic alternative for these patients.

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) constitute a rare heterogeneous group of tumours that include a wide variety of histological subtypes, which require a multidisciplinary and, frequently specialized and complex management. Despite advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology of the disease, there are no consensus multidisciplinary recommendations about its diagnosis and treatment in our country. The objective of these guidelines is to provide practical therapeutic recommendations that may contribute to improve the therapeutic results of this disease in our environment. With this purpose, the Spanish Group for Research in Sarcomas (GEIS) held a meeting with a multidisciplinary group of experts for the study and management of sarcomas. The results of this meeting are compiled in this document, in which recommendations on diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of soft tissue sarcomas are included. In summary, these guidelines aim to facilitate the identification and management of STS for clinical practice in Spain., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier España, S.L. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess the progression-free survival (PFS) and antitumor response to standard-dose doxorubicin compared with sequential dose-dense doxorubicin and ifosfamide in first-line treatment of advanced soft tissue sarcoma., Patients and Methods: Patients with measurable advanced soft tissue sarcoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) < 2, between the ages 18 and 65 years, and with adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function were entered in the study. The stratifications were: ECOG PS (0 v 1), location of metastases, and potentially resectable disease. Patients were randomly assigned to either doxorubicin 75 mg/m(2) given as a bolus injection every 3 weeks for 6 cycles (arm A) or doxorubicin at 30 mg/m(2) per day for 3 consecutive days once every 2 weeks for 3 cycles followed by ifosfamide at 12.5 g/m(2) delivered by continuous infusion over 5 days once every 3 weeks for 3 cycles with filgastrim or pegfilgastrim support (arm B)., Results: Between December 2003 and September 2007, 132 patients were entered onto the study. Febrile neutropenia, asthenia, and mucositis were more frequent in the arm B. The interim preplanned analysis for futility allowed the premature closure. Objective responses were observed in 23.4% of assessable patients in arm A and 24.1% in arm B. PFS was 26 weeks in the arm A and 24 weeks in arm B (P = .88). Overall survival did not differ between the two therapeutic arms (P = .14)., Conclusion: Single-agent doxorubicin remains the standard treatment in fit patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma.

Background: Alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS) is a rare soft-tissue sarcoma that is unresponsive to chemotherapy. Cediranib, a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, has shown substantial activity in ASPS in non-randomised studies. The Cediranib in Alveolar Soft Part Sarcoma (CASPS) study was designed to discriminate the effect of cediranib from the intrinsically indolent nature of ASPS.Methods: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 2 trial, we recruited participants from 12 hospitals in the UK (n=7), Spain (n=3), and Australia (n=2). Patients were eligible if they were aged 16 years or older; metastatic ASPS that had progressed in the previous 6 months; had an ECOG performance status of 0-1; life expectancy of more than 12 weeks; and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function. Participants had to have no anti-cancer treatment within 4 weeks before trial entry, with exception of palliative radiotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1), with allocation by use of computer-generated random permuted blocks of six, to either cediranib (30 mg orally, once daily) or matching placebo tablets for 24 weeks. Treatment was supplied in number-coded bottles, masking participants and clinicians to assignment. Participants were unblinded at week 24 or sooner if they had progression defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1); those on placebo crossed over to cediranib and all participants continued on treatment until progression or death. The primary endpoint was percentage change in sum of target marker lesion diameters between baseline and week 24 or progression if sooner, assessed in the evaluable population (all randomly assigned participants who had a scan at week 24 [or sooner if they progressed] with target marker lesions measured). Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01337401; the European Clinical Trials database, number EudraCT2010-021163-33; and the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN63733470 recruitment is complete and follow-up is ongoing.Findings: Between July 15, 2011, and July 29, 2016, of 48 participants recruited, all were randomly assigned to cediranib (n=32) or placebo (n=16). 23 (48%) were female and the median age was 31 years (IQR 27-45). Median follow-up was 34·3 months (IQR 23·7-55·6) at the time of data cutoff for these analyses (April 11, 2018). Four participants in the cediranib group were not evaluable for the primary endpoint (one did not start treatment, and three did not have their scan at 24 weeks). Median percentage change in sum of target marker lesion diameters for the evaluable population was -8·3% (IQR -26·5 to 5·9) with cediranib versus 13·4% (IQR 1·1 to 21·3) with placebo (one-sided p=0·0010). The most common grade 3 adverse events on (blinded) cediranib were hypertension (six [19%] of 31) and diarrhoea (two [6%]). 15 serious adverse reactions in 12 patients were reported; 12 of these reactions occurred on open-label cediranib, and the most common symptoms were dehydration (n=2), vomiting (n=2), and proteinuria (n=2). One probable treatment-related death (intracranial haemorrhage) occurred 41 days after starting open-label cediranib in a patient who was assigned to placebo in the masked phase.Interpretation: Given the high incidence of metastatic disease and poor long-term prognosis of ASPS, together with the lack of efficacy of conventional chemotherapy, our finding of significant clinical activity with cediranib in this disease is an important step towards the goal of long-term disease control for these young patients. Future clinical trials in ASPS are also likely to involve immune checkpoint inhibitors.Funding: Cancer Research UK and AstraZeneca. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]