Search

Background The immunomodulator mifamurtide plus a chemotherapy regimen has been shown to significantly improve the outcome in non-metastatic osteosarcoma patients. We report the results of the addition of mifamurtide to chemotherapy in newly diagnosed patients with osteosarcoma. Methods A total of 36 children with osteosarcoma without detectable metastasis were treated between November 2010 and April 2018 at the Ankara University Department of Pediatric Oncology. Mifamurtide was added to the chemotherapy regimen in 17 patients while the remaining 19 did not receive mifamurtide. The probabilities of metastasis and overall survival were compared between the groups. Results The 43-month survival rate was 87.5% and 89.9% in the patients who received and did not receive mifamurtide, respectively (p=0.65). Common side effects of mifamurtide were chills and fever. The addition of mifamurtide in the high-risk group with ≤95% necrosis tended to decrease the probability of distant metastasis (36.4% vs. 58.3%) (p=0.39). The time to metastasis in the group with positive surgical margins (4 months in one patient in the non-mifamurtide group, 7 and 20 months in the mifamurtide group) was also longer in the mifamurtide group. During the 43-month follow up period, median time to metastasis was longer in the mifamurtide group (20 vs. 5 months). In addition, mifamurtide plus chemotherapy decreased the risk of metastasis in the cases with primary site relapse. Conclusions The addition of mifamurtide to chemotherapy might improve event-free survival by decreasing the probability of distant metastasis in bad histologic responders, and also by increasing the time to distant metastasis in the surgical margin positive group. Additional clinical studies are necessary to determine the long-term effects of mifamurtide on metastatic disease. .

Background: According to retrospective osteosarcoma series, ABCB1/P-glycoprotein (Pgp) overexpression predicts for poor outcomes. A prospective trial to assess a risk-adapted treatment strategy using mifamurtide in Pgp+ patients was performed. Methods: This was a phase 2, multicenter, uncontrolled trial including patients 40 years old or younger with nonmetastatic extremity high-grade osteosarcoma stratified according to Pgp expression. All patients received high-dose methotrexate, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MAP) preoperatively. In Pgp+ patients, mifamurtide was added postoperatively and combined with MAP for a good histologic response (necrosis ≥ 90%; good responders [GRs]) or with high-dose ifosfamide (HDIFO) at 3 g/m2/d on days 1 to 5 for a histologic response < 90% (poor responders [PRs]). Pgp– patients received MAP postoperatively. After an amendment, the cumulative dose of methotrexate was increased from 60 to 120 g/m2 (from 5 to 10 courses). The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS). A postamendment analysis was performed. Results: In all, 279 patients were recruited, and 194 were included in the postamendment analysis: 70 (36%) were Pgp–, and 124 (64%) were Pgp+. The median follow-up was 51 months. For Pgp+ patients, 5-year EFS after definitive surgery (null hypothesis, 40%) was 69.8% (90% confidence interval [CI], 62.2%-76.2%): 59.8% in PRs and 83.7% in GRs. For Pgp– patients, the 5-year EFS rate was 66.4% (90% CI, 55.6%-75.1%). Conclusions: This study showed that adjuvant mifamurtide, combined with HDIFO for a poor response to induction chemotherapy, could improve EFS in Pgp+ patients. Overall, the outcomes compared favorably with previous series. Mifamurtide and HDIFO as salvage chemotherapy are worth further study.

Highlights • Osteosarcoma outcomes have not improved since use of cytotoxic chemotherapy. • Addition of macrophage activators and interferon have been disappointing. • Combination therapies may be needed to exploit the role of the immune system., Osteosarcoma is a rare, primary tumour of bone. Curative treatment consists of multi-agent chemotherapy and complete surgical resection. Despite the use of multi-agent chemotherapy, the risk of recurrence is high. Survival outcomes for patients with osteosarcoma have not changed since the 1980′s. Based on biologic rationale, there has been interest in adding immunotherapies to upfront curative intent chemotherapy, including mifamurtide (a macrophage activator) and interferon. However, results to date have been disappointing. In the metastatic setting, checkpoint inhibitors alone have not proven effective. Ongoing translational work is needed to further understand which patients may benefit from immune-oncology approaches with standard cytotoxic chemotherapy.

Resumen Introducción: El osteosarcoma es el tumor óseo más frecuente en los niños. La supervivencia de los que no tienen metástasis al inicio del tratamiento no ha cambiado significativamente en la última década. Existen estudios que sugieren el beneficio del uso de nuevas moléculas como mifamurtida. Métodos: Se describieron las variables de interés en 8 pacientes menores de 18 años con osteosarcoma de alto grado no metastásico, que recibieron quimioterapia convencional y mifamurtida como adyuvante en 2 instituciones de Colombia entre 2014 y 2017. Resultados: La mayoría de los pacientes tenía afectación del fémur por osteosarcoma convencional. Todos se manejaron con quimioterapia pre y posquirúrgica. El 75 % de los pacientes fue llevado a salvamento de extremidad. En total se evaluaron 375 ciclos de mifamurtida a dosis de 2 mg/m2 de superficie corporal total. Se presentaron efectos adversos en 7 de los 375 ciclos administrados (1,87 %), en 4 de los 8 pacientes participantes en el estudio. Al finalizar el estudio, 6 de los 8 pacientes estaban vivos. Conclusiones: En los pacientes evaluados, el uso de mifamurtida fue bien tolerado; sin embargo, por el tipo de estudio, no se puede determinar si el uso de este medicamento tuvo impacto en la supervivencia. Abstract Introducción: Osteosarcoma is the most frequent bone tumor in children. Survival of patients who do not have metastases at the beginning has not changed in the last decade; there are studies that suggest the benefit of the use of new molecules such as mifamurtide. Methods: We described the variables of interest in 8 patients under 18 years of age with high-grade non-metastatic osteosarcoma, who received management with conventional chemotherapy and mifamurtide as adjuvant in 2 Colombian institutions between 2014 and 2017. Results: The majority of the patients had femoral compromise due to conventional osteosarcoma, all of them received management with pre and post-surgical chemotherapy, 75% of the patients were taken to limb salvage. In total, 375 cycles of mifamurtide were evaluated (2 mg/m2 of total body surface area). There were adverse effects in 7 of the 375 cycles administered (1.87 %); these occurred in 4 of the 8 patients participating in the study; at the end of the study, 6 of 8 patients were alive. Conclusions: In the patients evaluated, the use of mifamurtide was well tolerated, however due to the type of study it cannot be determined if the use of this medication had an impact on survival.

Introduction Advances in the treatment of osteosarcoma (OS) came in the mid-1970s, when adding chemotherapy to surgery significantly improved patient survival. OS outcomes have since plateaued, however, despite exhaustive clinical investigations. Area covered This review focuses on the most significant recent results of trials (in phases II and III) on localized and metastatic/relapsing OS and offers an overview of new targeted drugs. Expert opinion Recent findings confirm the MAP (methotrexate, doxorubicin and cisplatin) regimen as the gold standard for OS patients, also in metastatic cases, and the inefficacy of augmenting or modifying chemotherapy in poor responder patients. Immunotherapy and several tyrosine kinase inhibitors seem to be effective and promising in the treatment of OS. Optimizing the use of active drugs available by personalizing chemotherapies might prove important in the future. We urgently need bench-to-bedside research on OS. This will need to involve the extensive sequencing and immunoprofiling of all resected tumor tissue to find new therapeutic agents, especially for relapsing/metastatic patients. The low incidence of OS, its genomic complexity, and differences within and between tumors combine to complicate efforts to elucidate the biology of this disease. This means that we need to pool the resources of different groups studying OS and support translational research.

Uterine corpus endometrial carcinoma (UCEC) causes thousands of deaths per year. To improve the overall survival of patients with UCEC, there is a need to identify prognostic biomarkers and potential drugs. The aim of this study was twofold: the identification of prognostic gene signatures from expression profiles of pattern recognition receptor (PRR) genes and identification of the most effective existing drugs using the prognostic gene signature. This study was based on the expression profile of PRR genes of 541 patients with UCEC obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Key prognostic signatures were identified using various approaches, including survival analysis, network, and clustering. Hub genes were identified by constructing a co-expression network. Representative genes were identified using k-means and k-medoids-based clustering. Univariate Cox proportional hazard (PH) analysis was used to identify survival-associated genes. ‘cmap2’ was used to identify potential drugs that can suppress/enhance the expression of prognostic genes. Models were developed using hub genes and achieved a maximum hazard ratio (HR) of 1.37 (p = 0.294). Then, a clustering-based model was developed using seven genes (HR 9.14; p = 1.49 × 10−12). Finally, a nine gene-based risk stratification model was developed (CLEC1B, CLEC3A, IRF7, CTSB, FCN1, RIPK2, NLRP10, NLRP9, and SARM1) and achieved HR 10.70; p = 1.1 × 10−12. The performance of this model improved significantly in combination with the clinical stage and achieved HR 15.23; p = 2.21 × 10−7. We also developed a model for predicting high-risk patients (survival ≤ 4.3 years) and achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.86. We identified potential immunotherapeutic agents based on prognostic gene signature: hexamethonium bromide and isoflupredone. Several novel candidate drugs were suggested, including human interferon-α-2b, paclitaxel, imiquimod, MESO-DAP1, and mifamurtide. These biomolecules and repurposed drugs may be utilised for prognosis and treatment for better survival.

The spread of infectious diseases is rampant. The emergence of new infections, the irrational use of antibiotics in medicine and their widespread use in agriculture contribute to the emergence of microorganisms that are resistant to antimicrobial drugs. By 2050, mortality from antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria is projected to increase up to 10 million people per year, which will exceed mortality from cancer. Mutations in bacteria and viruses are occurring faster than new drugs and vaccines are being introduced to the market. In search of effective protection against infections, new strategies and approaches are being developed, one of which is the use of innate immunity activators in combination with etiotropic chemotherapy drugs. Muramyl peptides, which are part of peptidoglycan of cell walls of all known bacteria, regularly formed in the body during the breakdown of microflora and considered to be natural regulators of immunity. Their interaction with intracellular receptors launches a sequence of processes that ultimately leads to the increased expression of genes of MHC molecules, pro-inflammatory mediators, cytokines and their soluble and membrane-associated receptors. As a result, all subpopulations of immunocompetent cells are activated: macrophages and dendritic cells, neutrophils, T-, B- lymphocytes and natural killer cells for an adequate response to foreign or transformed antigens, manifested both in the regulation of the inflammatory response and in providing immunological tolerance. Muramyl peptides take part in the process of hematopoiesis, stimulating production of colony-stimulating factors, which is the basis for their use in the treatment of oncological diseases. In this review we highlight clinical trials of drugs based on muramyl peptides, as well as clinical efficacy of drugs mifamurtide, lycopid, liasten and polimuramil. Such a multifactorial effect of muramyl peptides and a well-known mechanism of activity make them promising drugs in the treatment and preventing of infectious, allergic and oncological diseases, and in the composition of vaccines.

Highlights • A report on the best treatment results on an osteosarcoma cohort. • There has been a lack of improvement in osteosarcoma treatment for the last four decades. • Mifamurtide is the only new drug against osteosarcoma licensed by the EMA but not by the FDA. • Oncologists have no consensus for mifamurtide use due to its expense., Purpose Conventional osteosarcoma is an orphan disease. Current treatment approaches include combining a three drug chemotherapy schedule and surgery. The 3- and 5-year event-free survival (EFS) in localized disease is roughly 65 and 60%, respectively. The registration study of mifamurtide reported survival benefit, but some methodological controversies have been insufficient for FDA market authorization in contrast to EMA. Methods prospective single centre survival analysis of a mifamurtide addition to conventional therapy in 23 patients over a 5.5 year enrolment period is reported and compared to a historical control of 26 patient with localized disease. Bias arising from observational methodology was addressed using Landmark analysis and time-dependent Cox models. Blood count dynamics were analysed during the treatment. Results The adverse event profile was as expected with no dose limiting toxicities. There were no local relapses observed, one patient died in the first complete remission due to doxorubicin cardiotoxicity, one patient had pulmonary metastatic relapse. The observed 3- and 5-year EFS was 87.4% (CI 72.4–100%) and 87.4% (CI 72.4–100%), progression free survival (PFS) was 92.9% (CI 80.3–100%) and 92.9% (CI 80.3–100%), overall survival was 94.1% (CI 83.6–100) and 80.7% (CI 58.3–100), respectively. Comparison to the historical control showed statistically significant better PFS for mifamurtide patients (Landmark analysis; p = 0.044). Risk of progression was 5-times lower for the mifamurtide group (Cox model; HR 0.21, p = 0.136). Only subtle differences in lymphocyte counts were observed across treatment. Conclusion the PFS benefit of mifamurtide is reported herein. The addition of mifamurtide could be considered as a best treatment option for localized osteosarcoma.

Background This report aims to discuss the mechanism of pleural and pericardial effusion related to mifamurtide which is an immunological agent used as adjuvant chemotherapy in osteosarcoma. Case Mifamurtide (2 mg/m 2 ) and European and American Osteosarcoma Studies (EURAMOS) protocol were used together intravenously after complete surgical resection. No side effects occurred except for fever after the first dose. However, pleural, pericardial effusion, and splenic nodule formation began 11 months after discontinuation of mifamurtide treatment. Pleural biopsy revealed a type 4 hypersensitivity reaction. We treated the patient with 1,5 mg per day colchicine. Pericardial effusion attacks and nodules in the spleen disappeared. The patient had a mild pleural effusion attack which has not yet repeated. Conclusion Mifamurtide, which activates macrophages, can also activate immunity with a stand by effect and cause a hypersensitivity reaction.

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficiency and side effects of mifamurtide in childhood osteosarcoma (OS). In total, 477 doses of 2 mg/m intravenous (IV) mifamurtide, along with paracetamol as a premedication, were given to 15 patients with primary nonmetastatic OS after complete surgical resection and to 3 patients with progressive OS. The most common side effects encountered in the patients were chills and fever (17/18). These reactions were observed in 4 patients during the administration of each dose, in a single patient during the last administration, and in the remaining 12 patients during the first or initial 2 administrations. Headache, myalgia, and arthralgia were observed in 2 patients during each infusion. Headache was observed in 1 patient with additional hearing loss during the first 2 infusions. One patient had back pain occuring within the first infusion. Of the 15 patients with primary nonmetastatic OS and treated with the addition of mifamurtide to chemotherapy, 13 showed a complete remission, and 2 patients were still under treatment with a complete remission. Of 3 patients with progressive disease, 2 died while the disease progressed further in the third case over a 51-month period. The 3-year overall survival and event-free survival distributions were 87.5% (mean follow-up time, 46.12; 95% confidence interval, 37.79-52.45 mo) and 75.6% (mean follow-up time, 31.30; 95% confidence interval, 26.54-36.06 mo), respectively. We consider that mifamurtide therapy is a safe and well-tolerated agent in childhood OS.

Drugs that are neither lipophilic nor suitable for encapsulation via remote loading procedures are generally characterized by low entrapment efficiencies and poor retention in liposomes. One approach to circumvent this problem consists in covalently linking a lipid to the drug molecule in order to permit its insertion into the vesicle membrane. The nature of the conjugated lipid and linker, as well as the composition of the liposomal bilayer were found to have a profound impact on the pharmacokinetic properties and biodistribution of the encapsulated drugs as well as on their biological activity. This contribution reviews the past and recent developments on liposomal lipid-drug conjugates, and discusses important issues related to their stability and in vivo performance. It also provides an overview of the data that were generated during the clinical assessment of these formulations. The marketing authorization of the immunomodulating compound mifamurtide in several countries as well as the promising results obtained with the lipid prodrug of mitomycin C suggest that carefully designed liposomal formulations of lipid-drug conjugates is a valid strategy to improve a drug's pharmacokinetic profile and with that its therapeutic index and/or efficacy.

Osteosarcoma mostly occurs during the period of rapid bone growth in children and adolescents as high-grade osteosarcomas. Current treatment recommended for high-grade non-metastatic and metastatic and/or relapsed osteosarcoma involves neoadjuvant multiagent conventional chemotherapy, followed by surgical resection of macroscopically detected tumor and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. However, residual micrometastatic deposits that develop following surgery have shown resistance to postoperative/adjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, there is a critical need for more effective and innovative therapeutic approaches such as immune stimulatory agents. The most extensively studied immune stimulatory agent in the treatment of osteosarcoma is mifamurtide. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and synthesize the evidence on the effectiveness of mifamurtide in addition to standard chemotherapy on survival outcomes.To present the best available evidence on the treatment of high-grade non-metastatic and metastatic osteosarcoma with mifamurtide in addition to standard chemotherapy.All populations of patients regardless of age, gender or ethnicity with high-grade, resectable, non-metastatic and metastatic osteosarcoma based on histological diagnosis.This review focused on intravenous infusion of either of the pharmaceutical formulations of mifamurtide (MTP-PE or L-MTP-PE) in addition to standard chemotherapy, and the comparator was chemotherapy alone.This review considered any experimental study design including randomized controlled trials, non-randomized trials and quasi-experimental studies.The primary outcomes of interest were event-free survival, overall survival and recurrence of osteosarcoma. Secondary outcomes that were considered included health-related quality of life and any mifamurtide-related adverse events.A search for published and unpublished literature in English was undertaken (seven published literature databases, four unpublished literature databases, and three government agency and organizational websites were searched). Studies published between 1990 to June 2016 were considered. A three-step strategy was developed using MeSH terminology and keywords to ensure that all relevant studies were included related to this review.The methodological quality of included studies was assessed by two reviewers, who appraised each study independently, using a standardized Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tool.Data was extracted from the studies that were identified as meeting the criteria for methodological quality using the standard JBI data extraction tool.Due to the heterogeneity of populations and interventions in available studies, meta-analysis was not possible and results are presented in narrative form.Three papers outlining two studies involving 802 patients evaluated the effectiveness of mifamurtide in addition of chemotherapy. Results indicated no significant difference in event-free survival between the addition of mifamurtide to standard chemotherapy regimen and chemotherapy alone, both in non-metastatic and metastatic osteosarcoma patients. There was a significant difference in progression-free survival favoring the addition of mifamurtide in pulmonary metastatic and/or relapsed osteosarcoma. There was no significant difference in overall survival between the addition of mifamurtide and chemotherapy alone in metastatic osteosarcoma; however there was a significant difference favoring the addition of mifamurtide in non-metastatic osteosarcoma patients. The addition of mifamurtide resulted in a significant difference in survival after relapse in pulmonary metastatic and/or relapsed osteosarcoma patients. Both studies reported on mifamurtide-related adverse events - the first was reported as toxicity which included haematological, hepatic, renal, gastrointestinal disorders, cardiac, rhythm and nervous system disorders, ear disorders and others (infection, fever; and performance status) in metastatic osteosarcoma patients. Results were similar across all combined treatment regimens. Although no statistical analysis was undertaken, the figures suggest there were no significant differences between the treatment regimens. In the other study, mifamurtide-related adverse events were reported as clinical toxic effects of mifamurtide in relapsed osteosarcoma, which included chills, fever and headache for the initial dose of mifamurtide, while for the subsequent doses of mifamurtide all patients reported toxicity as delayed fatigue.The available evidence on the effectiveness of mifamurtide in addition to a standard chemotherapy regimen for the treatment of high-grade osteosarcoma is limited and therefore no definitive conclusions can be made.

Tumor-associated macrophages and their alternative activation states together with cytokines and growth factors trapped in tumor microenvironment contribute to the progression of OS. In contrast to other tumor types, M2 polarized macrophages, reduce metastasis and improve survival in osteosarcoma patients. Mifamurtide is an immunomodulatory drug given together with standard adjuvant chemotherapy in high-grade osteosarcoma to improve outcome. Macrophages obtained from peripheral blood mononucleated cells of healthy donors and MG63 cells were cultured alone and together, and treated with Mifamurtide. We analyzed the effects of Mifamurtide on macrophage polarization and on MG63 proliferation, migration and differentiation, evaluating the expression of M1/M2 and osteoblast markers and molecules involved in metastasis and proliferation pathways. Our data suggest that Mifamurtide, switching macrophage polarization towards a TAM-like intermediate M1/M2 phenotype, may modulate the delicate balance between pro-inflammatory and immunomodulatory macrophage functions. Moreover, Mifamurtide may inhibit the cellular proliferation and induce the tumor cell differentiation, probably through the down regulation of pSTAT3, pAKT and IL-17R.

IntroductionThe controversial results on the mifamurtide efficacy associated with chemotherapy, issued from the American INT-0133-study, in localised osteosarcomas, and the underpowered analysis performed separately in metastatic patients, should be clarified to homogenise international use of this promising drug. The European Commission has granted a marketing authorisation to mifamurtide combined with postoperative chemotherapy in localised osteosarcomas but not in metastatic patients, while the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has denied this authorisation.Methods and analysisSarcome-13/OS2016 trial is a multicentre randomised open-label phase II trial evaluating the survival benefit of mifamurtide administered during 36 weeks in combination with postoperative chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, in patients >2 and ≤50 years with newly diagnosed high-risk localised or metastatic osteosarcoma. The main objective is to evaluate the impact on event-free survival (EFS) of mifamurtide on intention-to-treat population. The secondary objectives are to evaluate the impact of mifamurtide on overall survival, to evaluate the feasibility and toxicity of the planned treatment, to correlate biology/immunology with the mifamurtide efficacy/toxicity. With a total of 126 enrolled patients and 51 events, the power is 80% if mifamurtide is associated with an 18% improvement of the 3-year EFS (52%vs70%, equivalent to an HR=0.55), with a one-sided logrank test alpha=10%. As relevant historical data are available (aggregate treatment effect from the INT-0133 trial and individual data from the control group of the Sarcome-09/OS2006 trial), a Bayesian analysis is also planned.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the ‘Comité de Protection des Personnes Ile de France I’ (12/06/2018), complies with the Declaration of Helsinki and French laws and regulations, and follows the International Conference on Harmonisation E6 Guideline for Good Clinical Practice. The trial results, even if they are inconclusive, as well as biological ancillary studies will be presented at appropriate international congresses and published in international peer-review journals.Trial registration numberEudraCT 2017-001165-24,NCT03643133

Tumours are complex systems of genetically diverse malignant cells that proliferate in the presence of a heterogeneous microenvironment consisting of host derived microvasculature, stromal, and immune cells. The components of the tumour microenvironment (TME) communicate with each other and with cancer cells, to regulate cellular processes that can inhibit, as well as enhance, tumour growth. Therapeutic strategies have been developed to modulate the TME and cancer-associated immune response. However, modulating compounds are often insoluble (aqueous solubility of less than 1 mg/mL) and have suboptimal pharmacokinetics that prevent therapeutically relevant drug concentrations from reaching the appropriate sites within the tumour. Nanomedicines and, in particular, liposomal formulations of relevant drug candidates, define clinically meaningful drug delivery systems that have the potential to ensure that the right drug candidate is delivered to the right area within tumours at the right time. Following encapsulation in liposomes, drug candidates often display extended plasma half-lives, higher plasma concentrations and may accumulate directly in the tumour tissue. Liposomes can normalise the tumour blood vessel structure and enhance the immunogenicity of tumour cell death; relatively unrecognised impacts associated with using liposomal formulations. This review describes liposomal formulations that affect components of the TME. A focus is placed on formulations which are approved for use in the clinic. The concept of tumour immunogenicity, and how liposomes may enhance radiation and chemotherapy-induced immunogenic cell death (ICD), is discussed. Liposomes are currently an indispensable tool in the treatment of cancer, and their contribution to cancer therapy may gain even further importance by incorporating modulators of the TME and the cancer-associated immune response.

Background The Catalan Healthcare System (CatSalut) runs a specific program for drug evaluation (PHF) aimed to guarantee equity in the access to innovative medications. PHF recommendations determine the degree of priority and mechanism for drug invoicing: clinical criteria with direct invoicing; individualised criteria requiring approval by an ad-hoc committee, and exceptional use with no budget allocation. In 2017, the program incorporated an EVIDEM based matrix for Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis a standard procedure. In 2018, the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) was included in the matrix for oncological drugs. This study retrospectively checked the consistency of recommendations issued by the PHF for oncological drugs with the ESMO-MCBS score. Methods The recommendations of the PHF between 2011 and 2018 for oncological drugs were retrieved from reports and meeting minutes. Pivotal studies were scored using ESMO-MCBS version 1.1 for each drug. Matchings and discrepancies were summarised, and the debate reflected in the minutes of the committees was retrieved. Results Throughout the period 2011 to 2018 a total of 47 decisions were made on 57 oncology drugs evaluated. All PHF recommendations for drugs with ESMO-MCBS scores ≥ 4 were positive. Discrepancies were seen for 2 drugs in the curative setting (A score and exceptional use), 8 drugs in the non-curative (1-2 score and clinical criteria) and 1 in the curative setting (C and clinical criteria). The main criteria supporting the PHF decisions for these products are summarised in the table. Table: 1628O . Curative Trial quality Mifamurtide Safety concerns Ipilimumab Managed agreement Pembrolizumab Non curative Consolidated use Bevacizumab Aflibercept Subgroups Nintedanib Eribuline Managed agreement Everolimus Cabazitaxel None Trastuzumab Abiraterone Conclusions Factors explaining discrepancies between PHF recommendations and ESMO-MCBS were mostly related to the context of the appraisal. ESMO-MCBS standardises efficacy but does not consider quality of trials, added value to other drugs or other factors. It may not be a single formula to reach decisions, but may be useful to ensure that the size of effect is systematically approached in appraisals, and to complement a multiple criteria based system. Legal entity responsible for the study CatSalut. Funding Has not received any funding. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

The mortality and progression rates in osteosarcoma differ depending on the presence of metastasis. A decision model would be useful for estimating long-term effectiveness of treatment with limited clinical trial data. The aim of this study was to explore the lifetime effectiveness of the addition of mifamurtide to chemotherapy for patients with metastatic and nonmetastatic osteosarcoma. The target population was osteosarcoma patients with or without metastasis. A Markov process model was used, whose time horizon was lifetime with a starting age of 13 years. There were five health states: disease-free (DF), recurrence, post-recurrence disease-free, post-recurrence disease-progression, and death. Transition probabilities of the starting state, DF, were calculated from the INT-0133 clinical trials for chemotherapy with and without mifamurtide. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) increased upon addition of mifamurtide to chemotherapy by 10.5 % (10.13 and 9.17 QALY with and without mifamurtide, respectively) and 45.2 % (7.23 and 4.98 QALY with and without mifamurtide, respectively) relative to the lifetime effectiveness of chemotherapy in nonmetastatic and metastatic osteosarcoma, respectively. Life-years gained (LYG) increased by 10.1 % (13.10 LYG with mifamurtide and 11.90 LYG without mifamurtide) in nonmetastatic patients and 42.2 % (9.43 LYG with mifamurtide and 6.63 LYG without mifamurtide) in metastatic osteosarcoma patients. The Markov model analysis showed that chemotherapy with mifamurtide improved the lifetime effectiveness compared to chemotherapy alone in both nonmetastatic and metastatic osteosarcoma. Relative effectiveness of the therapy was higher in metastatic than nonmetastatic osteosarcoma over lifetime. However, absolute lifetime effectiveness was higher in nonmetastatic than metastatic osteosarcoma.

Osteosarcoma as a secondary malignancy after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is very rare. We present a case and review of 18 other cases reported to date. Our patient underwent HSCT for myelodysplastic syndrome at the age of 4 years. She developed osteosarcoma 13 years later. She underwent surgery after three courses of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by chemotherapy and mifamurtide. She has no evidence of disease 28 months after termination of chemotherapy. In 18 other cases of secondary osteosarcoma in the literature, 15 had received total body irradiation, eight had received alkylating agents, and six had received etoposide. The median interval from HSCT to the onset of osteosarcoma was 6.5 years (range 2.5-15.3), which confirms that children undergoing HSCT should be followed up for many years. In conclusion, osteosarcoma must be included in the differential diagnosis among solid tumors that may develop following HSCT.

Background Immunotherapies, specifically those based on immune checkpoint inhibitors, have shown promising activity in multiple tumor types. Other than mifamurtide (MEPACT®) for osteosarcoma approved by European Medicines Agency, there are no approved immunotherapies for sarcomas. Methods We analyzed medical records of patients with advanced sarcoma who were referred to Phase 1 clinic at MD Anderson and received an immunotherapy (checkpoint inhibitors, vaccines, or cytokine based therapies). Clinical parameters including demographics, clinical history, toxicity, and response were abstracted. Results Among 50 patients enrolled in immunotherapy trials (Bone 10; Soft-tissue 40) we found 14 different subtypes of sarcomas. Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) prognostic score was

Treatment for osteosarcoma, the most common malignant tumor of bone in children and adolescents, has not changed in decades. Treatment is multimodal, employing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by aggressive and complete surgical resection to achieve negative margins and a prolonged course of adjuvant chemotherapy. The primary tumor is usually successfully managed via surgery, but micrometastases are likely present in most patients at diagnosis. Death is the result of tumor recurrence in the lungs or more rarely in other bones despite aggressive treatment regimens and is likely attributable to innate resistance to chemotherapy. Better therapies are desperately needed. The three most active agents-high-dose methotrexate, doxorubicin, and cisplatin-commonly referred to as "MAP," form the backbone of therapy. After 2 cycles of MAP, surgical resection is performed of all sites of disease if possible. Histologic response following neoadjuvant chemotherapy is prognostic in non-metastatic osteosarcoma, but augmentation of adjuvant therapy for poor responders with additional agents (ifosfamide, etoposide) has not improved outcome. Inclusion of immunotherapy into treatment regimens is promising. Specifically, liposome-encapsulated muramyl tripeptide phosphatidylethanolamine (L-MTP-PE), a macrophage and monocyte activator, improved 10-year overall survival for patients with localized disease, with a similar pattern of response in patients with metastatic disease. L-MTP-PE (mifamurtide) is approved and in widespread use in Europe and elsewhere but has not been approved for use by the Federal Drug Administration in the USA. Identifying novel targeted therapies to improve outcomes for patients with osteosarcoma remains an area of active research.

For the past 30 years, improvements in the survival of patients with osteosarcoma have been mostly incremental. Despite evidence of genomic instability and a high frequency of chromothripsis and kataegis, osteosarcomas carry few recurrent targetable mutations, and trials of targeted agents have been generally disappointing. Bone has a highly specialized immune environment and many immune signalling pathways are important in bone homeostasis. The success of the innate immune stimulant mifamurtide in the adjuvant treatment of non-metastatic osteosarcoma suggests that newer immune-based treatments, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, may substantially improve disease outcome.

In the absence of long-term clinical trials that compare mifamurtide plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy only for treatment of osteosarcoma, decision analysis is a useful tool that helps to determine the optimal treatment strategy. We analyzed the differences between mifamurtide plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy only by using modeling to determine the treatment approach that results in longer life expectancy among children with osteosarcoma. We used the Markov model to compare the expected lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) between mifamurtide plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy only. Our target cohort consisted of children with osteosarcoma. The starting age of the cohort was 12 years and cycle length was 3 months. The transition probabilities for each disease state and death were calculated using overall survival or progression free survival data from randomized controlled trials. Utility weights from scenario-based survey for 303 Korean general populations were applied to the model. Based on the base case analysis, the incremental benefit analysis indicated that mifamurtide plus chemotherapy resulted in an incremental QALY increase of 1.57 (a relative increase of 16.3 % in QALY expectancy) compared to chemotherapy only. Also, the incremental life years gained (LYG) from mifamurtide plus chemotherapy was 1.96 on comparison with chemotherapy only; this is a relative increase of 15.7 % in LYG expectancy. The decision analysis model indicated that mifamurtide plus chemotherapy was associated with a substantially longer survival than chemotherapy only among children with osteosarcoma during their lifetime.