Search

Retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcomas (RPS) are rare tumors. Surgery is the mainstay of curative therapy, but local recurrence is common. No recommendations concerning the best management of recurring disease have been developed so far. Although every effort should be made to optimize the initial approach, recommendations to treat recurring RPS will be helpful to maximize disease control at recurrence. An RPS transatlantic working group was established in 2013. The goals of the group were to share institutional experiences, build large multi-institutional case series, and develop consensus documents on the approach to this difficult disease. The outcome of this document applies to recurrent RPS that is nonvisceral in origin. Included are sarcomas of major veins, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma of psoas, ureteric leiomyosarcoma (LMS). Excluded are desmoids-type fibromatosis, angiomyolipoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumors, sarcomas arising from the gut or its mesentery, uterine LMS, prostatic sarcoma, paratesticular/spermatic cord sarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, alveolar/embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma, sarcoma arising from teratoma, carcinosarcoma, sarcomatoid carcinoma, clear cell sarcoma, radiation-induced sarcoma, paraganglioma, and malignant pheochromocytoma. Recurrent RPS management was evaluated from diagnosis to follow-up. It is a rare and complex malignancy that is best managed by an experienced multidisciplinary team in a specialized referral center. The best chance of cure is at the time of primary presentation, but some patients may experience prolonged disease control also at recurrence, when the approach is optimized and follows the recommendations contained herein. International collaboration is critical for adding to the present knowledge. A transatlantic prospective registry has been established.

While they account for one-fifth of new cancer cases, rare cancers are difficult to study. A higher than average degree of uncertainty should be accommodated for clinical as well as for population-based decision making. Rules of rational decision making in conditions of uncertainty should be rigorously followed and would need widely informative clinical trials. In principle, any piece of new evidence would need to be exploited in rare cancers. Methodologies to explicitly weigh and combine all the available evidence should be refined, and the Bayesian logic can be instrumental to this end. Likewise, Bayesian-design trials may help optimize the low number of patients liable to be enrolled in clinical studies on rare cancers, as well as adaptive trials in general, with their inherent potential of flexibility when properly applied. While clinical studies are the mainstay to test hypotheses, the potential of electronic patient records should be exploited to generate new hypotheses, to create external controls for future studies (when internal controls are unpractical), to study effectiveness of new treatments in real conditions. Framework study protocols in specific rare cancers to stepwisely test sets of new agents, as from the early post-phase I development stage, should be encouraged. Also the compassionate and the off-label settings should be exploited to generate new evidence, and flexible regulatory innovations such as adaptive licensing could convey new agents early to rare cancer patients, while generating evidence. Though validation of surrogate end points is problematic in rare cancers, the use of an updated notion of tumor response may be of great value in the single patient to optimize the use of therapies, all the more the new ones. Disease-based communities, involving clinicians and patients, should be regularly consulted by regulatory bodies when setting their policies on drug approval and reimbursement in specific rare cancers ., While they account for one-fifth of new cancer cases, rare cancers are difficult to study. A higher than average degree of uncertainty should be accommodated for clinical as well as for population-based decision making. Rules of rational decision making in conditions of uncertainty should be rigorously followed and would need widely informative clinical trials. In principle, any piece of new evidence would need to be exploited in rare cancers. Methodologies to explicitly weigh and combine all the available evidence should be refined, and the Bayesian logic can be instrumental to this end. Likewise, Bayesian-design trials may help optimize the low number of patients liable to be enrolled in clinical studies on rare cancers, as well as adaptive trials in general, with their inherent potential of flexibility when properly applied. While clinical studies are the mainstay to test hypotheses, the potential of electronic patient records should be exploited to generate new hypotheses, to create external controls for future studies (when internal controls are unpractical), to study effectiveness of new treatments in real conditions. Framework study protocols in specific rare cancers to sequentially test sets of new agents, as from the early post-phase I development stage, should be encouraged. Also the compassionate and the off-label settings should be exploited to generate new evidence, and flexible regulatory innovations such as adaptive licensing could convey new agents early to rare cancer patients, while generating evidence. Though validation of surrogate end points is problematic in rare cancers, the use of an updated notion of tumor response may be of great value in the single patient to optimize the use of therapies, all the more the new ones. Disease-based communities, involving clinicians and patients, should be regularly consulted by regulatory bodies when setting their policies on drug approval and reimbursement in specific rare cancers.

Background. Adrenal cortical carcinoma is an uncommon tumor with a poor prognosis. The low incidence of this tumor makes it difficult to achieve reliable data on clinical manifestations, natural history, and the impact of therapies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate such aspects in a large series. Methods. A retrospective series of 129 cases (55 men and 74 women, mean age of 49 years) was collected from 18 surgical institutions. AT the time of diagnosis 45.7% of patients had endocrine symptoms. One hundred twenty-four patients underwent surgery, which was considered curative in 91 cases and palliative in 33. Sixty-three patients had local disease, 48 had regional disease, and 43 had distant metastases. Results. This study confirmed a higher incidence in the 40- to 50-year-old population with a female prevalence; hormonal hyperincretion was more common in women, but it was not caused by advanced disease. The overall 5-year survival rate was 35%. Tumor stage and curative resection affected prognosis significantly. The influence of gender, side, age, and hormonal function has not been confirmed. Adjuvant therapies were ineffective in prolonging survival. Reoperated patients experienced better survival (mean, 41.5 months) than nonreoperated cases (mean, 15.6 months). Conclusions. The poor prognosis of adrenal cortical carcinoma may be imroved by early diagnosis and complete resection. Radical surgery is the sole effective therapy, particularly in early stages. Surgical treatment of recurrence seems to improve survival and should be attempted systematically. Adjuvant therapies obtained contrasting results, and their role should be evaluated in prospective multicentric trials.