Inequality factors in access to early-phase clinical trials in oncology in France: results of the EGALICAN-2 study.

BACKGROUND: Investigation of the disparities in the access to experimental treatment in early-phase clinical trials is lacking. The objective of the EGALICAN-2 study was to identify the factors underpinning such inequalities. METHODS: A national prospective survey was conducted in 11 early-phase clinical trial centers (CLIP2) certified by the French National Cancer Institute. Sociodemographic, socioeconomic and medical data were collected. Univariate logistic regression models were carried out to estimate odds ratios and 90% confidence intervals associated with the effect of each study variable. A multivariate logistic regression model was built to explore the independent factors associated with the administration of the experimental treatment (C1D1). A post hoc analysis was carried out excluding female cancer patients. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2016, 1355 patients referred from 11 CLIP2 centers in France were included in the study. Eight hundred and forty-eight patients received C1D1 (73%) and 320 patients (27%) were screening failure. Median age was 58 years (range 17-97 years) and 667 patients (54%) were female. Most patients had a metastatic disease (n = 751, 87%). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the significant independent factors associated with C1D1 were male sex, initial care received in a hospital with an early-phase unit and living in wealthy metropolitan areas (P values <0.05). In the post hoc analysis, the sex factor was no longer significant [odds ratio = 1.21 (95% confidence interval 0.86-1.70), P value = 0.271]. CONCLUSIONS: This study investigated the factors producing social inequalities in the context of early-phase clinical trials in oncology. Our research highlights factors of sex, care pathway and geographic location. Gynecological cancer was found to impact C1D1 significantly, unlike breast cancer. The results of this study should contribute to improve patient access to early-phase clinical trials.

Epithelioid hemangio-endothelioma (EHE) in NETSARC: The nationwide series of 267 patients over 12 years.

EPITHELIOID HEMANGIOENDOTHELIOMA: A NATIONWIDE STUDY: Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is an ultrarare sarcoma whose natural history and treatment is not well defined. We report on the presentation and outcome of 267 patients with EHE in the NETSARC+ network since 2010 in France. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NETSARC (netsarc.org) is a network of 26 reference sarcoma centres with specialised multidisciplinary tumour boards (MDTB), funded by the French National Cancer Institute (NCI), Institut National du Cancer (INCA). Since 2010, presentation to an MDTB and second pathological review are mandatory for sarcoma patients. Patients' characteristics are collected in a nationwide database regularly monitored with stable incidence since 2013. The characteristics of patients with EHE at diagnosis are presented as well as progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and outcome under treatment. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-seven patients with EHE were included in the NETSARC+ database since 2010. Median age in the series was 51 (range 10-90) years, 58% were women. Median tumour size was 37 mm (4-220). Forty-eight percent, 42%, and 10% were visceral, soft parts, or bone primaries. The most frequent sites were liver (28%), lung (13%). 40% were reported to have systemic (i.e. multifocal or metastatic disease) at diagnosis. With a median follow-up of 20 months, OS and PFS rates at 24 months were 82% and 67%, with 10-year projected OS and PFS of 62% and 21% respectively. Male and M+ patients at diagnosis had a significantly worse OS, but not PFS. Local treatment was associated with a favourable survival in localised but not in patients with advanced stage at diagnosis. For 23 patients receiving medical treatment, PFS and OS were 50.2% and 33.2% at 60 months were respectively. CONCLUSIONS: EHE is a frequently metastatic sarcoma at diagnosis with a unique natural history. This study shows in a nationwide series over 12 years that most patients progressed but are still alive at 10 years, both in localised and metastatic stages.

MOVIE: a phase I, open-label, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and tolerability of metronomic vinorelbine combined with durvalumab plus tremelimumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) agents have only moderate antitumor activity in some advanced solid tumors (AST), including breast cancer (BC), prostate cancer (PC), cervical cancer (CC), and head and neck cancer (HNC). Combining anti-PD-L1 with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein (CTLA) and chemotherapy may significantly improve efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MOVIE is a multicohort phase I/II study examining the combination of anti-PD-L1 durvalumab (Durv; 1500 mg IV Q4W) plus anti-CTLA tremelimumab (Trem; 75 mg IV Q4W) with metronomic vinorelbine (MVino; 20-40 mg orally daily) in various AST resistant to conventional therapies. The primary objective of the phase I part was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose for phase II (RP2D). RESULTS: Among the 14 patients enrolled during phase I, including 13 women and 1 man, 9 had BC, 1 PC, 2 CC, and 2 miscellaneous cancers with high mutational loads. Median age was 53 years. A total of 12 patients were assessable for the dose-escalation part in which only one dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed [one neutropenia without fever, grade (G) 4]. Two (14.3%), four (28.6%), and four (28.6%) patients had G ≥3 adverse events (AEs) related to MVino, Durv, and Trem, respectively. Treatment-related events included mostly clinical AEs with asthenia (eight G2; three G3), colitis (one G2, one G3), diarrhea (one G3), nausea (two G2), dry skin (two G2), maculopapular rash (one G3), and hyperthyroidism (three G2). No toxic death was reported. Preliminary data showed one patient (CC) who presented a complete response and four patients with stable disease (SD). CONCLUSIONS: MTD was not reached and dose level 2 (MVino 40 mg, Durv 1500 mg, Trem 75 mg) was selected as RP2D. The safety profile of the combination was manageable and consistent with previous reports of Trem + Durv or MVino. Phase II is currently ongoing in BC, PC, CC, HNC, and miscellaneous cohorts.

Two phase I studies of BI 836880, a vascular endothelial growth factor/angiopoietin-2 inhibitor, administered once every 3 weeks or once weekly in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: BI 836880 is a humanized bispecific nanobody® that inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor and angiopoietin-2. Here, we report results from two phase I, nonrandomized, dose-escalation studies (NCT02674152 and NCT02689505; funded by Boehringer Ingelheim) evaluating BI 836880 in patients with confirmed locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors, refractory to standard therapy, or for which standard therapy was ineffective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and adequate organ function received escalating intravenous doses of BI 836880 once every 3 weeks (Q3W; Study 1336.1) or once weekly (QW; Study 1336.6). Primary objectives were maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose of BI 836880, based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during the first cycle. RESULTS: Patients received one of five dosages of 40-1000 mg Q3W (29 patients) or 40-240 mg QW (24 patients). One DLT occurred with Q3W treatment [Grade (G) 3 pulmonary embolism (1000 mg)]. Five DLTs occurred in four patients treated QW [G2 proteinuria (120 mg); G3 hypertension (180 mg); G3 proteinuria and G3 hypertension (240 mg); and G4 respiratory distress (240 mg)]. All patients experienced adverse events, most commonly hypertension with Q3W treatment (89.7%; G3 41.4%), and asthenia with QW treatment (62.5%). Two patients treated Q3W (both 1000 mg) and three patients treated QW (120 mg, 2 patients; 180 mg, 1 patient) experienced partial response. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD of BI 836880 was 720 mg Q3W and 180 mg QW. BI 836880 was generally manageable and demonstrated preliminary efficacy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT02674152; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02674152 and NCT02689505; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02689505.

Access to early-phase clinical trials in older patients with cancer in France: the EGALICAN-2 study.

BACKGROUND: Access to clinical trials and especially early-phase trials (ECT) is an important issue in geriatric oncology. As cancer can be considered an age-related disease because the incidence of most cancers increases with age, new drugs should also be evaluated in older patients to assess their safety and efficacy. The EGALICAN-2 study was primarily designed to identify social and/or regional inequalities regarding access to ECT. We focused on the factors of inequalities in access to ECT in older patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During a 1-year period (2015-2016), a survey was conducted in 11 early-phase units certified by the French National Cancer Institute. RESULTS: A total of 1319 patients were included in the analyses: 1086 patients (82.3%) were <70 years and 233 patients (17.7%) were >70 years. The most common tumor types at referral in older patients were gastrointestinal (19.3%), hematological (19.3%), and thoracic tumors (18.0%). Most patients referred to the phase I unit had signed informed consent and the rate was similar across age (92.7% in younger patients versus 90.6% in older patients; P = 0.266). The rate of screening failure was also similar across age (28.5% in younger patients versus 24.3% in older patients; P = 0.219). Finally, in older patients, univariate analyses showed that initial care received in the hospital having a phase I unit was statistically associated with first study drug administration (odds ratio 0.49, 90% confidence interval 0.27-0.88; P = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients are underrepresented in early clinical trials with 17.7% of patients aged ≥70 years compared with the number of new cases of cancer in France (50%). However, when invited to participate, older patients were prone to sign informed consent.

A single-arm multicentre phase II trial of doxorubicin in combination with trabectedin in the first-line treatment for leiomyosarcoma with long-term follow-up and impact of cytoreductive surgery.

BACKGROUND: Uterine leiomyosarcomas (U-LMSs) and soft tissue leiomyosarcomas (ST-LMSs) are rare tumours with poor prognosis when locally advanced or metastatic, and with moderate chemosensitivity. In 2015 we reported very encouraging results of the LMS-02 study (NCT02131480) with manageable toxicity. Herein, we report the updated and long-term results of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received 60 mg/m2 intravenous doxorubicin followed by trabectedin 1.1 mg/m2 as a 3-h infusion on day 1 and pegfilgrastim on day 2, every 3 weeks, up to six cycles. Surgery for residual disease was permitted. Patients were stratified into U-LMS and ST-LMS groups. RESULTS: One-hundred and eight patients were enrolled, mainly with metastatic disease (85%), and 20 patients (18.5%) had surgical resection of metastases after chemotherapy. With a median follow-up of 7.2 years [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.9-8.2 years], the median PFS was 10.1 months (95% CI 8.5-12.6 months) in the whole population, and 8.3 months (95% CI 7.4-10.3 months) and 12.9 months (95% CI 9.2-14.1 months) for U-LMSs and ST-LMSs, respectively. The median OS was 34.4 months (95% CI 26.9-42.7 months), 27.5 months (95% CI 17.9-38.2 months), and 38.7 months (95% CI 31.0-52.9 months) for the whole population, U-LMSs, and ST-LMSs, respectively. The median OS of the patients with resected metastases was not reached versus 31.6 months in the overall population without surgery (95% CI 23.9-35.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: These updated results confirm the impressive efficiency of the doxorubicin plus trabectedin combination given in first-line therapy for patients with locally advanced/metastatic LMS in terms of PFS and OS. Results of the LMS04 trial (NCT02997358), a randomized phase III study comparing the doxorubicin plus trabectedin combination versus doxorubicin alone in first-line therapy in metastatic LMSs, are pending.

A randomized phase III trial comparing trabectedin to best supportive care in patients with pre-treated soft tissue sarcoma: T-SAR, a French Sarcoma Group trial.

BACKGROUND: The French Sarcoma Group assessed the efficacy, safety, and quality of life (QoL) of trabectedin versus best supportive care (BSC) in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III study included adults with STS who progressed after 1-3 prior treatment lines. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to receive trabectedin 1.5 mg/m2 every 3 weeks or BSC, stratified into L-STS (liposarcoma/leiomyosarcoma) and non-L-STS groups (other histotypes). Patients from the BSC arm were allowed to cross over to trabectedin at progression. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) confirmed by blinded central review and analyzed in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between 26 January 2015 and 5 November 2015, 103 heavily pre-treated patients (60.2% with L-STS) from 16 French centers were allocated to receive trabectedin (n = 52) or BSC (n = 51). Median PFS was 3.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-5.9 months] in the trabectedin arm versus 1.5 months (0.9-2.6 months) in the BSC arm (hazard ratio = 0.39, 95% CI 0.24-0.64, P < 0.001) with benefits observed across almost all analyzed subgroups, but particularly in patients with L-STS (5.1 versus 1.4 months, P = 0.0001). Seven patients (13.7%) in the trabectedin arm (all with L-STS) achieved a partial response, while no objective responses were observed in the BSC arm (P = 0.004). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (44.2% of patients), leukopenia (34.6%), and transaminase increase (32.7%). Health-related 30-item core European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire evidenced no statistical differences between the arms for any domain and at any time point. After progression, 91.8% of patients crossed over from BSC to trabectedin. CONCLUSION: Trabectedin demonstrates superior disease control to BSC without impairing QoL in patients with recurrent STS of multiple histologies, with greater impact in patients with L-STS.

A phase II of gemcitabine combined with pazopanib followed by pazopanib maintenance, as second-line treatment in patients with advanced leiomyosarcomas: A unicancer French Sarcoma Group study (LMS03 study).

BACKGROUND: Options in second-line therapy after doxorubicin-based chemotherapy for metastatic/advanced leiomyosarcoma include gemcitabine (G), trabectedin and pazopanib (P) monotherapy. Currently, no combination therapy is better than monotherapy. LMS03 is an open-label multicentre single-group phase II study designed to assess the efficacy and tolerance of G + P in the second-line setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (pts), ECOG ≤2, with metastatic leiomyosarcomas (LMS) after first-line doxorubicin chemotherapy failure were eligible. Pts were treated with G 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of each 21 days (maximum eight cycles), in combination with oral daily P (800 mg), until disease progression/toxicity. 9-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate was the primary endpoint. Inacceptable and promising 9-month PFS rates were defined, in the intent-to-treat population, as 32% and 44%. RESULTS: 106 pts were included with a mean age of 59.8 years and an ECOG 0 in 63.5%; the primary tumour site was uterus in 61%. Pts were treated with P + G for a median of 3.8 mo, and P for a median of 4.2 mo. The 9-month PFS rate was 32.1% (95% CI 23.1-41.1). After a median follow-up of 14.2 months, the PFS was 6.5 months (95% CI 5.6-8.2), and the overall survival was 22.4 months (95% CI 16.9-26.5). The best response was 23.8%. The most frequent reported grade 3-4 adverse events were haematological. CONCLUSIONS: LMS03 failed to show that second-line therapy, with gemcitabine combined with pazopanib, followed by pazopanib alone, was beneficial for advanced LMS patients. Eudract N°2011-001308-36 and NCT01442662.

European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group Experience with Advanced/Metastatic Epithelioid Sarcoma Patients Treated in Prospective Trials: Clinical Profile and Response to Systemic Therapy.

AIMS: Epithelioid sarcoma is a soft tissue sarcoma associated with a high rate of local recurrence after wide resection and high incidence of distant metastasis. Little is known about the clinical course and response to systemic treatments in epithelioid sarcoma patients. We carried out a retrospective analysis of clinical data from epithelioid sarcoma patients to provide a reference for the design of future epithelioid sarcoma-specific studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from patients with epithelioid sarcoma entered in prospective multi-sarcoma phase II/III trials were pooled: EORTC trial 62012 (doxorubicin versus doxorubicin/ifosfamide), 62043 (pazopanib), 62072 (pazopanib versus placebo) and 62091 (doxorubicin versus trabectedin). Patients had either a local or a centrally confirmed diagnosis of epithelioid sarcoma, had inoperable/metastatic disease at study entry and were eligible for the according trial. Response was assessed according to RECIST 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were calculated from date of entry. RESULTS: Among 976 patients with advanced sarcomas, 27 epithelioid sarcoma patients (2.8%) were eligible for the analysis (17 men, median age at diagnosis 50 years, range 19-72). Eighteen (66.7%) received chemotherapy as first-line treatment (five doxorubicin, eight doxorubicin/ifosfamide, two pazopanib, three trabectedin) and nine (33.3%) received pazopanib as second line or later. The primary tumour was located in the lower extremity (n = 8; 29.6%), upper extremity (n = 5; 18.5%), retro/intra-abdominal (n = 4; 14.8%) and in other locations (n = 10; 37.0%). At entry, metastases were mainly found in lung (n = 17; 63%), lymph nodes (n = 9; 33.3%), bone (n = 8; 29.6%) and soft tissue (n = 7; 25.9%). The best response for first-line patients was four partial responses (22.2%), 10 stable disease (55.6%) and four progressive disease (22.2%). In subsequent lines, pazopanib achieved one partial response (11.1%), four stable disease (44.4%) and four progressive disease (44.4%). All patients but one progressed on treatment. The median PFS and overall survival were 3.8 (95% confidence interval 2.2-4.8) and 10.8 months (95% confidence interval 8.1-21.3), respectively. Five patients were still alive at the time of the according trial analysis. CONCLUSION: With all limitations of such a rare disease and small data set, objective response and survival outcomes are similar in epithelioid sarcoma to non-selected sarcoma populations. The clinical testing of novel systemic treatments for epithelioid sarcoma remains an unmet medical need and a high priority.

Improved survival using specialized multidisciplinary board in sarcoma patients.

BACKGROUND: Sarcomas are rare but aggressive diseases. Specialized multidisciplinary management is not implemented for all patients in most countries. We investigated the impact of a multidisciplinary tumor board (MDTB) presentation before treatment in a nationwide study over 5 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NETSARC (netsarc.org) is a network of 26 reference sarcoma centers with specialized MDTB, funded by the French National Cancer Institute to improve the outcome of sarcoma patients. Since 2010, presentation to an MDTB and second pathological review are mandatory for sarcoma patients in France. Patients' characteristics and follow-up are collected in a database regularly monitored and updated. The management and survival of patients presented to these MDTB before versus after initial treatment were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of the 12 528 patients aged ≥15 years, with a first diagnosis of soft tissue and visceral sarcoma obtained between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014, 5281 (42.2%) and 7247 (57.8%) were presented to the MDTB before and after the initiation of treatment, respectively. The former group had generally worse prognostic characteristics. Presentation to a MDTB before treatment was associated with a better compliance to clinical practice guidelines, for example, biopsy before surgery, imaging, quality of initial surgery, and less reoperations (all P < 0.001). Local relapse-free survival and relapse-free survival were significantly better in patients presented to a MDTB before initiation of treatment, both in univariate and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: The compliance to clinical practice guidelines and relapse-free survival of sarcoma patients are significantly better when the initial treatment is guided by a pre-therapeutic specialized MDTB.

Prediction of local and metastatic recurrence in solitary fibrous tumor: construction of a risk calculator in a multicenter cohort from the French Sarcoma Group (FSG) database.

BACKGROUND: Solitary fibrous tumors (SFT) are rare unusual ubiquitous soft tissue tumors that are presumed to be of fibroblastic differentiation. At present, the challenge is to establish accurate prognostic factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 214 consecutive patients with SFT diagnosed in 24 participating cancer centers were entered into the European database (www.conticabase.org) to perform univariate and multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS), local recurrence incidence (LRI) and metastatic recurrence incidence (MRI) by taking competing risks into account. A prognostic model was constructed for LRI and MRI. Internal and external validations of the prognostic models were carried out. An individual risk calculator was carried out to quantify the risk of both local and metastatic recurrence. RESULTS: We restricted our analysis to 162 patients with local disease. Twenty patients (12.3%) were deceased at the time of analysis and the median OS was not reached. The LRI rates at 10 and 20 years were 19.2% and 38.6%, respectively. The MRI rates at 10 and 20 years were 31.4% and 49.8%, respectively. Multivariate analysis retained age and mitotic count tended to significance for predicting OS. The factors influencing LRI were viscera localization, radiotherapy and age. Mitotic count, tumor localization other than limb and age had independent values for MRI. Three prognostic groups for OS were defined based on the number of unfavorable prognostic factors and calculations were carried out to predict the risk of local and metastatic recurrence for individual patients. CONCLUSION: LRI and MRI rates increased between 10 and 20 years so relapses were delayed, suggesting that long-term monitoring is useful. This study also shows that different prognostic SFT sub-groups could benefit from different therapeutic strategies and that use of a survival calculator could become standard practice in SFTs to individualize treatment based on the clinical situation.

Patterns of care and clinical outcomes in primary oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST): A retrospective study of the French Sarcoma Group (FSG).

BACKGROUND: Oesophageal GIST (ESOGIST) are very rare tumours requiring special consideration regarding diagnosis, surgical management, and perioperative treatment. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted across 9 centres in the French Sarcoma Group (FSG) to characterize all patients in the years 2000-2014. RESULTS: Seventeen patients (pts) with primary localized ESOGIST were identified, with median age 69 years (36-81) and 11 females. Eight tumours (T) occurred in the lower third of the oesophagus, five in the oesophageal gastric junction, two in the superior third, and two in the middle third. All pts underwent oesophagoscopy and/or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and CT scan. Fifteen had EUS guided biopsy. Nine pts received Imatinib (IM) as initial treatment resulting in six PR, three SD. Tumours were resected in nine pts (53%) (7 upfront, 2 after IM); via enucleation in four (44%) [median size 4 cm], oesophagectomy in five (56%) [median size 10 cm]. Resections were R0 in three pts (33%), R1 in six (66%). Eight pts (47%) had no tumour resection, and one patient was never treated. Six pts received adjuvant IM. With a median follow-up of 24 months (7-101), 11 pts are alive (64.7%), five died (29.4%), one was lost to follow-up. Two pts of 4 pts relapsed following enucleation. CONCLUSIONS: ESOGIST can be reliably identified pre-operatively by EUS-guided biopsy. Surgery for ESOGIST is either enucleation or oesophagectomy depending on tumour size, location, and patient's individual surgical risk. Preoperative IM therapy could improve resectability and should be considered if surgery is contraindicated or would lead to negative impact on the functional status of the patient.

Patients with primary localized high-grade sarcomas of the digestive tract excluding GIST : a retrospective study from the French sarcoma group.

INTRODUCTION: The natural history of localized high-grade sarcomas of the digestive tract (SDT) excluding GIST has been rarely considered owing to their low incidence and heterogeneity. We describe the histoclinical characteristics of SDT and correlate them with patients' outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively collected medical files from a European database covering connective tissue tumors listed in Europe for about twenty years. Only untreated localized primary high-grade SDT were included. A central histological review was performed for each case. Patients' characteristics were compared and correlated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 45 patients were identified. Leiomyosarcomas (LMS) and undifferentiated sarcomas (UDS) were predominant, the former having better overall survival (OS) and progressionfree survival (PFS) while the latter having a worse outcome than the other histological types. Complete remission was obtained in 34 patients (75%) and was associated with male sex, age over 40 years and monofocal tumor. Complete surgery and LMS histology were associated with a better prognosis without any significant difference in baseline characteristics or in treatment modalities. CONCLUSION: Complete surgery and histological type seem to be prognostic indicators of SDT. These results suggest the importance of treating these patients in a reference center.

Randomized phase II trial comparing molecularly targeted therapy based on tumor molecular profiling versus conventional therapy in patients with refractory cancer: cross-over analysis from the SHIVA trial.

Background: Several studies used the ratio of progression-free survival (PFS) on genotype-matched treatment to PFS on genotype-unmatched treatment to assess the efficacy of therapy guided by patients' tumor molecular profiling. We evaluated the PFS ratio from patients who cross-over in the SHIVA trial. Patients and methods: The primary end point of the SHIVA trial was to compare PFS on molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) based on tumor molecular profiling and treatment at physician's choice (TPC) in patients with any kind of cancer who had failed standard-of-care therapy. The experimental treatment included only marketed MTAs given outside their indications according to a pre-specified treatment algorithm. Patients were allowed to cross-over at disease progression in both arms. Response was evaluated according to RECIST 1.1 at randomization and at cross-over. We evaluated the ratio of PFS on MTA (PFSMTA) to PFS on TPC (PFSTPC) in patients who crossed-over. Results: Among 741 patients enrolled in the SHIVA trial, 197 were randomized, and 95 crossed-over, including 70 patients from the TPC to the MTA arm and 25 patients from the MTA to the TPC arm. Two patients crossed-over in the TPC arm without disease progression. The PFSMTA/PFSTPC ratio exceeded 1.3 in 37% of patients who crossed-over from the TPC to the MTA arm. The PFSMTA/PFSTPC ratio exceeded 1.3 in 61% of patients who crossed-over from the MTA arm to the TPC arm. Conclusions: The cross-over analysis of the SHIVA trial identified 37% of patients who crossed-over from TPC to MTA with a PFSMTA/PFSTPC ratio exceeding 1.3.

Management and prognosis of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors: The experience of the French Sarcoma Group (GSF-GETO).

BACKGROUND: Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST) are a rare subtype of soft tissue sarcoma. They can arise in irradiated fields, in patients with type 1 neurofibromatosis (NF1), or sporadically. MPNST exhibit an aggressive behaviour, and their optimal management remains controversial. An unsolved issue is whether NF1-related and sporadic forms of MPNST have a different prognosis, and should be managed differently. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Adult and paediatric patients with histologically confirmed MPNST treated between 1990 and 2013 in French cancer centres of the GSF/GETO network, were included in this retrospective study. RESULTS: A total of 353 patients (37% with NF1 and 59% with sporadic tumours) were analysed. Median age at diagnosis was 42 years (range 1-94). The majority of tumours developed in the limbs, were deep-seated and of high grade. Two hundreds and ninety four patients underwent a curative intent surgery. Among them, 60 patients (21%) had neoadjuvant treatment (mainly chemotherapy), and 173 (59%) had adjuvant treatment (mainly radiotherapy). For operated patients, median progression free and overall survival (OS) were 26.3 months and 95.8 months, respectively. In multivariate analysis, poor-prognosis factors for OS were high grade, deep location, locally advanced stage at diagnosis, and macroscopically incomplete resection (R2). NF1 status was not negatively prognostic, except in the recurrence or metastatic setting, where NF1-related MPNST patients treated with palliative chemotherapy showed worse survival than patients with sporadic forms. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, our series is the largest study of patients with MPNST reported to date. For operated patients, we showed a worse prognosis for NF1-related MPNST, due to different clinical features at diagnosis, more than NF1 status itself. The French sarcoma group is now conducting correlative analyses on these patients, using the latest molecular tools.

Sorafenib in patients with locally advanced and metastatic chordomas: a phase II trial of the French Sarcoma Group (GSF/GETO).

BACKGROUND: There is no consensual treatment of locally advanced or metastatic chordomas. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, uncontrolled phase II trial of sorafenib (800 mg/day). The primary end point was the 9-month progression-free rate according to RECIST 1.1. All patients had documented progressive disease at the time of study entry. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were enrolled between May 2011 and January 2014. The median age was 64 (range, 30-86) years. There were 17 men and 10 women. Twelve patients had been previously treated with chemotherapy and molecularly targeted agents. The maximum toxicity grade per patient was grade 3 in 21 cases (77.8%) and grade 4 in 4 cases (14.8%). Sorafenib provided an intent-to-treat best objective response of 1/27 [3.7%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1% to 19.0%], a 9-month progression-free rate of 73.0% (95% CI 46.1-88.0) and a 12-month overall survival rate of 86.5% (95% CI 55.8-96.5). Survival curves were similar in pretreated and not pretreated patients. DISCUSSION: Additional clinical trials further exploring sorafenib as a treatment of locally advanced or metastatic chordomas are warranted.

A phase IIb multicentre study comparing the efficacy of trabectedin to doxorubicin in patients with advanced or metastatic untreated soft tissue sarcoma: the TRUSTS trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether trabectedin as first-line chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic soft tissue sarcoma prolongs progression-free survival (PFS), compared to doxorubicin and, in the phase IIb part here, to select the most appropriate trabectedin treatment schedule (3-hour or 24-hour infusion) in terms of safety, convenience and efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomised multicentre prospective dose-selection phase IIb superiority trial, 133 patients were randomised between doxorubicin (n=43), trabectedin (3-hour infusion, T3h) (n=47) and trabectedin (24-hour infusion, T24h) (n=43). PFS was defined as time from random assignment until objective progression by response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST 1.1), a global deterioration of the health status requiring discontinuation of the treatment, or death from any cause. RESULTS: The study was terminated due to lack of superiority in both trabectedin treatment arms as compared to the doxorubicin control arm. Median PFS was 2.8months in the T3h arm, 3.1months in the T24h arm and 5.5months in the doxorubicin arm. No significant improvements in PFS were observed in the trabectedin arms as compared to the doxorubicin arm (T24h versus doxorubicin: hazard ratio (HR) 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-1.90, P=.675; T3h versus doxorubicin: HR 1.50, 95% CI 0.91-2.48, P=.944). Only one toxic death occurred in the T3h arm, but treatment had to be stopped due to toxicity in 7 (15.2%) (T3h), 8 (19.5%) (T24h) and 1 (2.5%) doxorubicin patients. CONCLUSION: Doxorubicin continues to be the standard treatment in eligible patients with advanced/metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (STS). Trabectedin 1.5mg/m(2)/24-hour infusion is the overall proven approach to delivering this agent in the second-line setting for patients with advanced or metastatic STS.

Debio0932, a second-generation oral heat shock protein (HSP) inhibitor, in patients with advanced cancer-results of a first-in-man dose-escalation study with a fixed-dose extension phase.

BACKGROUND: Objective was to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended dose (RD) and schedule, safety, pharmacokinetic (PK) profile, pharmacodynamic (PD) effects, and antitumor activity of Debio0932, a new second-generation oral heat shock protein (HSP) inhibitor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, uncontrolled, open-label, nonrandomized, dose-escalation study in adults with treatment-resistant advanced cancer. Groups of three patients received oral Debio0932 either daily or every other day. The starting dose of 50 mg was escalated until the MTD was reached, i.e. dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) occurred in ≥2 patients. Further 9 patients and an extension cohort of 30 patients were treated at the next lower dose (=RD). Adverse events (AEs), tumor response, PK, and HSP70 levels in peripheral blood mononuclear cells were recorded over 30 days. RESULTS: Fifty patients were treated with doses up to 1600 mg, at which level three DLT occurred (febrile neutropenia, diarrhea, asthenia). In total, 39 patients were then treated at the RD of 1000 mg daily. Most common drug-related AEs were asthenia and gastrointestinal events. No ocular toxicities were observed. Debio0932 was rapidly absorbed and metabolized. Plasma steady state was reached within 9 days. Volume of distribution was high and elimination half-life was 9-11 h. Food had no effect on PK. PD showed large interpatient variability, but no dose-effect relationship. Partial tumor response was observed in 2 patients (NSCLC and breast cancer), stable disease (SD) in 12 patients (5 of 8 NSCLC patients). In the extension cohort, 9 patients had SD, and 1 patient a partial metabolic tumor response. CONCLUSION: Debio0932 has limited clinical activity, together with manageable toxicity. Further development as adjunct treatment of NSCLC at daily doses of 1000 mg is warranted. CLINICAL TRIAL: NCT01168752.

Effect on survival of local ablative treatment of metastases from sarcomas: a study of the French sarcoma group.

AIMS: Recent data suggest that patients with pulmonary metastases from sarcomas might benefit from ablation of their metastases. Some data are available regarding osteosarcomas/angiosarcomas and lung metastases. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of local ablative treatment on the survival of patients with oligometastases (one to five lesions, any metastatic site, any grade/histology) from sarcomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicentric retrospective study of the French Sarcoma Group was conducted in sarcoma patients with oligometastases who were treated between 2000 and 2012. Survival was analysed using multivariate sensitivity analyses with propensity scores to limit bias. RESULTS: Of the 281 patients evaluated, 164 patients received local treatment for oligometastases between 2000 and 2012. The groups' characteristics were similar in terms of tumour size and remission of the primary tumours. The median follow-up was 25.7 months; 129 (45.9%) patients had died at this point. The median overall survivals were 45.3 (95% confidence interval = 34-73) months for the local treatment group and 12.6 for the other group (95% confidence interval = 9.33-22.9). Survival was better among patients who received local treatment (hazard ratio = 0.47; 95% confidence interval = 0.29-0.78; P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed similar findings in the patients with single oligometastases (hazard ratio = 0.48; 95% confidence interval = 0.28-0.82; P = 0.007); a significant benefit was observed for grade 3, and a trend was observed for grade 2. CONCLUSION: Local ablative treatment seemed to improve the overall survival of the patients who presented with oligometastatic sarcomas, including soft tissue and bone sarcomas. The survival benefit remained after repeated local treatments for several oligometastatic events. Surgery yielded the most relevant results, but alternative approaches (i.e. radiofrequency ablation and radiotherapy) seemed to be promising. The relevance of these results is strengthened by our analysis, which avoided biases by restricting the population to patients with oligometastatic disease and used propensity scores.

Masitinib in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) after failure of imatinib: a randomized controlled open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Masitinib is a highly selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity against the main oncogenic drivers of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Masitinib was evaluated in patients with advanced GIST after imatinib failure or intolerance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial. Patients with inoperable, advanced imatinib-resistant GIST were randomized (1 : 1) to receive masitinib (12 mg/kg/day) or sunitinib (50 mg/day 4-weeks-on/2-weeks-off) until progression, intolerance, or refusal. Primary efficacy analysis was noncomparative, testing whether masitinib attained a median progression-free survival (PFS) (blind centrally reviewed RECIST) threshold of >3 months according to the lower bound of the 90% unilateral confidence interval (CI). Secondary analyses on overall survival (OS) and PFS were comparative with results presented according to a two-sided 95% CI. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were randomized to receive masitinib (n = 23) or sunitinib (n = 21). Median follow-up was 14 months. Patients receiving masitinib experienced less toxicity than those receiving sunitinib, with significantly lower occurrence of severe adverse events (52% versus 91%, respectively, P = 0.008). Median PFS (central RECIST) for the noncomparative primary analysis in the masitinib treatment arm was 3.71 months (90% CI 3.65). Secondary analyses showed that median OS was significantly longer for patients receiving masitinib followed by post-progression addition of sunitinib when compared against patients treated directly with sunitinib in second-line [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.85, P = 0.016]. This improvement was sustainable as evidenced by 26-month follow-up OS data (HR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.16-0.96, P = 0.033); an additional 12.4 months survival advantage being reported for the masitinib treatment arm. Risk of progression while under treatment with masitinib was in the same range as for sunitinib (HR = 1.1, 95% CI 0.6-2.2, P = 0.833). CONCLUSIONS: Primary efficacy analysis ensured the masitinib treatment arm could satisfy a prespecified PFS threshold. Secondary efficacy analysis showed that masitinib followed by the standard of care generated a statistically significant survival benefit over standard of care. Encouraging median OS and safety data from this well-controlled and appropriately designed randomized trial indicate a positive benefit-risk ratio. Further development of masitinib in imatinib-resistant/intolerant patients with advanced GIST is warranted.