Response rate specific to bone metastasis of various cancers for immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved the prognosis of patients with cancer, such as melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, head and neck cancer, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and urothelial carcinoma. The extension of life expectancy has led to an increased incidence of bone metastases (BM) among patients with cancer. BM result in skeletal-related events, including severe pain, pathological fractures, and nerve palsy. Surgery is typically required for the treatment of BM in patients with an impending fracture; however, it may be avoided in those who respond to ICIs. We systematically reviewed studies analyzing BM responses to treatment with ICIs. METHODS: This study was conducted in accordance with the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses 2020 statement and registered in the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (ID: UMIN000053707). Studies reporting response rates based on the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) or the MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDA) criteria specific for BM in patients treated with ICIs were included; reports of fewer than five cases and review articles were excluded. Studies involving humans, published in English and Japanese, were searched. The PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched. Ultimately, nine studies were analyzed. The Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-randomized Studies was used to assess the quality of studies. RESULTS: Based on the MDA criteria, complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) was observed in 44-78% and 62% patients treated with ICIs plus denosumab for NSCLC and melanoma, respectively. According to the RECIST, CR or PR was recorded in 5% and 7-28% of patients treated with ICIs for renal cell carcinoma and urothelial carcinoma, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although response rates to ICIs for BM are poor, patients treated with ICI plus denosumab for bone metastases with impending fractures from NSCLC and melanoma are likely to avoid surgery to prevent fractures.

Current Concepts in the Treatment of Giant Cell Tumor of Bone: An Update.

Curettage is recommended for the treatment of Campanacci stages 1-2 giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) in the extremities, pelvis, sacrum, and spine, without preoperative denosumab treatment. In the distal femur, bone chips and plate fixation are utilized to reduce damage to the subchondral bone and prevent pathological fracture, respectively. For local recurrence, re-curettage may be utilized when feasible. En bloc resection is an option for very aggressive Campanacci stage 3 GCTB in the extremities, pelvis, sacrum, and spine, combined with 1-3 doses of preoperative denosumab treatment. Denosumab monotherapy once every 3 months is currently the standard strategy for inoperable patients and those with metastatic GCTB. However, in case of tumor growth, a possible malignant transformation should be considered. Zoledronic acid appears to be as effective as denosumab; nevertheless, it is a more cost-effective option. Therefore, zoledronic acid may be an alternative treatment option, particularly in developing countries. Surgery is the mainstay treatment for malignant GCTB.

A Systematic Review of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Localized Dedifferentiated Chondrosarcoma.

Dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma (DDCS) is a high-grade subtype of chondrosarcoma with the bimorphic histological appearance of a conventional chondrosarcoma component with abrupt transition to a high-grade, non-cartilaginous sarcoma. DDCS can be radiographically divided into central and peripheral types. Wide resection is currently the main therapeutic option for localized DDCS. Moreover, the effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy remains controversial. Therefore, we performed a systematic review of available evidence to evaluate the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on localized DDCS. The purpose was to compare the 5-year survival rate among patients treated with surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy or surgery alone for localized DDCS. The search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases. Of the 217 studies shortlisted, 11 retrospective non-randomized studies (comprising 556 patients with localized DDCS) were selected. The 5-year survival rates were similar between the two treatment groups (28.2% (51/181) vs. 24.0% (90/375), respectively). The overall pooled odds ratio was 1.25 (95% confidence interval: 0.80-1.94; p = 0.324), and heterogeneity I2 was 2%. However, when limited to peripheral DDCS, adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with prolonged survival (p = 0.03). Due to the paucity of included studies and the absence of prospective comparative studies, no conclusions can be drawn regarding the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy for localized DDCS.

Is perioperative chemotherapy effective in patients with localized myxoid liposarcoma?

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the local recurrence, distant metastasis and disease-specific survival rates of patients with localized myxoid liposarcoma in the surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy group versus the surgery alone group. METHODS: A total of 456 patients in the Japanese National Bone and Soft Tissue Tumour Registry database who had localized myxoid liposarcoma and underwent surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy or surgery alone between 2001 and 2019 were included in this retrospective study. The study adjusted for background differences between patients who underwent surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 228) or surgery alone (n = 228) using propensity score matching. RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed no significant difference in local recurrence rate between the two groups (5-year local recurrence-free survival: 98.6% [95% confidence interval: 95.9-99.6] vs. 94.0% [95% confidence interval: 89.7-96.6], P = 0.052). Univariate analysis showed no difference in the incidence of distant metastases between the two groups (5-year distant metastasis-free survival: 80.5% [95% confidence interval: 73.9-85.8] vs. 75.1% [95% confidence interval: 67.7-81.2], P = 0.508). Univariate analysis showed no difference in disease-specific survival between the two groups (5-year disease-specific survival: 92.6% [95% confidence interval: 86.1-96.2] vs. 93.2% [95% confidence interval: 87.6-96.4], P = 0.804). In the high-risk group (n = 203) with high-grade tumours and tumour size ≥10 cm, there were no significant differences in the local recurrence, distant metastasis and disease-specific survival rates between the surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy group and the surgery alone group. CONCLUSION: The effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on localized myxoid liposarcoma appears to be limited.

Comparison of pre-operative and post-operative radiotherapy in patients with localized myxoid liposarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Myxoid liposarcoma is more radiosensitive than other soft tissue sarcomas, and radiotherapy has been reported to reduce tumour size. This study was performed to compare the rates of local recurrence, survival and wound complications between pre- and post-operative radiotherapy for localized myxoid liposarcoma. METHODS: From the Japanese Nationwide Bone and Soft Tissue Tumor Registry database, 200 patients with localized myxoid liposarcoma who received pre- (range, 30-56 Gy) or post-operative (range, 45-70 Gy) radiotherapy and surgery were included in this retrospective study. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for background differences between patients who received pre- and post-operative radiotherapy. RESULTS: Local recurrence occurred in five (5.0%) and nine (9.0%) patients in the pre- and post-operative radiotherapy groups, respectively (both n = 100). The median follow-up time from diagnosis was 40.5 months (IQR, 26.3-74). Univariate analysis showed a similar risk of local recurrence between the pre- and post-operative radiotherapy groups (5-year local recurrence-free survival 94.9% [95% CI 87.0-98.1] vs. 89.0% [95% CI 79.6-94.3]; P = 0.167). Disease-specific survival was similar between the pre- and post-operative radiotherapy groups (5-year disease-specific survival 88.1% [95% CI 75.5-94.6] vs. 88.4% [95% CI 77.3-94.5]; P = 0.900). The incidence of wound complications was similar between the pre- and post-operative radiotherapy groups (7.0% vs. 12.0%; P = 0.228). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in local recurrence, survival or incidence of wound complications between pre- and post-operative radiotherapy for localized myxoid liposarcoma. Therefore, pre-operative radiotherapy for myxoid liposarcoma provides clinical results equivalent to post-operative radiotherapy.

Megaprosthetic reconstruction of the distal femur with a short residual proximal femur following bone tumor resection: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the risk of postoperative function and complications associated with reconstruction methods in patients with short residual proximal femurs (< 12 cm) after resection of distal femoral bone tumors, we performed a systematic review of studies reporting postoperative function and complications in these patients. METHODS: Of the 236 studies identified by systematic searches using the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, eight were included (none were randomized controlled trials). In these studies, 106 (68.4%), 12 (7.7%), and 37 (23.9%) patients underwent reconstruction with custom-made megaprostheses with extracortical plates or cross-pins, allograft prosthetic composite (APC), and Compress® compliant pre-stress (CPS) implants, respectively. RESULTS: Aseptic loosening occurred slightly more frequently in the APC group than in the other reconstruction methods (APC group, 21%; custom-made megaprosthesis group, 0-17%; CPS implant group, 14%). No differences were noted in the frequencies of implant breakage, fractures, or infections between the three reconstruction methods. Mechanical survival, where endpoint was set as implant removal for any reason, was 80% at seven years in the APC group, 70-77% at 10 years in the custom-made megaprosthesis group, and 68% at nine years in the CPS implant group. Therefore, there appeared to be no difference among the three reconstruction methods with respect to mechanical survival. CONCLUSIONS: During megaprosthetic reconstruction of the distal femur with a short residual proximal femur after bone tumor resection, similar results were obtained using custom-made megaprostheses, APCs, and CPS implants.

Outcome of Reoperation for Local Recurrence Following En Bloc Resection for Bone Giant Cell Tumor of the Extremity.

En bloc resection is typically performed to treat giant cell tumors of bone (GCTB), particularly when curettage can be challenging owing to extensive bone cortex destruction with soft tissue extension. Few reports have addressed the clinical outcomes after reoperation for local recurrence in patients with GCTB who underwent en bloc resection. In this multicenter retrospective study, we investigated local recurrence, distant metastasis, malignant transformation, mortality, and limb function in patients treated for local recurrence following en bloc resection for GCTB. Among 205 patients who underwent en bloc resection for GCTB of the extremities between 1980 and 2021, we included 29 with local recurrence. En bloc resection was performed for large tumors with soft tissue extension, pathological fractures with joint invasion, complex fractures, and dispensable bones, such as the proximal fibula and distal ulna. Local re-recurrence, distant metastasis, malignant transformation, and mortality rates were 41.4% (12/29), 34.5% (10/29), 6.9% (2/29), and 6.9% (2/29), respectively. The median Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score was 26 (interquartile range, 23-28). The median follow-up period after surgery for local recurrence was 70.1 months (interquartile range, 40.5-123.8 months). Local recurrence following en bloc resection for GCTB could indicate an aggressive GCTB, necessitating careful follow-up.