Doxorubicin alone versus doxorubicin with trabectedin followed by trabectedin alone as first-line therapy for metastatic or unresectable leiomyosarcoma (LMS-04): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic leiomyosarcomas have a poor prognosis, and currently doxorubicin alone is used as the standard first-line treatment. Doxorubicin combined with trabectedin has shown promising results in phase 1 and 2 studies. We aimed to identify and compare the progression-free survival of patients with metastatic or unresectable uterine or soft tissue leiomyosarcoma treated with doxorubicin and trabectedin combined as first-line therapy versus doxorubicin alone in a phase 3 trial. METHODS: LMS-04 was a randomised, multicentre, open-label, superiority phase 3 trial, which included patients from 20 centres of the French Sarcoma Group (anticancer centers or hospitals with an oncological unit) in France. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and had metastatic or relapsed unresectable leiomyosarcomas that had not previously been treated with chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), by means of an interactive web response system (permuted blocks of different sizes from two to six), to receive either intravenous doxorubicin alone (75 mg/m2) once every 3 weeks for up to six cycles or of intravenous doxorubicin (60 mg/m2) plus intravenous trabectedin (1·1 mg/m2) once every 3 weeks up to six cycles followed by maintenance with trabectedin alone. Surgery for residual disease was allowed in both groups after six cycles of treatment. Randomisation was stratified by tumour location (uterine vs soft tissue) and disease (locally advanced vs metastatic). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review and according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours 1.1 criteria. Efficacy analyses were performed on all randomly assigned patients, based on the intention-to-treat principle. The safety population included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one cycle of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02997358, and is closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: Between Jan 18, 2017, and March 21, 2019, 150 patients were enrolled (67 with uterine leiomyosarcomas and 83 with soft tissue leiomyosarcomas) and included in the intention-to-treat population: 76 in the doxorubicin alone group and 74 in the doxorubicin plus trabectedin group. The median duration of follow-up was 36·9 months (IQR 30·0-43·2) in the doxorubicine group and 38·8 months (32·7-44·2) in the doxorubicin plus trabectedin group. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer with doxorubicin plus trabectedin versus doxorubicin alone (12·2 months [95% CI 10·1-15·6] vs 6·2 months [4·1-7·1]; adjusted hazard ratio 0·41 [95% CI 0·29-0·58]; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (ten [13%] of 75 patients in the doxorubicin alone group vs 59 [80%] in the doxorubicin plus trabectedin group), anaemia (four [5%] vs 23 [31%]), thrombocytopenia (0 vs 35 [47%]), and febrile neutropenia (seven [9%] vs 21 [28%]). Nine (12%) patients in the doxorubicin alone group and 15 (201%) patients in the doxorubicin plus trabectedin group has serious adverse events. There was only one treatment-related death, reported in the doxorubicin alone group (cardiac failure). INTERPRETATION: Doxorubicin plus trabectedin in first-line therapy was found to significantly increase progression-free survival in patients with metastatic or unresectable leiomyosarcomas compared with doxorubicin alone, despite a higher but manageable toxicity, and could be considered an option for the first-line treatment of metastatic leiomyosarcomas. FUNDING: PharmaMar.

Effectiveness of a nurse-led telephone follow-up in the therapeutic management of patients receiving oral antineoplastic agents: a randomized, multicenter controlled trial (ETICCO study).

PURPOSE: The use of oral cancer drugs (OAD) has increased over the last two decades. The objective of this study was to measure the impact of a nurse-led telephone follow-up in the therapeutic management of patients treated with an OAD regarding toxicity, medication adherence and quality of life. METHODS: A randomized, multicenter, controlled trial was conducted. All consecutive over 18-year-old patients, treated in medical oncology, radiotherapy, or hematology departments, receiving OAD for any cancer were invited to participate to the study. A total of 183 patients treated for solid or hematological cancers with an OAD were randomly assigned to receive a nurse-led telephone follow-up or standard care for 24 weeks. Data were collected between 2015 and 2018. RESULTS: Nurse telephone follow-up did not improve the global score toxicity in the intervention group. However, telephone calls directed by trained nurses induced a significant decrease in number of patients with grade 3 adverse events throughout the follow-up [OR 0.45 (IC à 95%) (0.23, 0.9)](P = 0.03). There was no significant difference in quality of life and medication adherence between groups at any follow-up time point. CONCLUSIONS: In this first French real-life study, the advice provided by qualified nurses via phone calls improved the management of grade 3 toxicities but failed to demonstrate an improvement of all grades of toxicities. More prospective studies are needed to confirm the impact of telephone calls on the toxicities related to OAD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration is NCT02459483. Protection committee SUD-ESTI registration is 2015-A00527-42 on 13 April 2015. National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products registration is 150619-B on the 27 may 2015.

Results of API-AI based regimen in osteosarcoma adult patients included in the French OS2006/Sarcome-09 study.

In the OS2006 study, patients younger than 18 years were treated with a methotrexate-based regimen (MTX), patients older than 25 years with a doxorubicin-cisplatin-ifosfamide-based regimen (API-AI), whereas patients aged 18-25 years received either API-AI or MTX. We herein report the prespecified subgroup analysis of the outcome of 106 patients treated with API-AI. Preoperative chemotherapy combined three doxorubicin-ifosfamide-cisplatin (API) and two doxorubicin-ifosfamide (AI) courses. Postoperative chemotherapy was assigned by risk group: localised patients with a good histological response (<10% viable cells) received two AI and two cisplatin-ifosfamide (PI) courses; patients with synchronous metastases, poor histological response or unresectable primary received five cycles of etoposide-ifosfamide (EI). Of the 106 patients, 61 were randomised to receive or not zoledronate. Median age was 30 years (range 18-67), 66 (62%) patients were >25 years. The primary tumours were axial in 28 patients (26%), and 28 (26%) presented with metastases. Ninety-six patients (91%) had surgery, conservative in 82 (85%); 36 patients (38%, 95% CI 28-48%) were good responders. Toxicity was manageable, with no significant difference in severe acute toxicity between patients aged >25 years and those younger. With a median follow-up of 4.8 years, the 5-year event-free survival and overall survival rates were 46% (95% CI 36-56) and 57% (95% CI 47-67), respectively. The primary tumour size and initial metastases correlated with a higher risk of event. In these 106 osteosarcoma adult patients, API-AI proved feasible with no excess of toxicity, and favourable activity despite poor-prognosis factors.

Dose-intensive regimen treatment for small-cell carcinoma of the ovary of hypercalcemic type (SCCOHT).

PURPOSE: Small cell carcinoma of the ovary of hypercalcemic type (SCCOHT) is a rare and rapidly lethal disease affecting young women. Cytoreductive surgery associated with chemotherapy followed by a high dose chemotherapy regimen (HDC) demonstrated improved outcomes in a unique prospective and several retrospective studies, and this report aimed to confirm these results in an independent and larger cohort. METHODS: Between 2006 and 2018, we conducted a multicentric prospective study on 44 women diagnosed with SCCOHT. Patients were treated homogeneously with optimal cytoreductive surgery and chemotherapy protocol for four to six cycles (PAVEP). In case of complete response, patients received HDC with stem-cell support, followed by pelvic radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was the event-free survival (EFS) in the per-protocol cohort. Secondary analysis explored the effect of HDC with outcomes. RESULTS: Mean age at diagnosis was 33 years old (range 13.8-75.8). 14 patients presented with stage FIGO I, 21 with stage III and 9 with stage IV. Median follow-up was 53.4 months. 38 patients underwent optimal surgery with up to 6 cycles of PAVEP. 30 received HDC, and 21 pelvic radiotherapy. 21 relapses were reported leading to death for 18 patients. Median EFS in the per-protocol cohort was 18.2 months, and 2-year EFS rate was 40%. HDC was significantly associated with better overall survival (p < .001). Grades 3/4 adverse events were frequent but, in most cases, manageable, although one grade-5 adverse-event occurred during HDC. CONCLUSION: Intensive regimen containing multidrug chemotherapy, HDC and pelvic radiotherapy, for the management of SCCOHT, demonstrated encouraging survival and should be proposed for all patients. However, the significant toxicity cost associated is of concern and it should be restricted to expert centers.

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib in adult patients with metastatic osteosarcoma: a non-comparative, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib has proven activity in patients with pretreated gastrointestinal stromal tumours and colorectal and hepatocellular carcinoma. We designed REGOBONE to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib for patients with progressive metastatic osteosarcoma and other bone sarcomas. This trial comprised four parallel independent cohorts: osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, chondrosarcoma, and chordoma. In this Article, we report the results of the osteosarcoma cohort. METHODS: In this non-comparative, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial, patients aged 10 years or older with histologically confirmed osteosarcoma whose disease had progressed after treatment with one to two previous lines of chemotherapy for metastatic disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either oral regorafenib (160 mg/day, for 21 of 28 days) or matching placebo. Patients in both groups also received best supportive care. Randomisation was done using a web-based system and was stratified (permuted block) by age at inclusion (<18 vs ≥18 years old). Investigators and patients were masked to treatment allocation. Patients in the placebo group, after centrally confirmed progressive disease, could cross over to receive regorafenib. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients without disease progression at 8 weeks. Analyses were done by modified intention to treat (ie, patients without any major entry criteria violation who initiated masked study drug treatment were included). All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02389244, and the results presented here are the final analysis of the osteosarcoma cohort (others cohorts are ongoing). FINDINGS: Between Oct 10, 2014, and April 4, 2017, 43 adult patients were enrolled from 13 French comprehensive cancer centres. All patients received at least one dose of assigned treatment and were evaluable for safety; five patients were excluded for major protocol violations (two in the placebo group and three in the regorafenib group), leaving 38 patients who were evaluable for efficacy (12 in the placebo group and 26 in the regorafenib group). 17 of 26 patients (65%; one-sided 95% CI 47%) in the regorafenib group were non-progressive at 8 weeks compared with no patients in the placebo group. Ten patients in the placebo group crossed over to receive open-label regorafenib after centrally confirmed disease progression. 13 treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in seven (24%) of 29 patients in the regorafenib group versus none of 14 patients in the placebo group. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events during the double-blind period of treatment included hypertension (in seven [24%] of 29 patients in the regorafenib group vs none in the placebo group), hand-foot skin reaction (three [10%] vs none), fatigue (three [10%] vs one [3%]), hypophosphataemia (three [10%] vs none), and chest pain (three [10%] vs none). No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Regorafenib demonstrated clinically meaningful antitumour activity in adult patients with recurrent, progressive, metastatic osteosarcoma after failure of conventional chemotherapy, with a positive effect on delaying disease progression. Regorafenib should be further evaluated in the setting of advanced disease as well as potentially earlier in the disease course for patients at high risk of relapse. Regorafenib might have an important therapeutic role as an agent complementary to standard cytotoxic chemotherapy in the therapeutic armamentarium against osteosarcoma. FUNDING: Bayer HealthCare.

Treatment patterns and survival in an exhaustive French cohort of pazopanib-eligible patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS).

BACKGROUND: The French EMS study prospectively collected exhaustive data from STS patients diagnosed in the Rhone-Alpes region from 2005 to 07. METHODS: The database included diagnosis/histology, surgery, radiotherapy, systemic treatments and treatment response. Treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with metastatic disease, excluding adipocytic sarcoma and GIST were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 888 total patients, 145 were included based on having metastatic disease and appropriate subtypes. All patients received treatment with systemic therapy being most common (74%, n = 107), followed by radiotherapy (30%, n = 44) and surgery (23%, n = 33). Doxorubicin, alone or in combination, was the most common first line systemic therapy (65%, n = 46). Drugs without license in sarcoma were used in 38-83% of treatments depending on treatment line. 24% of frontline patients demonstrated an objective response, decreasing to 11% objective responses in second line but no responses were documented beyond second line, with median PFS declining with each additional line. Median PFS also declined in patients receiving surgery compared to those receiving no surgery (8-15 m vs 5 m). Median OS from metastatic diagnosis for patients receiving systemic therapy was double that of patients without systemic treatment (24 m vs 12 m, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes in this population were poor and declined with successive treatment. However, results suggest that further anticancer therapies in recurrent sarcoma might be beneficial.

Safety and efficacy of regorafenib in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (REGOSARC): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib is a multikinase inhibitor with proven activity in refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumours and chemotherapy-refractory advanced colorectal cancers. We assessed this agent's efficacy and safety in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas previously treated with anthracycline. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial undertaken in France and Austria, we enrolled patients aged 18 years and older with advanced soft tissue sarcomas who had received previous doxorubicin or other anthracycline treatment. These patients were randomly assigned (1:1) into one of the following four cohorts: liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, synovial sarcoma, and other sarcomas. Participants were treated with oral regorafenib (160 mg per day 3 weeks on and 1 week off) or matched placebo. Patients receiving placebo were offered optional crossover in case of centrally confirmed disease progression. The random allocation schedule was computer-generated with permuted blocks of four patients, with two stratification factors: country (France or Austria) and previous exposure to pazopanib (yes or no). Eligibility criteria included patients with histologically proven advanced and inoperable soft tissue sarcomas with intolerance or failure to doxorubicin or other anthracycline-based chemotherapy and at least one unidimensionally or bidimensionally measurable lesion according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST; version 1.1). The primary endpoint was RECIST-based progression-free survival after central radiological review in the intention-to-treat population. Patients, physicians, and radiologists of the panel were masked to treatment allocation. This study is still open for recruitment for an additional stratum (patients previously treated with pazopanib) and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01900743. FINDINGS: From Aug 5, 2013, to Nov 26, 2014, 182 patients were randomly assigned to one of four cohorts and included in the final analysis. At the cutoff date (Jan 7, 2016), the number of required events was reached for the four cohorts. In the liposarcoma cohort, progression-free survival was 1·1 months (95% CI 0·9-2·3) with regorafenib versus 1·7 months (0·9-1·8) with placebo (HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·48-1·64] p=0·70). In the leiomyosarcoma cohort, progression-free survival was 3·7 months (95% CI 2·5-5·0) with regorafenib versus 1·8 (1·0-2·8) months with placebo (HR 0·46 [95% CI 0·46-0·80] p=0·0045). In the synovial sarcoma cohort, progression-free survival was 5·6 months (95% CI 1·4-11·6) with regorafenib versus 1·0 (0·8-1·4) with placebo (HR 0·10 [95% CI 0·03-0·35] p<0·0001). In the other sarcoma cohort, progression-free survival was 2·9 months (95% CI 1·0-7·8) with regorafenib versus 1·0 (0·9-1·9) with placebo (HR 0·46 [95% CI 0·25-0·81] p=0·0061). Before crossover, the most common clinically significant grade 3 or higher adverse events were arterial hypertension (17 [19%] events in the 89 patients in the regorafenib group vs two [2%] events in the 92 patients in the placebo group), hand and foot skin reaction (14 [15%] vs no events) and asthenia (12 [13%] vs six [6%]). One treatment-related death occurred in the regorafenib group due to liver failure. INTERPRETATION: Regorafenib has an important clinical antitumour effect in non-adipocytic soft tissue sarcomas, improving progression-free survival. Regorafenib should be further evaluated in this setting, and its therapeutic role has to be defined in the context of the growing therapeutic armamentarium, already including one approved multikinase inhibitor, pazopanib. FUNDING: Bayer HealthCare.

Translating Clinical Evidence-Based Medicine into the Real World: Single-Center Experience with Cabazitaxel in Metastatic Prostate Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: We studied the efficacy and safety of cabazitaxel in unselected real-life patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively investigated all patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) treated with cabazitaxel 25 mg/m2 i.v. every 3 weeks combined with oral prednisolone (10 mg once daily) after first-line docetaxel chemotherapy. Study issues were to report patient characteristics and cabazitaxel data in terms of tolerance and efficacy. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. All data were compared with TROPIC results. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2014, 41 patients received cabazitaxel; 15 patients (37%) had a performance status (PS) ≥2 versus 7% (p < 0.0001) in TROPIC, and 38 patients (93%) presented a Gleason score ≥7 at baseline (vs. 60%; p < 0.0001). All patients had metastatic disease at baseline. Previous therapies were radiotherapy in 17 patients (41 vs. 61%; p = 0.01) and surgery in 24 patients (59 vs. 52%; p = 0.4). The median number of cabazitaxel cycles was 5 (1-10) versus 6 (3-10) in TROPIC. Five patients completed 10 cycles of cabazitaxel (12%) versus 28% in TROPIC (p = 0.03). Toxicities were anemia (12 patients, 29%), diarrhea (9 patients, 22%), nausea (7 patients, 17%), pain (6 patients, 15%), sepsis (4 patients, 10%), neutropenia (3 patients, 7%) and urinary tract infection (1 patient, 2%). The tumor response rate was 19.5 versus 14.4% in TROPIC (nonsignificant). PFS was 4.5 months (95% CI 3.3-6.4) in our analysis and 2.8 months (95% CI 2.4-3.0) in TROPIC. OS was 12.1 months (95% CI 9.2 to not reached) and 15.1 months (95% CI 14.1-16.3), respectively. CONCLUSION: In our unselected mPC patients with poorer baseline clinical conditions and aggressive disease, cabazitaxel seems efficient and not more toxic than in the TROPIC study.

Trabectedin in combination with doxorubicin for first-line treatment of advanced uterine or soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma (LMS-02): a non-randomised, multicentre, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic leiomyosarcomas of uterine or soft-tissue origin have poor prognosis and moderate chemosensitivity. Trabectedin has shown activity in pretreated leiomyosarcoma. We did a single-group, multicentre, phase 2 trial (LMS-02) to assess the effect of first-line doxorubicin and trabectedin combination on disease control and survival. METHODS: Adults (18 years to physiological age ≤70 years) with measurable metastatic or unresectable uterine leiomyosarcoma or soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma who had not received any previous chemotherapy were enrolled at 19 centres in France. Treatment consisted of 60 mg/m(2) intravenous doxorubicin followed by 1·1 mg/m(2) trabectedin in a 3 h intravenous infusion on day 1, both by the central venous route, and 6 mg subcutaneous pegfilgrastim on day 2, repeated every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. Surgery for residual disease was permitted. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving disease control, defined as complete or partial response or stable disease. Stratification was done by anatomical site and analyses were per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02131480. FINDINGS: Between July 28, 2010, and May 10, 2013, 109 patients were enrolled and treated, of whom 108 were assessable for response: 47 in the uterine leiomyosarcoma group and 61 in the soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma group. 32 (68%) patients in the uterine leiomyosarcoma group and 45 (74%) in the soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma group received all six cycles of treatment. Of 47 patients with uterine leiomyosarcoma, 28 (59·6%, 95% CI 44·3-73·6) achieved a partial response and 13 (27·7%, 15·6-42·6) stable disease; 41 (87·2%, 74·3-95·2) patients achieved disease control. Of 61 patients with soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma, two (3·3%, 95% CI 0·4-11·7) achieved a complete response, 22 (36·1%, 25·0-50·8) had a partial response, and 32 (52·5%, 40·8-67·3) had stable disease; 56 (91·8%, 81·9-97·3) of patients achieved disease control. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-associated adverse events were neutropenia (84 [78%] of 108 patients), increased alanine aminotransferase concentration (42 [39%]), thrombocytopenia (40 [37%]), anaemia (29 [27%]), febrile neutropenia (26 [24%]), and fatigue (21 [19%]). INTERPRETATION: Despite expected but manageable toxic effects, these results support the activity of doxorubicin plus trabectedin as first-line treatment for uterine leiomyosarcoma and soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma. This combination should be developed further in a phase 3 trial against the present standard of care. FUNDING: Pharmamar and Amgen.

Primary localized rectal/pararectal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: results of surgical and multimodal therapy from the French Sarcoma group.

BACKGROUND: Rectal and pararectal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are rare. The optimal management strategy for primary localized GISTs remains poorly defined. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 41 patients with localized rectal or pararectal GISTs treated between 1991 and 2011 in 13 French Sarcoma Group centers. RESULTS: Of 12 patients who received preoperative imatinib therapy for a median duration of 7 (2-12) months, 8 experienced a partial response, 3 had stable disease, and 1 had a complete response. Thirty and 11 patients underwent function-sparing conservative surgery and abdominoperineal resection, respectively. Tumor resections were mostly R0 and R1 in 35 patients. Tumor rupture occurred in 12 patients. Eleven patients received postoperative imatinib with a median follow-up of 59 (2.4-186) months. The median time to disease relapse was 36 (9.8-62) months. The 5-year overall survival rate was 86.5%. Twenty patients developed local recurrence after surgery alone, two developed recurrence after resection combined with preoperative and/or postoperative imatinib, and eight developed metastases. In univariate analysis, the mitotic index (≤5) and tumor size (≤5 cm) were associated with a significantly decreased risk of local relapse. Perioperative imatinib was associated with a significantly reduced risk of overall relapse and local relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative imatinib therapy was associated with improved disease-free survival. Preoperative imatinib was effective. Tumor shrinkage has a clear benefit for local excision in terms of feasibility and function preservation. Given the complexity of rectal GISTs, referral of patients with this rare disease to expert centers to undergo a multidisciplinary approach is recommended.

The off-label use of targeted therapies in sarcomas: the OUTC'S program.

BACKGROUND: Few targeted therapies (TTs) are registered for sarcoma treatment despite numerous phase II studies and yet there are potential treatment options for patients after standard treatment escape. The French Sarcoma Group - Bone Tumor Study Group (GSF-GETO) created a national registry to evaluate the outcome of patients treated with off-label TTs. METHODS: Every consecutive sarcoma-patient receiving an off-label TT outside a clinical trial was included. The objective was to describe this patient efficacy and safety data in routine practice. RESULTS: From October 2008 to October 2011, 249 patients in 24 centers received 278 treatment lines with TTs. Twenty-five histological subtypes were included: most frequent were leiomyosarcoma (n=48, receiving sorafenib in 63%, and sunitinib in 27%), GIST (n=39, receiving sorafenib in 79%), and angiosarcoma (n=18, receiving sorafenib in 78%). The overall response rate to TTs was 15% (95% CI [10,6-20,2]), the disease control rate at 2 months was 59%. The median progression-free survival was 4,1 months (IC 95% [3,2-4,8]). Three complete responses were observed. No toxic death occurred, grade 3 and 4 toxicities were reported in 74 (27%) and 14 patients (5%) respectively. CONCLUSION: Off-label TTs can be used for sarcoma patients in routine practice with an acceptable toxicity profile and efficacy similar to that reported in non-randomized clinical trials.

The Combination of 80 Years of Age and Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Remain an Uphill Battle: A Case Report with Cabazitaxel as a Double-Edged Sword.

We report the case of an 80-year-old patient who presented with a progressive prostate metastatic cancer with poor performance status. The patient had already benefitted from docetaxel and abiraterone. A new line of chemotherapy by cabazitaxel was started with good response, and there was a dramatic improvement in general status and pain symptoms. Age and performance status alone should not be limiting decision factors for elderly cancer patients.

Territorial inequalities in management and conformity to clinical guidelines for sarcoma patients: an exhaustive population-based cohort analysis in the Rhône-Alpes region.

BACKGROUND: Sarcomas are rare cancers with great variability in clinical and histopathological presentation. The main objective of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is to standardize diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: From March 2005 to February 2007, all patients diagnosed with localized sarcoma in the Rhône-Alpes region were included in a cohort-based study, to evaluate the compliance of sarcoma management with French guidelines in routine practice and to identify predictive factors for compliance with CGPs. RESULTS: 634 (71 %) patients with localized sarcoma satisfying the inclusion criteria were included out of 891 newly diagnosed sarcomas. Taking into account initial diagnosis until follow-up, overall conformity to CPGs was only 40 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) = 36-44], ranging from 54 % for gastrointestinal stromal tumor to 36 % for soft tissue sarcoma and 42 % for bone sarcoma. In multivariate analysis, primary tumor type [relative risk (RR) = 4.42, 95 % CI = 2.79-6.99, p < 0.001], dedicated multidisciplinary staff before surgery (RR = 4.19, 95 % CI = 2.39-7.35, p < 0.001) and management in specialized hospitals (RR = 3.71, 95 % CI = 2.43-5.66, p < 0.001) were identified as unique independent risk factors for conformity to CPGs for overall treatment sequence. CONCLUSIONS: With only 40 % of total conformity to CPGs, the conclusions support the improvement of initial sarcoma management and its performance in specialized centres or within specialized dedicated networks.

Transferability of health cost evaluation across locations in oncology: cluster and principal component analysis as an explorative tool.

BACKGROUND: The transferability of economic evaluation in health care is of increasing interest in today's globalized environment. Here, we propose a methodology for assessing the variability of data elements in cost evaluations in oncology. This method was tested in the context of the European Network of Excellence "Connective Tissues Cancers Network". METHODS: Using a database that was previously aimed at exploring sarcoma management practices in Rhône-Alpes (France) and Veneto (Italy), we developed a model to assess the transferability of health cost evaluation across different locations. A nested data structure with 60 final factors of variability (e.g., unit cost of chest radiograph) within 16 variability areas (e.g., unit cost of imaging) within 12 objects (e.g., diagnoses) was produced in Italy and France, separately. Distances between objects were measured by Euclidean distance, Mahalanobis distance, and city-block metric. A hierarchical structure using cluster analysis (CA) was constructed. The objects were also represented by their projections and area of variability through correlation studies using principal component analysis (PCA). Finally, a hierarchical clustering based on principal components was performed. RESULTS: CA suggested four clusters of objects: chemotherapy in France; follow-up with relapse in Italy; diagnosis, surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and follow-up without relapse in Italy; and diagnosis, surgery, and follow-up with or without relapse in France. The variability between clusters was high, suggesting a lower transferability of results. Also, PCA showed a high variability (i.e. lower transferability) for diagnosis between both countries with regard to the quantities and unit costs of biopsies. CONCLUSION: CA and PCA were found to be useful for assessing the variability of cost evaluations across countries. In future studies, regression methods could be applied after these methods to elucidate the determinants of the differences found in these analyses.

Long-term outcome and effect of maintenance therapy in patients with advanced sarcoma treated with trabectedin: an analysis of 181 patients of the French ATU compassionate use program.

BACKGROUND: The long term outcome of advanced sarcoma patients treated with trabectedin outside of clinical trials and the utility of maintenance treatment has not been reported. METHODS: Between 2003 and 2008, patients with advanced sarcoma failing doxorubicin could be treated within a compassionate use program (ATU, Temporary Use Authorization) of trabectedin in France using the standard 3-weekly regimen. Data from 181 patients (55%) were collected from 11 centres and analyzed. RESULTS: Trabectedin was given in first, second, third or fourth line in metastatic phase in 6%, 37%, 33% and 23% of patients respectively. With a median follow-up of 6 years, median PFS and OS were 3.6 months and 16.1 months respectively. The median number of cycles was 3 (range 1-19). Best response were partial response (PR, n = 18, 10%), stable disease (SD, n = 69, 39%) and progressive disease (PD, n = 83, 46%), non evaluable (NE, n = 9, 5%). Thirty patients (17%) had to be hospitalized for treatment- related side effects. Independent prognostic factors in multivariate analysis (Cox model) were myxoid LPS and line of trabectedin for PFS, and myxoid LPS and retroperitoneal sarcomas for OS. Patients in PR or SD after 6 cycles continuing treatment had a better PFS (median 5.3 vs 10.5 months, p = 0.001) and OS (median 13.9 vs 33.4 months, p = 0.009) as compared to patients who stopped after 6 cycles. CONCLUSIONS: In this compassionate use program, trabectedin yielded similar or better PFS and OS than in clinical trials. Maintenance treatment beyond 6 cycles was associated with an improved survival.

Real-World Data on Olaparib in Relapsed BRCA-mutated Ovarian Cancer: A Multicenter GINECO RETROLA Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Olaparib was approved in 2014 by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) as maintenance treatment for patients with breast cancer gene (BRCA)-mutated platinum-sensitive relapsed high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) following the results of the Study 19. We present the results of a national real-world study on the effectiveness of olaparib in relapsed BRCA-mutated EOC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with EOC, peritoneal, and/or fallopian-tube cancer treated with olaparib in a French Center between May 2014 and March 2017 were included. The primary end-point of the study was progression-free survival. RESULTS: Of the 128 patients analyzed, 89 were treated according to the EMA label. The median progression-free survival was 17.0 months. The most common treatment-related toxicity was fatigue. Treatment-related myelodysplastic syndrome (n=5) and a second cancer (n=1) were diagnosed. CONCLUSION: In this real-life setting, olaparib confirmed its efficacy and safety profile, as previously shown in clinical trials.

Sorafenib for patients with advanced angiosarcoma: a phase II Trial from the French Sarcoma Group (GSF/GETO).

BACKGROUND: Angiosarcomas account for <2% of all soft tissue sarcomas. This subtype is one of the most aggressive forms of soft tissue sarcoma. The prognosis for angiosarcoma patients in the advanced phase remains poor with current cytotoxic agents (progression-free survival [PFS] time of ∼4 months and overall survival [OS] time of ∼8 months). We investigated the antitumor activity of sorafenib in patients with metastatic or advanced angiosarcomas in a phase II trial. METHODS: We conducted a stratified phase II trial. The primary endpoint was the progression-free rate (PFR) at 9 months according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. A two-stage design (optimal Simon design) was used. Patients received sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) for 9 months until unacceptable toxicity or tumor progression. Central pathological and radiological reviews were performed. Data on stratum A (superficial angiosarcoma) and stratum B (visceral angiosarcoma) are currently available. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier, NCT00874874). FINDINGS: Strata A and B recruited 26 and 15 patients, respectively. The median age was 63 years (range, 31-82 years), with 17 male and 24 female patients. Fourteen cases arose in irradiated fields. Thirty patients (73.0%) had been pretreated with conventional chemotherapy. No unexpected toxicity occurred. The PFR at 9 months was 3.8% in stratum A and 0.0% in stratum B. The median PFS times were 1.8 months and 3.8 months, respectively, whereas the median OS times were 12.0 months and 9.0 months, respectively. No responses were observed in chemotherapy-naïve patients, whereas a 40% tumor control rate and 23% response rate were observed in the pretreated population. In this cohort, no activating mutation of the KDR gene (exons 15, 16, 24) was detected. INTERPRETATION: Sorafenib showed limited antitumor activity in pretreated patients only, for both visceral and superficial angiosarcoma, but tumor control was of short duration.

Ketamine in chronic pain: A Delphi survey.

BACKGROUND: There is no recommendation in Europe for the use of ketamine in patients with chronic pain. The heterogeneity of practice highlights the need to seek the advice of experts in order to establish a national consensus. This Delphi survey aimed to reach a national consensus on the use of ketamine in chronic pain in Pain clinics. METHODS: A collaborative four-round internet-based questionnaire was used. It was created after literature search on ketamine administration in chronic pain and included about 96 items. It discussed utility and advantages, adverse events and deleterious aspects, methods of administration, concomitant treatments and assessment of results. RESULTS: Twenty-eight experts completed all rounds of the survey with a total of 81.3% items reaching a consensual answer. Neuropathic pain represents the first indication to use ketamine, followed, with a good to moderate utility, by other situations (fibromyalgia, complex regional pain syndrome, central neuropathic pain, peripheral neuropathic pain, nociceptive pain, sensitization, opioid withdrawal, palliative care, depression). Experts agreed on the rare occurrence of adverse events. Concerning routes of administration, intravenous infusion with doses of 0.5-0.9 mg/kg/d for 4 days of treatment is preferred. Place of care is hospital, as in- or out-patient, with a quarterly administration of ketamine. Finally, ketamine effectiveness is assessed 1 month after infusion, and experts encourage combination with non-pharmacological treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi survey established a consensus of pain specialists on the use of ketamine in refractory chronic pain, thus providing a basis for future comparative trials. SIGNIFICANCE: This Delphi survey in chronic pain reached agreement on four main aspects: (1) Priority to treat neuropathic pain with evaluation of effectiveness at 1 month; (2) No deleterious effects in the majority of listed diseases/situations with the absence or <3% of suggested adverse events; (3) 0.5-0.9 mg/kg/d IV infusion; (4) Combination with non-pharmacological treatment.

No Geographical Inequalities in Survival for Sarcoma Patients in France: A Reference Networks' Outcome?

The national reference network NETSARC+ provides remote access to specialized diagnosis and the Multidisciplinary Tumour Board (MTB) to improve the management and survival of sarcoma patients in France. The IGéAS research program aims to assess the potential of this innovative organization to address geographical inequalities in cancer management. Using the IGéAS cohort built from the nationwide NETSARC+ database, the individual, clinical, and geographical determinants of the 3-year overall survival of sarcoma patients in France were analyzed. The survival analysis was focused on patients diagnosed in 2013 (n = 2281) to ensure sufficient hindsight to collect patient follow-up. Our study included patients with bone (16.8%), soft-tissue (69%), and visceral (14.2%) sarcomas, with a median age of 61.8 years. The overall survival was not associated with geographical variables after adjustment for individual and clinical factors. The lower survival in precarious population districts [HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.48] in comparison to wealthy metropolitan areas (HR = 1) found in univariable analysis was due to the worst clinical presentation at diagnosis of patients. The place of residence had no impact on sarcoma patients' survival, in the context of the national organization driven by the reference network. Following previous findings, this suggests the ability of this organization to go through geographical barriers usually impeding the optimal management of cancer patients.