Immune evasion in lung metastasis of leiomyosarcoma: upregulation of EPCAM inhibits CD8+ T cell infiltration.

BACKGROUND: Leiomyosarcomas are among the most common histological types of soft tissue sarcoma (STS), with no effective treatment available for advanced patients. Lung metastasis, the most common site of distant metastasis, is the primary prognostic factor. We analysed the immune environment targeting lung metastasis of STS to explore new targets for immunotherapy. METHODS: We analysed the immune environment of primary and lung metastases in 38 patients with STS using immunohistochemistry. Next, we performed gene expression analyses on primary and lung metastatic tissues from six patients with leiomyosarcoma. Using human leiomyosarcoma cell lines, the effects of the identified genes on immune cells were assessed in vitro. RESULTS: Immunohistochemistry showed a significant decrease in CD8+ cells in the lung metastases of leiomyosarcoma. Among the genes upregulated in lung metastases, epithelial cellular adhesion molecule (EPCAM) showed the strongest negative correlation with the number of CD8+ cells. Transwell assay results showed that the migration of CD8+ T cells was significantly increased in the conditioned media obtained after inhibition or knock down of EPCAM. CONCLUSIONS: EPCAM was upregulated in lung metastases of leiomyosarcoma, suggesting inhibition of CD8+ T cell migration. Our findings suggest that EPCAM could serve as a potential novel therapeutic target for leiomyosarcoma.

Rare but clinically important salivary gland-type tumor of the lung: A review.

Salivary gland-type tumor (SGT) of the lung, which arises from the bronchial glands of the tracheobronchial tree, was first recognized in the 1950s. SGT represents less than 1% of all lung tumors and is generally reported to have a good prognosis. Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) and adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) are the two most common subtypes, comprising more than 90% of all SGTs. The reported 5-year survival rate of patients with SGT is 63.4%. Because this type of tumor develops in major bronchi, patients with SGT commonly present with symptoms of bronchial obstruction, including dyspnea, shortness of breath, wheezing, and coughing; thus, the tumor is usually identified at an early stage. Most patients are treated by lobectomy and pneumonectomy, but bronchoplasty or tracheoplasty is often needed to preserve respiratory function. Lymphadenectomy in the surgical resection of SGT is recommended, given that clinical benefit from lymphadenectomy has been reported in patients with MEC. For advanced tumors, appropriate therapy should be considered according to the subtype because of the varying clinicopathologic features. MEC, but not ACC, is less likely to be treated with radiation therapy because of its low response rate. Although previous researchers have learned much from studying SGT over the years, the diagnosis and treatment of SGT remains a complex and challenging problem for thoracic surgeons. In this article, we review the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy) of SGT, mainly focusing on MEC and ACC. We also summarize reports of adjuvant and definitive radiation therapy for ACC in the literature.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy for breast cancer can cause neutropenia, increasing the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) and serious infections. The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) as primary prophylaxis has been explored to mitigate these risks. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary G-CSF prophylaxis in patients with invasive breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted according to the "Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development" using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies assessing using G-CSF as primary prophylaxis in invasive breast cancer were included. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and FN incidence. Meta-analyses were performed for outcomes with sufficient data. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis, and five RCTs were meta-analyzed for FN incidence. The meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in FN incidence with primary G-CSF prophylaxis (risk difference [RD] = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.01-0.43, p = 0.04). Evidence for improvement in OS with G-CSF was inconclusive. Four RCTs suggested a tendency for increased pain with G-CSF, but statistical significance was not reported. CONCLUSIONS: Primary prophylactic use of G-CSF is strongly recommended for breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, as it has been shown to reduce the incidence of FN. While the impact on OS is unclear, the benefits of reducing FN are considered to outweigh the potential harm of increased pain.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for patients with Ewing sarcomas: a systematic review for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma can lead to severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve Ewing sarcoma treatment outcomes?". METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi web databases, including English and Japanese articles published from 1990 to 2019. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival (OS), febrile neutropenia (FN) incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life (QOL), and pain. RESULTS: Twenty-five English and five Japanese articles were identified for CQ #1. After screening, a cohort study of vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide chemotherapy with 851 patients was selected. Incidence of FN was 60.8% with G-CSF and 65.8% without; statistical tests were not conducted. Data on OS, infection-related mortality, QOL, or pain was unavailable. Consequently, CQ #1 was redefined as a future research question. As for CQ #2, we found two English and five Japanese papers, of which one high-quality randomized controlled trial on G-CSF use in intensified chemotherapy was included. This trial showed trends toward lower mortality and a significant increase in event-free survival for 2-week interval regimen with the G-CSF primary prophylactic use compared with 3-week interval. CONCLUSION: This review indicated that G-CSF's efficacy as primary prophylaxis in Ewing sarcoma, except in children, is uncertain despite its common use. This review tentatively endorses intensified chemotherapy with G-CSF primary prophylaxis for Ewing sarcoma.

Effectiveness and safety of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor priming regimen for acute myeloid leukemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Clinical Practice Guideline for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remain poor. Although the concomitant use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and anti-chemotherapeutic agents has been investigated to improve the antileukemic effect on AML, its usefulness remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the effects of G-CSF priming as a remission induction therapy or salvage chemotherapy. METHODS: We performed a thorough literature search for studies related to the priming effect of G-CSF using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. A qualitative analysis of the pooled data was performed, and risk ratios (RRs) with confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and summarized. RESULTS: Two reviewers independently extracted and accessed the 278 records identified during the initial screening, and 62 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility in second screening. Eleven studies were included in the qualitative analysis and 10 in the meta-analysis. A systematic review revealed that priming with G-CSF did not correlate with an improvement in response rate and overall survival (OS). The result of the meta-analysis revealed the tendency for lower relapse rate in the G-CSF priming groups without inter-study heterogeneity [RR, 0.91 (95% CI 0.82-1.01), p = 0.08; I2 = 4%, p = 0.35]. In specific populations, including patients with intermediate cytogenetic risk and those receiving high-dose cytarabine, the G-CSF priming regimen prolonged OS. CONCLUSIONS: G-CSF priming in combination with intensive remission induction treatment is not universally effective in patients with AML. Further studies are required to identify the patient cohort for which G-CSF priming is recommended.

Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for patients with non-round cell soft tissue sarcomas: a systematic review for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is an essential supportive agent for chemotherapy-induced severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for non-round cell soft tissue sarcoma (NRC-STS)?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve NRC-STS treatment outcomes?" for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: A literature search was performed on the primary prophylactic use of G-CSF for NRC-STSs. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival, incidence of febrile neutropenia, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: Eighty-one and 154 articles were extracted from the literature search for CQs #1 and #2, respectively. After the first and second screening, one and two articles were included in the final evaluation, respectively. Only some studies have addressed these two clinical questions through a literature review. CONCLUSION: The clinical questions were converted to future research questions because of insufficient available data. The statements were proposed: "The benefit of primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STS" and "The benefit of intensified chemotherapy with primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STSs." G-CSF is often administered as primary prophylaxis when chemotherapy with severe myelosuppression is administered. However, its effectiveness and safety are yet to be scientifically proven.

Effectiveness of G-CSF in chemotherapy for digestive system tumors: a systematic review of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 delineated by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reportedly reduces the risk of neutropenia and subsequent infections caused by cancer chemotherapy. Although several guidelines recommend using G-CSF in primary prophylaxis according to the incidence rate of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN), the effectiveness of G-CSF in digestive system tumor chemotherapy remains unclear. To address these clinical questions, we conducted a systematic review as part of revising the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 published by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: This systematic review addressed two main clinical questions (CQ): CQ1: "Is primary prophylaxis with G-CSF effective in chemotherapy?", and CQ2: "Is increasing the intensity of chemotherapy with G-CSF effective?" We reviewed different types of digestive system tumors, including esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, biliary tract, colorectal, and neuroendocrine carcinomas. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web databases were searched for information sources. Independent systematic reviewers conducted two rounds of screening and selected relevant records for each CQ. Finally, the working group members synthesized the strength of evidence and recommendations. RESULTS: After two rounds of screening, 5/0/3/0/2/0 records were extracted for CQ1 of esophageal/gastric/pancreatic/biliary tract/colorectal/ and neuroendocrine carcinoma, respectively. Additionally, a total of 2/6/1 records were extracted for CQ2 of esophageal/pancreatic/colorectal cancer, respectively. The strength of evidence and recommendations were evaluated for CQ1 of colorectal cancer; however, we could not synthesize recommendations for other CQs owing to the lack of records. CONCLUSION: The use of G-CSF for primary prophylaxis in chemotherapy for colorectal cancer is inappropriate.

Comparison between a single dose of PEG G-CSF and multiple doses of non-PEG G-CSF: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUD: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is widely used for the primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (FN). Two types of G-CSF are available in Japan, namely G-CSF chemically bound to polyethylene glycol (PEG G-CSF), which provides long-lasting effects with a single dose, and non-polyethylene glycol-bound G-CSF (non-PEG G-CSF), which must be sequentially administrated for several days. METHODS: This current study investigated the utility of these treatments for the primary prophylaxis of FN through a systematic review of the literature. A detailed literature search for related studies was performed using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted and assessed by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis or meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate six outcomes. RESULTS: Through the first and second screenings, 23 and 18 articles were extracted for qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis, respectively. The incidence of FN was significantly lower in the PEG G-CSF group than in the non-PEG G-CSF group with a strong quality/certainty of evidence. The differences in other outcomes, such as overall survival, infection-related mortality, the duration of neutropenia (less than 500/µL), quality of life, and pain, were not apparent. CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of PEG G-CSF is strongly recommended over multiple-dose non-PEG G-CSF therapy for the primary prophylaxis of FN.

Therapeutic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with febrile neutropenia: a comprehensive systematic review for clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia represents a critical oncologic emergency, and its management is pivotal in cancer therapy. In several guidelines, the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia is not routinely recommended except in high-risk cases. The Japan Society of Clinical Oncology has updated its clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF, incorporating a systematic review to address this clinical question. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted by performing a comprehensive literature search across PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web, focusing on publications from January 1990 to December 2019. Selected studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and cohort and case-control studies. Evaluated outcomes included overall survival, infection-related mortality, hospitalization duration, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 332 records. Following two rounds of screening, two records were selected for both qualitative and quantitative synthesis including meta-analysis. Regarding infection-related mortality, the event to case ratio was 5:134 (3.73%) in the G-CSF group versus 6:129 (4.65%) in the non-G-CSF group, resulting in a relative risk of 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.27-2.58; p = 0.54), which was not statistically significant. Only median values for hospitalization duration were available from the two RCTs, precluding a meta-analysis. For overall survival, quality of life, and pain, no suitable studies were found for analysis, rendering their assessment unfeasible. CONCLUSION: A weak recommendation is made that G-CSF treatment not be administered to patients with febrile neutropenia during cancer chemotherapy. G-CSF treatment can be considered for patients at high risk.

Optimal timing of prophylactic pegylated G-CSF after chemotherapy administration for patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

INTRODUCTION: The timing of prophylactic pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration during cancer chemotherapy varies, with Day 2 and Days 3-5 being the most common schedules. Optimal timing remains uncertain, affecting efficacy and adverse events. This systematic review sought to evaluate the available evidence on the timing of prophylactic pegylated G-CSF administration. METHODS: Based on the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development, we searched the PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and Cochrane Library databases for literature published from January 1990 to December 2019. The inclusion criteria included studies among the adult population using pegfilgrastim. The search strategy focused on timing-related keywords. Two reviewers independently extracted and assessed the data. RESULTS: Among 300 initial search results, only four articles met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis for febrile neutropenia incidence suggested a potential higher incidence when pegylated G-CSF was administered on Days 3-5 than on Day 2 (odds ratio: 1.27, 95% CI 0.66-2.46, p = 0.47), with a moderate certainty of evidence. No significant difference in overall survival or mortality due to infections was observed. The trend of severe adverse events was lower on Days 3-5, without statistical significance (odds ratio: 0.72, 95% CI 0.14-3.67, p = 0.69) and with a moderate certainty of evidence. Data on pain were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Both Day 2 and Days 3-5 were weakly recommended for pegylated G-CSF administration post-chemotherapy in patients with cancer. The limited evidence highlights the need for further research to refine recommendations.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis to develop clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is commonly administered to cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy, especially when incidence rate of febrile neutropenia (FN) surpasses 20%. While primary prophylaxis with G-CSF has been proven effective in preventing FN in patients with cancer, there is limited evidence regarding its efficacy in specifically, lung cancer. Our systematic review focused on the efficacy of G-CSF primary prophylaxis in lung cancer. METHODS: We extracted studies on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) using the PubMed, Ichushi Web, and Cochrane Library databases. Two reviewers assessed the extracted studies for each type of lung cancer and conducted quantitative and meta-analyses of preplanned outcomes, including overall survival, FN incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and musculoskeletal pain. RESULTS: A limited number of studies were extracted: two on NSCLC and six on SCLC. A meta-analysis was not conducted owing to insufficient data on NSCLC. Two case-control studies explored the efficacy of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF in patients with NSCLC (on docetaxel and ramucirumab therapy) and indicated a lower FN frequency with G-CSF. For SCLC, meta-analysis of five studies showed no significant reduction in FN incidence, with an odds ratio of 0.38 (95% confidence interval 0.03-5.56, P = 0.48). Outcomes other than FN incidence could not be evaluated due to low data availability. CONCLUSION: Limited data are available on G-CSF prophylaxis in lung cancer. Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF may be weakly recommended in Japanese patients with NSCLC undergoing docetaxel and ramucirumab combination therapy.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF after induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan society of clinical oncology.

Although granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reduces the incidence, duration, and severity of neutropenia, its prophylactic use for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains controversial due to a theoretically increased risk of relapse. The present study investigated the effects of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis for AML with remission induction therapy. A detailed literature search for related studies was performed using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted and assessed by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis of pooled data was conducted, and the risk ratio with corresponding confidence intervals was calculated in the meta-analysis and summarized. Sixteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis, nine of which were examined in the meta-analysis. Although G-CSF significantly shortened the duration of neutropenia, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF did not correlate with infection-related mortality. Moreover, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF did not affect disease progression/recurrence, overall survival, or adverse events, such as musculoskeletal pain. However, evidence to support or discourage the use of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis for adult AML patients with induction therapy remains limited. Therefore, the use of G-CSF as primary prophylaxis can be considered for adult AML patients with remission induction therapy who are at a high risk of infectious complications.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor during dose-dense chemotherapy for urothelial cancer: Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) decreases the incidence, duration, and severity of febrile neutropenia (FN); however, dose reduction or withdrawal is often preferred in the management of adverse events in the treatment of urothelial cancer. It is also important to maintain therapeutic intensity in order to control disease progression and thereby relieve symptoms, such as hematuria, infection, bleeding, and pain, as well as to prolong the survival. In this clinical question, we compared treatment with primary prophylactic administration of G-CSF to maintain therapeutic intensity with conventional standard therapy without G-CSF and examined the benefits and risks as major outcomes. A detailed literature search for relevant studies was performed using PubMed, Ichu-shi Web, and Cochrane Library. Data were extracted and evaluated independently by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis of the pooled data was performed, and the risk ratios with corresponding confidence intervals were calculated and summarized in a meta-analysis. Seven studies were included in the qualitative analysis, two of which were reviewed in the meta-analysis of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) therapy, and one randomized controlled study showed a reduction in the incidence of FN. Primary prophylactic administration of G-CSF may be beneficial, as shown in a randomized controlled study of dose-dense MVAC therapy. However, there are no studies on other regimens, and we made a "weak recommendation to perform" with an annotation of the relevant regimen (dose-dense MVAC).

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis of G-CSF during chemotherapy for prostate cancer, Japanese clinical guideline for appropriate use of G-CSF: clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel (DTX) is commonly used as a primary chemotherapy, and cabazitaxel (CBZ) has shown efficacy in patients who are DTX resistant. Primary prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) therapy is currently used with CBZ treatment in routine clinical care in Japan. METHODS: In this study, we performed a systematic review following the Minds guidelines to investigate the effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during chemotherapy for prostate cancer and to construct G-CSF guidelines for primary prophylaxis use during chemotherapy. A comprehensive literature search of various electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi) was performed on January 10, 2020, to identify studies published between January 1990 and December 31, 2019 that investigate the impact of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during CBZ administration on clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Ultimately, nine articles were included in the qualitative systematic review. Primary G-CSF prophylaxis during CBZ administration for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer was difficult to assess in terms of correlation with overall survival, mortality from infection, and patients' quality of life. These difficulties were owing to the lack of randomized controlled trials comparing patients with and without primary prophylaxis of G-CSF during CBZ administration. However, some retrospective studies have suggested that it may reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSION: G-CSF may be beneficial as primary prophylaxis during CBZ administration for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer, and we made a "weak recommendation to perform" with an annotation of the relevant regimen.

What Are the Complication Rates and Factors Associated With Total Femur Replacement After Tumor Resection? Findings From the Japanese Musculoskeletal Oncology Group.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing massive tumor resection and total femur replacement (TFR) face a substantial risk of hip dislocation and infection, often resulting in multiple implant revisions or hip disarticulation. These complications can impact their independence and prognosis. Additionally, their shorter life expectancy is influenced by challenges in achieving local radical resection and controlling metastases. Identifying suitable candidates for TFR is vital, necessitating investigations into dislocation, infection, implant failure rates, local recurrence, overall survival, and associated factors. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the postsurgical complication (hip dislocation and infection) rate and factors associated with postsurgical complications in patients who underwent TFR after tumor resection? (2) What is the local recurrence rate, implant failure rate, overall survival rate, and factors associated with local recurrence and implant failure? METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 42 patients (median [range] age 47 years [10 to 79 years]) who underwent TFR and tumor resection at the time of the same surgical procedure between 1990 and 2020 at 12 registered institutions that specialized in tumor treatment in Japan. A total of 55% (23) of the patients were men, and 79% (33) had bone sarcoma. The median (range) follow-up period was 36.5 months (2 to 327 months). Of the 42 patients, 12% (5) were lost to follow-up before 2 years without meeting a study endpoint (postsurgical complications, revision, or amputation), and another 19% (8) died before 2 years with implants intact, leaving 69% (29) of the original group who had either follow-up of at least 2 years or met a study endpoint before the minimum surveillance duration. Another 10% (4) had a minimum of 2 years of follow-up but had not been seen in the past 5 years. Infection was defined as deep-seated infection involving soft tissues, bones, joints, and the area around the implant. We did not consider superficial infections. Implant failure was defined when a patient underwent reimplantation or amputation. The complication and implant failure rates were assessed by the cumulative incidence function method, considering competing events. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the overall survival rate. RESULTS: The 1-month, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year dislocation rates were 5%, 12%, 14%, and 14%, respectively. The 1-month, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year infection rates were 5%, 7%, 10%, and 15%, respectively. Multivariable analyses for hip dislocation and infection revealed that resection of the abductor muscles and large tumor size were positively associated with hip dislocation. The 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year local recurrence rates were 5%, 15%, and 15%, respectively. The 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year implant failure rates were 5% (95% confidence interval 1% to 15%), 7% (95% CI 2% to 18%), 16% (95% CI 6% to 29%), and 16% (95% CI 6% to 29%), respectively. Multivariable analyses of local recurrence and implant failure that led to reimplantation or amputation revealed that a positive surgical margin was positively associated with local recurrence. The 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year overall patient survival rates were 95% (95% CI 87% to 102%), 77% (95% CI 64% to 91%), and 64% (95% CI 48% to 81%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Hip dislocation, infection, and local recurrence were frequently observed in patients who received massive tumor resection and TFR in our study, eventually leading to reimplantation or amputation. Preserving the abductor muscles and resecting the tumor with a wide margin can prevent postoperative dislocation and local recurrence. Future research should focus on patient selection criteria, prevention of hip dislocation, and innovative treatments. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Detection of Novel Tyrosine Kinase Fusion Genes as Potential Therapeutic Targets in Bone and Soft Tissue Sarcomas Using DNA/RNA-based Clinical Sequencing.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 1% of clinically treatable tyrosine kinase fusions, including anaplastic lymphoma kinase, neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase, RET proto-oncogene, and ROS proto-oncogene 1, have been identified in soft tissue sarcomas via comprehensive genome profiling based on DNA sequencing. Histologic tumor-specific fusion genes have been reported in approximately 20% of soft tissue sarcomas; however, unlike tyrosine kinase fusion genes, these fusions cannot be directly targeted in therapy. Approximately 80% of tumor-specific fusion-negative sarcomas, including myxofibrosarcoma and leiomyosarcoma, that are defined in complex karyotype sarcomas remain genetically uncharacterized; this mutually exclusive pattern of mutations suggests that other mutually exclusive driver oncogenes are yet to be discovered. Tumor-specific, fusion-negative sarcomas may be associated with unique translocations, and oncogenic fusion genes, including tyrosine kinase fusions, may have been overlooked in these sarcomas. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Can DNA- or RNA-based analysis reveal any characteristic gene alterations in bone and soft tissue sarcomas? (2) Can useful and potential tyrosine kinase fusions in tumors from tumor-specific, fusion-negative sarcomas be detected using an RNA-based screening system? (3) Do the identified potential fusion tumors, especially in neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase gene fusions in bone sarcoma, transform cells and respond to targeted drug treatment in in vitro assays? (4) Can the identified tyrosine kinase fusion genes in sarcomas be useful therapeutic targets? METHODS: Between 2017 and 2020, we treated 100 patients for bone and soft tissue sarcomas at five institutions. Any biopsy or surgery from which a specimen could be obtained was included as potentially eligible. Ninety percent (90 patients) of patients were eligible; a further 8% (8 patients) were excluded because they were either lost to follow-up or their diagnosis was changed, leaving 82% (82 patients) for analysis here. To answer our first and second questions regarding gene alterations and potential tyrosine kinase fusions in eight bone and 74 soft tissue sarcomas, we used the TruSight Tumor 170 assay to detect mutations, copy number variations, and gene fusions in the samples. To answer our third question, we performed functional analyses involving in vitro assays to determine whether the identified tyrosine kinase fusions were associated with oncogenic abilities and drug responses. Finally, to determine usefulness as therapeutic targets, two pediatric patients harboring an NTRK fusion and an ALK fusion were treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors in clinical trials. RESULTS: DNA/RNA-based analysis demonstrated characteristic alterations in bone and soft tissue sarcomas; DNA-based analyses detected TP53 and copy number alterations of MDM2 and CDK4 . These single-nucleotide variants and copy number variations were enriched in specific fusion-negative sarcomas. RNA-based screening detected fusion genes in 24% (20 of 82) of patients. Useful potential fusions were detected in 19% (11 of 58) of tumor-specific fusion-negative sarcomas, with nine of these patients harboring tyrosine kinase fusion genes; five of these patients had in-frame tyrosine kinase fusion genes ( STRN3-NTRK3, VWC2-EGFR, ICK-KDR, FOXP2-MET , and CEP290-MET ) with unknown pathologic significance. The functional analysis revealed that STRN3-NTRK3 rearrangement that was identified in bone had a strong transforming potential in 3T3 cells, and that STRN3-NTRK3 -positive cells were sensitive to larotrectinib in vitro. To confirm the usefulness of identified tyrosine kinase fusion genes as therapeutic targets, patients with well-characterized LMNA-NTRK1 and CLTC-ALK fusions were treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors in clinical trials, and a complete response was achieved. CONCLUSION: We identified useful potential therapeutic targets for tyrosine kinase fusions in bone and soft tissue sarcomas using RNA-based analysis. We successfully identified STRN3-NTRK3 fusion in a patient with leiomyosarcoma of bone and determined the malignant potential of this fusion gene via functional analyses and drug effects. In light of these discoveries, comprehensive genome profiling should be considered even if the sarcoma is a bone sarcoma. There seem to be some limitations regarding current DNA-based comprehensive genome profiling tests, and it is important to use RNA testing for proper diagnosis and accurate identification of fusion genes. Studies on more patients, validation of results, and further functional analysis of unknown tyrosine kinase fusion genes are required to establish future treatments. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: DNA- and RNA-based screening systems may be useful for detecting tyrosine kinase fusion genes in specific fusion-negative sarcomas and identifying key therapeutic targets, leading to possible breakthroughs in the treatment of bone and soft tissue sarcomas. Given that current DNA sequencing misses fusion genes, RNA-based screening systems should be widely considered as a worldwide test for sarcoma. If standard treatments such as chemotherapy are not effective, or even if the sarcoma is of bone, RNA sequencing should be considered to identify as many therapeutic targets as possible.

Rare presentation of a primary intraosseous glomus tumor in the humerus of a teenager.

A glomus tumor is a benign mesenchymal tumor comprised of cells that resemble the perivascular modified smooth muscle cells of the glomus body. Glomus tumors typically appear in the superficial lesions of the soft tissue in the extremities, such as the subungual region. However, their occurrence in the bone is rare, with only about 30 cases reported to date. Half of these cases involved the distal phalanges of the fingers or toes, with only three reported cases involving the long bones. Here, we present the first case, a primary glomus tumor in the humerus of a 14-year-old female. An osteolytic and cystic lesion was detected after a pathological fracture occurred during exercise. Despite the tumor's large size, no pathological findings indicated malignancy. The fracture healed through conservative treatment, while the tumor was effectively managed with curettage. Appropriate medical care can be provided to patients by focusing on pathological findings.

Low-grade central osteosarcoma with extraosseous dedifferentiation: a rare case.

Low-grade central osteosarcoma (LGCOS), which arises from the intramedullary cavity of the metaphysis of long bones, occasionally exhibits extraosseous spread. Approximately 10-30% of patients with LGCOS exhibit dedifferentiation, but it is rare to experience a primary tumor with a dedifferentiated component. A 38-year-old female patient presented with right knee pain for two months. Imaging studies revealed a bone mass with extraosseous involvement. Wide resection was performed, and pathologic examination led to the diagnosis of LGCOS with a dedifferentiated extraosseous lesion. A single defect in the bone cortex constituted the boundary between the low- and high-grade components. The extraosseous high-grade component included more tumor cells with p53 overexpression and more murine double minute 2 (MDM2) copies compared with the low-grade component. These genetic mutations and copy number alterations can be associated with malignant transformation of LGCOS.

[Educational Impact of Using Three-dimentional Models for Preoperative Simulation of Segmentectomy for Medical Students].

BACKGROUND: Lung segment anatomy is complex and difficult for medical students to comprehend, so education is a challenging issue. Three-dimensional (3D) models may be a more effective teaching tool for medical students. We evaluated the usefulness of 3D models in education for segmentectomy. METHODS: Sixty-six students who participated in clinical training for thoracic surgery from November 2020 to March 2022 were included in the study. Computed tomography (CT) images, 3D-CT images, and 3D models were used to investigate students' level of understanding for each lung segment. Levels of understanding were assessed using a questionnaire administered using the interview method. The results of the questionnaire were tabulated and analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: The response rate was 100%. Comprehension scores for all questions were highest for 3D models, followed by 3D-CT and CT. These results suggest that use of a 3D entity model may have a high educational effect. CONCLUSION: Although it is unclear whether students' comprehension was directly related to their understanding of correct anatomy, our results suggest that 3D models may be an effective way for medical students to understand lung segmentectomy.

The brain-specific splice variant of the CDC42 GTPase works together with the kinase ACK to downregulate the EGF receptor in promoting neurogenesis.

The small GTPase CDC42 plays essential roles in neurogenesis and brain development. Previously, we showed that a CDC42 splice variant that has a ubiquitous tissue distribution specifically stimulates the formation of neural progenitor cells, whereas a brain-specific CDC42 variant, CDC42b, is essential for promoting the transition of neural progenitor cells to neurons. These specific roles of CDC42 and CDC42b in neurogenesis are ascribed to their opposing effects on mTORC1 activity. Specifically, the ubiquitous form of CDC42 stimulates mTORC1 activity and thereby upregulates tissue-specific transcription factors that are essential for neuroprogenitor formation, whereas CDC42b works together with activated CDC42-associated kinase (ACK) to downregulate mTOR expression. Here, we demonstrate that the EGF receptor (EGFR) is an additional and important target of CDC42b and ACK, which is downregulated by their combined actions in promoting neurogenesis. The activation status of the EGFR determines the timing by which neural progenitor cells derived from P19 embryonal carcinoma terminally differentiate into neurons. By promoting EGFR degradation, we found that CDC42b and ACK stimulate autophagy, which protects emerging neurons from apoptosis and helps trigger neural progenitor cells to differentiate into neurons. Moreover, our results reveal that CDC42b is localized in phosphatidylinositol (3,4,5)-triphosphate-enriched microdomains on the plasma membrane, mediated through its polybasic sequence 185KRK187, which is essential for determining its distinct functions. Overall, these findings now highlight a molecular mechanism by which CDC42b and ACK regulate neuronal differentiation and provide new insights into the functional interplay between EGFR degradation and autophagy that occurs during embryonic neurogenesis.