Afamitresgene autoleucel for advanced synovial sarcoma and myxoid round cell liposarcoma (SPEARHEAD-1): an international, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Afamitresgene autoleucel (afami-cel) showed acceptable safety and promising efficacy in a phase 1 trial (NCT03132922). The aim of this study was to further evaluate the efficacy of afami-cel for the treatment of patients with HLA-A*02 and MAGE-A4-expressing advanced synovial sarcoma or myxoid round cell liposarcoma. METHODS: SPEARHEAD-1 was an open-label, non-randomised, phase 2 trial done across 23 sites in Canada, the USA, and Europe. The trial included three cohorts, of which the main investigational cohort (cohort 1) is reported here. Cohort 1 included patients with HLA-A*02, aged 16-75 years, with metastatic or unresectable synovial sarcoma or myxoid round cell liposarcoma (confirmed by cytogenetics) expressing MAGE-A4, and who had received at least one previous line of anthracycline-containing or ifosfamide-containing chemotherapy. Patients received a single intravenous dose of afami-cel (transduced dose range 1·0 × 109-10·0 × 109 T cells) after lymphodepletion. The primary endpoint was overall response rate in cohort 1, assessed by a masked independent review committee using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1) in the modified intention-to-treat population (all patients who received afami-cel). Adverse events, including those of special interest (cytokine release syndrome, prolonged cytopenia, and neurotoxicity), were monitored and are reported for the modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04044768; recruitment is closed and follow-up is ongoing for cohorts 1 and 2, and recruitment is open for cohort 3. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2019, and July 27, 2021, 52 patients with cytogenetically confirmed synovial sarcoma (n=44) and myxoid round cell liposarcoma (n=8) were enrolled and received afami-cel in cohort 1. Patients were heavily pre-treated (median three [IQR two to four] previous lines of systemic therapy). Median follow-up time was 32·6 months (IQR 29·4-36·1). Overall response rate was 37% (19 of 52; 95% CI 24-51) overall, 39% (17 of 44; 24-55) for patients with synovial sarcoma, and 25% (two of eight; 3-65) for patients with myxoid round cell liposarcoma. Cytokine release syndrome occurred in 37 (71%) of 52 of patients (one grade 3 event). Cytopenias were the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events (lymphopenia in 50 [96%], neutropenia 44 [85%], leukopenia 42 [81%] of 52 patients). No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Afami-cel treatment resulted in durable responses in heavily pre-treated patients with HLA-A*02 and MAGE-A4-expressing synovial sarcoma. This study shows that T-cell receptor therapy can be used to effectively target solid tumours and provides rationale to expand this approach to other solid malignancies. FUNDING: Adaptimmune.

Disparate Outcomes, Biologic and Therapeutic Differences in Pediatric versus Adult Patients with Ewing Sarcoma.

INTRODUCTION: Ewing sarcoma (ES) is a small blue round cell sarcoma affecting a wide age spectrum. Clinical advances predominately stem from pediatric research consortia clinical trials. In most series, adults have poorer outcomes when compared to children. The aim of this study was to perform a detailed evaluation of factors potentially accounting for this difference. METHODS: A single institution retrospective chart review was conducted on patients with ES diagnosed from 2005 to 2015, identified using a free-text search engine with the keywords "Ewing sarcoma" as well as a corresponding pathologic database. Data were analyzed based on age, pediatric (age <18) and adult (age >18 years), using a multivariate analysis model. RESULTS: Eighty-eight ES patients (34 pediatric, 54 adult) were identified with a median age of 13 (range 3-18) and 31 (range 19-70) in their respective cohorts. Five-year overall survival (OS) was higher in pediatric patients (73.5% vs. 48.1%, p = 0.0213). By stage, 5-year OS in pediatric versus adult patients was 65% versus 20% (p = 0.0530) in metastatic (n = 32) and 68.1% versus 58.8% (p = 0.278) in localized (n = 56) patients. Lung-only metastases were present in 83% of metastatic pediatric patients versus 35% of adult metastatic patients. Pediatric patients received more cycles of first-line chemotherapy (13.8 vs. 11.4, p = 0.001), independent of stage. More cycles of chemotherapy correlated with improved OS (HR: 0.864, CI: 0.773-0.967) and progression-free survival (HR: 0.897, CI: 0.808-0.996). CONCLUSIONS: Outcome differences were most notable in patients with metastatic disease, although not statistically significant. Our series found differences in presentation between pediatric and adult populations with adult patients receiving fewer cycles of chemotherapy. This may suggest that both variations in underlying disease biology and potentially differences in treatment may account for outcome disparities.

Outcome of Patients With Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumors Enrolled on Sarcoma Alliance for Research Through Collaboration (SARC) Phase II Trials.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of prior phase II trials for malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST) may help develop more suitable trial endpoints in future studies. METHODS: We analyzed outcomes of patients with recurrent or unresectable/metastatic MPNST enrolled on prior Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration (SARC) phase II trials and estimated the progression-free survival (PFS). PFS from SARC006 (NCT00304083), the phase II trial of upfront chemotherapy in chemotherapy naïve patients, was analyzed separately. Impact of baseline enrollment characteristics on PFS was evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients (29 male, 35 female, median age 39 years (range 15-81)) with MPNST were enrolled on 1 of 5 trials of single agent or combination therapy that were determined to be inactive. Patients had received a median of 1 (range 0-5) prior systemic therapy, and most had undergone prior surgery (77%) and radiation (61%). Seventy-three percent had metastatic disease at enrollment. Median PFS was 1.77 months (95% CI, 1.61-3.45), and the PFS rate at 4 months was 15%. Greater number of prior systemic therapies and worse performance status were associated with inferior PFS. There was no significant difference in PFS based on age at enrollment, treatment trial, response criteria, presence of metastatic disease, disease site at enrollment, and prior surgery or radiation. In comparison, on the SARC006 trial the PFS rate at 4 months was 94% in 40 patients. CONCLUSION: These data provide a historical baseline PFS that may be used as a comparator in future clinical trials for patients with MPNST.

Integrative clinical genomics of metastatic cancer.

Metastasis is the primary cause of cancer-related deaths. Although The Cancer Genome Atlas has sequenced primary tumour types obtained from surgical resections, much less comprehensive molecular analysis is available from clinically acquired metastatic cancers. Here we perform whole-exome and -transcriptome sequencing of 500 adult patients with metastatic solid tumours of diverse lineage and biopsy site. The most prevalent genes somatically altered in metastatic cancer included TP53, CDKN2A, PTEN, PIK3CA, and RB1. Putative pathogenic germline variants were present in 12.2% of cases of which 75% were related to defects in DNA repair. RNA sequencing complemented DNA sequencing to identify gene fusions, pathway activation, and immune profiling. Our results show that integrative sequence analysis provides a clinically relevant, multi-dimensional view of the complex molecular landscape and microenvironment of metastatic cancers.

OER-073: A multicenter phase 2 study evaluating the role of pazopanib in angiosarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Angiosarcomas are rare mesenchymal sarcomas that can present as primary cutaneous or noncutaneous disease. They express a variety of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors. The authors hypothesized that the treatment of angiosarcoma with pazopanib, a multikinase inhibitor with activity against vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, would result in disease response and prolonged disease stabilization. METHODS: This was an open-label, phase 2 trial of pazopanib in patients who had incurable angiosarcoma. The co-primary end points were response according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors and progression-free survival (PFS) at 3 months. The starting dose of pazopanib was 800 mg daily. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients were accrued between 2011 and 2018, and 22 patients were evaluable for response. Toxicities were similar to those identified in prior reports. There was one partial response (3%), and the clinical benefit rate (including complete responses, partial responses, and stable disease) was 48%, which was observed more frequently in patients who had cutaneous disease. The median PFS was 14.4 weeks, and the 3-month PFS rate determined by Kaplan-Meier estimate was 54.6% (95% CI, 36.0%-82.9%), meeting the primary study objective. The Kaplan-Meier overall survival estimate was 16.1 months. CONCLUSIONS: Pazopanib therapy in patients who had incurable angiosarcoma was associated with meaningful disease control, especially in those who had cutaneous disease with limited objective responses. LAY SUMMARY: Angiosarcoma is a rare cancer that can be found on the skin or in internal organs. This study tested pazopanib, an oral targeted medication, to determine its benefit in patients with angiosarcoma who could not undergo the removal of their tumors by surgery. Pazopanib treatment was safe, and no new side effects were reported. The study showed that pazopanib controlled tumor growth in one half of patients at 3 months and was more common in angiosarcomas of the skin; it led to tumor shrinkage in a minority of patients (1 of 29).

Giant Cell Tumor of Bone: Effect of Longer Dosing Intervals of Denosumab on Tumor Control and Bone-related Complications.

BACKGROUND: Denosumab is an effective treatment for giant cell tumor of the bone (GCTB) but can cause clinically significant adverse effects. Current approved dosing is every 4 weeks after 3 weekly loading doses. We assessed whether alternative, longer dosing intervals are associated with differences in efficacy or bone toxicity. METHODS: Single institution retrospective chart review was conducted on patients with GCTB over 18 years old who received at least 1 year of standard denosumab dosing. Patients identified using a free-text search engine with keywords "giant cell tumor" and "denosumab" from January 1998 to August 2020. RESULTS: Approximately 37 patients with GCTB (19F, 18M) were identified with median age of 37 years (range 22-73). Dosing interval was increased in 38% (n = 14), with the most common final dosing interval 12 weeks (n = 8). Six patients (16%) had bone complications: osteonecrosis of the jaw (n =5), atypical fracture (n = 1), and nonhealing dental wounds (n = 2). All patients with bone complications were on the monthly dosing schedule, but there was no statistically significant difference compared to longer dosing intervals (P = .22). No statistically significant difference in median PFS was noted (P = .97). However, 5-year PFS was superior in patients treated with less frequent versus standard dosing of denosumab (P = .036). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the interval of denosumab dosing for GCTB provided similar tumor control compared to standard dosing and lower absolute number of bone toxicity events. Larger studies are needed to better define the optimal interval of denosumab administration and the effect on efficacy, toxicity, and associated healthcare expense.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors, Version 2.2022.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are the most common type of soft tissue sarcoma that occur throughout the gastrointestinal tract. Most of these tumors are caused by oncogenic activating mutations in the KIT or PDGFRA genes. The NCCN Guidelines for GIST provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with these tumors. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines, including revised systemic therapy options for unresectable, progressive, or metastatic GIST based on mutational status, and updated recommendations for the management of GIST that develop resistance to specific tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare malignancies of mesenchymal cell origin that display a heterogenous mix of clinical and pathologic characteristics. STS can develop from fat, muscle, nerves, blood vessels, and other connective tissues. The evaluation and treatment of patients with STS requires a multidisciplinary team with demonstrated expertise in the management of these tumors. The complete NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Soft Tissue Sarcoma provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of extremity/superficial trunk/head and neck STS, as well as retroperitoneal/intra-abdominal STS, desmoid tumors, and rhabdomyosarcoma. This portion of the NCCN Guidelines discusses general principles for the diagnosis and treatment of retroperitoneal/intra-abdominal STS, outlines treatment recommendations, and reviews the evidence to support the guidelines recommendations.

A randomized, open-label, phase 2, multicenter trial of gemcitabine with pazopanib or gemcitabine with docetaxel in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic options for patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) are limited. The goal of the current phase 2 study was to examine the clinical activity and safety of the combination of gemcitabine plus pazopanib, a multityrosine kinase inhibitor with activity in STS. METHODS: The current randomized, phase 2 trial enrolled patients with advanced nonadipocytic STS who had received prior anthracycline-based therapy. Patients were assigned 1:1 to receive gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 with pazopanib at a dose of 800 mg daily (G+P) or gemcitabine at a dose of 900 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and docetaxel at a dose of 100 mg/m2 on day 8 (G+T) every 3 weeks. Crossover was allowed at the time of disease progression. The study used a noncomparative statistical design based on the precision of 95% confidence intervals for reporting the primary endpoints of median progression-free survival (PFS) and rate of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) for these 2 regimens based on the intent-to-treat patient population (AEs were graded using version 4.0 of the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events). RESULTS: A total of 90 patients were enrolled: 45 patients on each treatment arm. The median PFS was 4.1 months for each arm (P = .3, log-rank test). The best overall response of stable disease or better (complete response + partial response + stable disease) was the same for both treatment arms (64% for both the G+T and G+P arms). The rate of related grade ≥3 AEs was 82% for the G+T arm and 78% for the G+P arm. Related grade ≥3 AEs occurring in ≥10% of patients in the G+T and G+P arms were anemia (36% and 20%, respectively), fatigue (29% and 13%, respectively), thrombocytopenia (53% and 49%, respectively), neutropenia (20% and 49%, respectively), lymphopenia (13% and 11%, respectively), and hypertension (2% and 20%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The data from the current study have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of G+P as an alternative to G+T for patients with nonadipocytic STS.

Health-related quality of life and pain with selinexor in patients with advanced dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

Objective: Compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of selinexor versus placebo in patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Materials & methods: HRQoL was assessed at baseline and day 1 of each cycle using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item core quality of life questionnaire. Results were reported from baseline to day 169 (where exposure to treatment was maximized while maintaining adequate sample size). Results: Pain scores worsened for placebo versus selinexor across all postbaseline visits, although differences in HRQoL at some visits were not significant. Other domains did not exhibit significant differences between arms; however, scores in both arms deteriorated over time. Conclusion: Patients treated with selinexor reported lower rates and slower worsening of pain compared with patients who received placebo.

Lay abstract The goal of this study was to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with advanced unresectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma treated with selinexor compared with those treated with placebo. HRQoL was measured prior to treatment initiation and at the first day of each cycle of their treatment using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item core quality of life questionnaire. Pain scores worsened for placebo compared with selinexor across all visits after treatment, but differences at some visits were not significant. Other domains did not exhibit significant differences between arms; however, scores in both arms worsened over time reflecting the progressive disease burden in this patient population. As pain is one of the most devastating symptoms associated with advanced and progressing cancers, the significant reduction in pain in the selinexor arm, according to patient perception, represent a relevant added value of this drug in dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

Systemic treatments in MDM2 positive intimal sarcoma: A multicentre experience with anthracycline, gemcitabine, and pazopanib within the World Sarcoma Network.

BACKGROUND: Intimal sarcoma (InS) is an exceedingly rare neoplasm with an unfavorable prognosis, for which new potentially active treatments are under development. We report on the activity of anthracycline-based regimens, gemcitabine-based regimens, and pazopanib in patients with InS. METHODS: Seventeen sarcoma reference centers in Europe, the United States, and Japan contributed data to this retrospective analysis. Patients with MDM2-positive InS who were treated with anthracycline-based regimens, gemcitabine-based regimens, or pazopanib between October 2001 and January 2018 were selected. Local pathological review was performed to confirm diagnosis. Response was assessed by RECIST1.1. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were computed by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were included (66 anthracycline-based regimens; 26 gemcitabine-based regimens; 12 pazopanib). In the anthracycline-based group, 24 (36%) patients were treated for localized disease, and 42 (64%) patients were treated for advanced disease. The real-world overall response rate (rwORR) was 38%. For patients with localized disease, the median RFS was 14.6 months. For patients with advanced disease, the median PFS was 7.7 months. No anthracycline-related cardiac toxicity was reported in patients with cardiac InS (n = 26). For gemcitabine and pazopanib, the rwORR was 8%, and the median PFS was 3.2 and 3.7 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: This retrospective series shows the activity of anthracycline-based regimens in InS. Of note, anthracyclines were used in patients with cardiac InS with no significant cardiac toxicity. The prognosis in patients with InS remains poor, and new active drugs and treatment strategies are needed.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Version 1.2021.

The NCCN Guidelines for Soft Tissue Sarcoma provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with soft tissue sarcomas. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines, including the development of a separate and distinct guideline for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs); reconception of the management of desmoid tumors; inclusion of further recommendations for the diagnosis and management of extremity/body wall, head/neck sarcomas, and retroperitoneal sarcomas; modification and addition of systemic therapy regimens for sarcoma subtypes; and revision of the principles of radiation therapy for soft tissue sarcomas.

Denosumab in patients with giant-cell tumour of bone: a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Giant-cell tumour of bone (GCTB) is a rare, locally aggressive osteoclastogenic stromal tumour of the bone. This phase 2 study aimed to assess the safety and activity of denosumab in patients with surgically salvageable or unsalvageable GCTB. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study done at 30 sites in 12 countries we enrolled adults and skeletally mature adolescents (aged ≥12 years) weighing at least 45 kg with histologically confirmed and radiographically measurable GCTB, Karnofsky performance status 50% or higher (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status 0, 1, or 2), and measurable active disease within 1 year of study enrolment. Patients had surgically unsalvageable GCTB (cohort 1), had surgically salvageable GCTB with planned surgery expected to result in severe morbidity (cohort 2), or were enrolled from a previous study of denosumab for GCTB (cohort 3). Patients received 120 mg subcutaneous denosumab once every 4 weeks during the treatment phase, with loading doses (120 mg subcutaneously) administered on study days 8 and 15 to patients in cohorts 1 and 2 (patients in cohort 3 did not receive loading doses). The primary endpoint was safety in terms of the type, frequency, and severity of adverse events; secondary endpoints included time to disease progression from cohort 1 and the proportion of patients without surgery at month 6 for cohort 2. The safety analysis set included all enrolled patients who received at least one dose of denosumab. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00680992, and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between Sept 9, 2008, and Feb 25, 2016, 532 patients were enrolled: 267 in cohort 1, 253 in cohort 2, and 12 in cohort 3. At data cutoff on Feb 24, 2017, median follow-up was 58·1 months (IQR 34·0-74·4) in the overall patient population, and 65·8 months (40·9-82·4) in cohort 1, 53·4 months (28·2-64·1) in cohort 2, and 76·4 months (61·2-76·5) in cohort 3. During the treatment phase, the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypophosphataemia (24 [5%] of 526 patients), osteonecrosis of the jaw (17 [3%], pain in extremity (12 [2%]), and anaemia (11 [2%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 138 (26%) of 526 patients; the most common were osteonecrosis of the jaw (17 [3%]), anaemia (6 [1%]), bone giant cell tumour (6 [1%]), and back pain (5 [1%]). 28 (5%) patients had positively adjudicated osteonecrosis of the jaw, four (1%) had atypical femur fracture, and four (1%) had hypercalcaemia occurring 30 days after denosumab discontinuation. There were four cases (1%) of sarcomatous transformation, consistent with historical data. Ten (2%) treatment-emergent deaths occurred (two of which were considered treatment-related; bone sarcoma in cohort 2 and sarcoma in cohort 1). Median time to progression or recurrence for patients in cohort 1 during the first treatment phase was not reached (28 [11%] of 262 patients had progression or recurrence). 227 (92%; 95% CI 87-95) of 248 patients who received at least one dose of denosumab in cohort 2 had no surgery in the first 6 months of the study. INTERPRETATION: The types and frequencies of adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of denosumab, which showed long-term disease control for patients with GCTB with unresectable and resectable tumours. Our results suggest that the overall risk to benefit ratio for denosumab treatment in patients with GCTB remains favourable. FUNDING: Amgen.

Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Version 2.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare solid tumors of mesenchymal cell origin that display a heterogenous mix of clinical and pathologic characteristics. STS can develop from fat, muscle, nerves, blood vessels, and other connective tissues. The evaluation and treatment of patients with STS requires a multidisciplinary team with demonstrated expertise in the management of these tumors. The complete NCCN Guidelines for STS provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of extremity/superficial trunk/head and neck STS, as well as intra-abdominal/retroperitoneal STS, gastrointestinal stromal tumors, desmoid tumors, and rhabdomyosarcoma. This portion of the NCCN Guidelines discusses general principles for the diagnosis, staging, and treatment of STS of the extremities, superficial trunk, or head and neck; outlines treatment recommendations by disease stage; and reviews the evidence to support the guidelines recommendations.

Pembrolizumab in advanced soft-tissue sarcoma and bone sarcoma (SARC028): a multicentre, two-cohort, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced sarcomas have a poor prognosis and few treatment options that improve overall survival. Chemotherapy and targeted therapies offer short-lived disease control. We assessed pembrolizumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, for safety and activity in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma or bone sarcoma. METHODS: In this two-cohort, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients with soft-tissue sarcoma or bone sarcoma from 12 academic centres in the USA that were members of the Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration (SARC). Patients with soft-tissue sarcoma had to be aged 18 years or older to enrol; patients with bone sarcoma could enrol if they were aged 12 years or older. Patients had histological evidence of metastatic or surgically unresectable locally advanced sarcoma, had received up to three previous lines of systemic anticancer therapy, had at least one measurable lesion according to the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1, and had at least one lesion accessible for biopsy. All patients were treated with 200 mg intravenous pembrolizumab every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response. Patients who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab were included in the safety analysis and patients who progressed or reached at least one scan assessment were included in the activity analysis. Accrual is ongoing in some disease cohorts. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02301039. FINDINGS: Between March 13, 2015, and Feb 18, 2016, we enrolled 86 patients, 84 of whom received pembrolizumab (42 in each disease cohort) and 80 of whom were evaluable for response (40 in each disease cohort). Median follow-up was 17·8 months (IQR 12·3-19·3). Seven (18%) of 40 patients with soft-tissue sarcoma had an objective response, including four (40%) of ten patients with undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, two (20%) of ten patients with liposarcoma, and one (10%) of ten patients with synovial sarcoma. No patients with leiomyosarcoma (n=10) had an objective response. Two (5%) of 40 patients with bone sarcoma had an objective response, including one (5%) of 22 patients with osteosarcoma and one (20%) of five patients with chondrosarcoma. None of the 13 patients with Ewing's sarcoma had an objective response. The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events were anaemia (six [14%]), decreased lymphocyte count (five [12%]), prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time (four [10%]), and decreased platelet count (three [7%]) in the bone sarcoma group, and anaemia, decreased lymphocyte count, and prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time in the soft-tissue sarcoma group (three [7%] each). Nine (11%) patients (five [12%] in the bone sarcoma group and four [10%] in the soft-tissue sarcoma group) had treatment-emergent serious adverse events (SAEs), five of whom had immune-related SAEs, including two with adrenal insufficiency, two with pneumonitis, and one with nephritis. INTERPRETATION: The primary endpoint of overall response was not met for either cohort. However, pembrolizumab showed encouraging activity in patients with undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma or dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Enrolment to expanded cohorts of those subtypes is ongoing to confirm and characterise the activity of pembrolizumab. FUNDING: Merck, SARC, Sarcoma Foundation of America, QuadW Foundation, Pittsburgh Cure Sarcoma, and Ewan McGregor.

Doxorubicin plus evofosfamide versus doxorubicin alone in locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (TH CR-406/SARC021): an international, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Evofosfamide is a hypoxia-activated prodrug of bromo-isophosphoramide mustard. We aimed to assess the benefit of adding evofosfamide to doxorubicin as first-line therapy for advanced soft-tissue sarcomas. METHODS: We did this international, open-label, randomised, phase 3, multicentre trial (TH CR-406/SARC021) at 81 academic or community investigational sites in 13 countries. Eligible patients were aged 15 years or older with a diagnosis of an advanced unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, of intermediate or high grade, for which no standard curative therapy was available, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive doxorubicin alone (75 mg/m2 via bolus injection administered over 5-20 min or continuous intravenous infusion for 6-96 h on day 1 of every 21-day cycle for up to six cycles) or doxorubicin (given via the same dose procedure) plus evofosfamide (300 mg/m2 intravenously for 30-60 min on days 1 and 8 of every 21-day cycle for up to six cycles). After six cycles of treatment, patients in the single-drug doxorubicin group were followed up expectantly whereas patients with stable or responsive disease in the combination group were allowed to continue with evofosfamide monotherapy until documented disease progression. A web-based central randomisation with block sizes of two and four was stratified by extent of disease, doxorubicin administration method, and previous systemic therapy. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in all patients who received any amount of study drug. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01440088. FINDINGS: Between Sept 26, 2011, and Jan 22, 2014, 640 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (317 to doxorubicin plus evofosfamide and 323 to doxorubicin alone), all of whom were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The overall survival endpoint was not reached (hazard ratio 1·06, 95% CI 0·88-1·29; p=0·527), with a median overall survival of 18·4 months (95% CI 15·6-22·1) with doxorubicin plus evofosfamide versus 19·0 months (16·2-22·4) with doxorubicin alone. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in both groups were haematological, including anaemia (150 [48%] of 313 patients in the doxorubicin plus evofosfamide group vs 65 [21%] of 308 in the doxorubicin group), neutropenia (47 [15%] vs 92 [30%]), febrile neutropenia (57 [18%] vs 34 [11%]), leucopenia (22 [7%] vs 17 [6%]), decreased neutrophil count (31 [10%] vs 41 [13%]), and decreased white blood cell count (39 [13%] vs 33 [11%]). Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia was more common in the combination group (45 [14%]) than in the doxorubicin alone group (four [1%]), as was grade 3-4 stomatitis (26 [8%] vs seven [2%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 145 (46%) of 313 patients in the combination group and 99 (32%) of 308 in the doxorubicin alone group. Five (2%) patients died from treatment-related causes in the combination group (sepsis [n=2], septic shock [n=1], congestive cardiac failure [n=1], and unknown cause [n=1]) versus one (<1%) patient in the doxorubicin alone group (lactic acidosis [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: The addition of evofosfamide to doxorubicin as first-line therapy did not improve overall survival compared with single-drug doxorubicin in patients with locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas and so this combination cannot be recommended in this setting. FUNDING: Threshold Pharmaceuticals.

Phase 2 study of dasatinib in patients with alveolar soft part sarcoma, chondrosarcoma, chordoma, epithelioid sarcoma, or solitary fibrous tumor.

BACKGROUND: Alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS), chondrosarcoma (CS), chordoma, epithelioid sarcoma, and solitary fibrous tumor (SFT) are malignant tumors that are relatively resistant to chemotherapy and for which more effective drug therapy is needed. METHODS: The 5 listed subtypes were enrolled into a single indolent sarcoma cohort in a phase 2 study of dasatinib using a Bayesian continuous monitoring rule for enrollment. The primary objective was to estimate the 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate according to the Choi criteria with a target of ≥50%. Cross-sectional imaging was performed before the start of treatment, every 2 months for 6 months, and then every 3 months during treatment. The 2- and 5-year survival rates were determined. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen patients were enrolled within 45 months, and 109 began treatment with dasatinib. The 6-month PFS rate and the median PFS were 48% and 5.8 months, respectively. The PFS rate at 6 months was highest with ASPS (62%) and lowest with SFT (30%). More than 10% of the patients with ASPS, CS, or chordoma had stable disease for more than 1 year. Collectively, for all 5 subtypes, the 2- and 5-year overall survival rates were 44% and 13%, respectively. An objective response was observed in 18% of the patients with CS or chordoma. CONCLUSIONS: Dasatinib failed to achieve control of sarcoma growth for at least 6 months in more than 50% of the patients in this trial according to the Choi tumor response criteria. An objective tumor response and prolonged stable disease was observed in >10% of patients with CS or chordoma. Cancer 2017;90-97. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

SARC009: Phase 2 study of dasatinib in patients with previously treated, high-grade, advanced sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Dasatinib exhibited activity in preclinical models of sarcoma. The Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration (SARC) conducted a multicenter, phase 2 trial of dasatinib in patients with advanced sarcoma. METHODS: Patients received dasatinib twice daily. The primary objective was to estimate the clinical benefit rate (CBR) (complete response or partial response within 6 months or stable disease duration of ≥6 months) with a target of ≥25%. Patients were enrolled into 1 of 7 different cohorts and assessed by imaging every 8 weeks using Choi criteria tumor response and a Bayesian hierarchical design. For each subtype, enrollment was stopped after a minimum of 9 patients were treated if there was a <1% chance the CBR was ≥25%. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients were enrolled. Accrual was stopped early in 5 cohorts because of low CBR. The leiomyosarcoma (LMS) and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS) cohorts fully accrued and 6 of 47 and 8 of 42 evaluable patients, respectively, exhibited clinical benefit. The probability that the CBR was ≥25% in the LMS and UPS cohorts was 0.008 and 0.10, respectively. The median progression-free survival ranged from 0.9 months in patients with rhabdomyosarcoma to 2.2 months in patients with LMS. The median overall survival was 8.6 months. The most frequent adverse events were constitutional, gastrointestinal, and respiratory, and 36% of patients required dose reduction for toxicity. Serious adverse events attributed to therapy occurred in 11% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Dasatinib may have activity in patients with UPS but is inactive as a single agent in the other sarcoma subtypes included herein. The Bayesian design allowed for the early termination of accrual in 5 subtypes because of lack of drug activity.

SPARC expression in patients with high-risk localized soft tissue sarcoma treated on a randomized phase II trial of neo/adjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for localized soft tissue sarcoma includes surgery and radiation, while the role of chemotherapy is controversial. Biomarkers that could predict therapeutic response or prognosticate overall survival (OS) are needed to define patients most likely to benefit from systemic treatment. Serum protein acidic and rich in cysteine (SPARC) is a matricellular glycoprotein that has been evaluated as a potential biomarker in numerous malignancies given its involvement in cell adhesion, proliferation, migration, and tissue remodeling. METHODS: Using primary biopsy and resection specimens from patients with high-risk localized, soft tissue sarcoma treated on a neo/adjuvant chemotherapy study, SPARC expression was assessed and compared to patient and tumor characteristics, treatment, and outcomes. Survival functions were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. The Cox model was used for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Fifty patients had primary tumor specimens available. High, low, and no SPARC expression was found in 22, 13, and 15 patients, respectively. There was no significant difference in time to recurrence or OS between patients in these three groups. Comparing lack of SPARC expression with any SPARC expression, there was no significant difference in time to recurrence in patients without SPARC expression (n = 15) compared to patients with SPARC expression (n = 35). Likewise, there was no statistically significant difference in OS in patients without SPARC expression versus patients whose tumors expressed SPARC. CONCLUSIONS: Although we did not find a statistically significant difference in time to recurrence and OS in patients with high-risk soft tissue sarcoma, we did identify a trend toward improved time to recurrence and OS in patients whose tumors lacked SPARC expression. However, SPARC did not demonstrate the ability to discern which high-risk patients may have a worse prognosis or greater benefit from chemotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on September 13, 2005 with ClinicalTrials.gov, number https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00189137?term=sarcoma&id=NCT00189137&state1=NA%3AUS%3AMI&phase=1&rank=1 .

Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Version 2.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare solid tumors of mesenchymal cell origin that display a heterogenous mix of clinical and pathologic characteristics. STS can develop from fat, muscle, nerves, blood vessels, and other connective tissues. The evaluation and treatment of patients with STS requires a multidisciplinary team with demonstrated expertise in the management of these tumors. The complete NCCN Guidelines for Soft Tissue Sarcoma (available at NCCN.org) provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of extremity/superficial trunk/head and neck STS, as well as intra-abdominal/retroperitoneal STS, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, desmoid tumors, and rhabdomyosarcoma. This manuscript discusses guiding principles for the diagnosis and staging of STS and evidence for treatment modalities that include surgery, radiation, chemoradiation, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy.