Sunitinib for the treatment of metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors: the effect of TDM-guided dose optimization on clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib is an oral anticancer drug approved for the treatment of among others gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Previous analyses demonstrated an exposure-response relationship at the standard dose, and minimum target levels of drug exposure have been defined above which better treatment outcomes are observed. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) could be used as a tool to optimize the individual dose, aiming at sunitinib trough concentrations ≥37.5 ng/ml for continuous dosing. Nonetheless, data on the added value of TDM-guided dosing on clinical endpoints are currently lacking. Therefore, we evaluate the effect of TDM in patients with advanced and metastatic GIST treated with sunitinib in terms of efficacy and toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A TDM-guided cohort was compared to a non-TDM-guided cohort in terms of median progression-free survival (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS). Also, mPFS between patients with and without dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) was compared. Patients in the prospective cohort were included in two studies on TDM-guided dosing (the DPOG-TDM study and TUNE study). The retrospective cohort consisted of patients from the Dutch GIST Registry who did not receive TDM-guided dosing. RESULTS: In total, 51 and 106 patients were included in the TDM-guided cohort and non-TDM-guided cohort, respectively. No statistical difference in mPFS was observed between these two cohorts (39.4 versus 46.9 weeks, respectively; P = 0.52). Patients who experienced sunitinib-induced DLTs had longer mPFS compared to those who did not (51.9 versus 28.9 weeks, respectively; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support the routine use of TDM-guided dose optimization of sunitinib in patients with advanced/metastatic GIST to improve survival.

The oncological outcomes of isolated limb perfusion and neo-adjuvant radiotherapy in soft tissue sarcoma patients - A nationwide multicenter study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with locally extensive high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcomas (eSTS) are often presented in multidisciplinary teams to decide between ablative surgery (amputation) or limb-salvage surgery supplemented with either neo-adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) or induction isolated limb perfusion (ILP). In The Netherlands, ILP typically aims to reduce the size of tumors that would otherwise be considered irresectable, whereas neo-adjuvant RT aims mainly at improving local control and reducing morbidity of required marginal margins. This study presents a 15-year nationwide cohort to describe the oncological outcomes of both pre-operative treatment strategies. METHODS: All consecutive patients with locally extensive primary high-grade eSTS surgically treated between 2000 and 2015 at five tertiary sarcoma centers that received neo-adjuvant ILP or RT were included. 169 patients met the inclusion criteria (89 ILP, 80 RT). Median follow-up was 7.3 years. RESULTS: Limb salvage was achieved in 84% of cases in the ILP group (80% for patients with amputation indication) and 96% of cases in the RT group. 5-Year overall survival was 47% in the ILP group, 69% in the RT group. 5-Year local recurrence rate was 14% in the ILP group, 10% in the RT group. Distant metastasis rate was 55% in the ILP group, 36% in the RT group. CONCLUSION: We find oncological outcomes and limb salvage rates in line with existing literature for both treatment modalities. Whether the tumor was locally advanced with an indication for induction therapy to prevent amputation or morbid surgery appeared to be the main determinant in choosing between neo-adjuvant ILP or RT.

Sex differences in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumours: do they exist and does it affect survival?

BACKGROUND: Sex differences in cancer have gained attention in recent years. The role of sex as a prognostic factor in gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) has not been well established. The aim of this research was to elucidate potential sex differences in GIST patients and the influence of sex on disease-specific survival (DSS). METHODS: A review of the literature was carried out to obtain an overview of all literature with sex as a covariate on GIST survival analyses. Furthermore, in the Dutch GIST Registry, GIST characteristics between males and females were compared and the influence of sex on DSS was analysed. RESULTS: A total of 118 articles from the review of the literature met our selection criteria; 58% of the articles found no sex difference in survival and 42% did find a sex difference. All differences favoured female patients, although there was substantial overlap of individual patients in the various reported groups. The Dutch GIST Registry cohort consisted of 1425 patients (46% female). Compared with female patients, male patients had larger tumours (mean 9.0 cm versus 7.9 cm) and higher mitotic rates (34.4% versus 28.0% >5 mitoses/5 mm2). GIST in males was more often metastasized at diagnosis (21.3% versus 13.7%) and incurable (38.5% versus 31.0%). Male patients less often received surgery of the primary tumour (71.7% versus 78.9%), but did experience more tumour ruptures (18.2% versus 13.3%). Male patients had a worse DSS than females. This was not statistically significant when corrected for differences in GIST characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: In case of sex differences in GIST in the literature, male patients have a worse outcome. In our Dutch GIST cohort a similar finding was made, but sex was shown not to be an independent factor. Male patients more often had aggressive GISTs, with larger tumours, higher mitotic rates, more tumour ruptures, and metastases, which could explain the sex differences in DSS.