RESUMO
Background: Treatment of Ewing sarcoma (ES) requires multidisciplinary approach and deficiencies in treatment adversely affect the results. This study included patients diagnosed with ES and aimed to determine the factors affecting prognosis and investigate the efficacy of replacing actinomycin-D with carboplatin in consolidation treatment. Methods: Eighty-two pediatric ES patients diagnosed at a single institution between 2005 and 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical and epidemiological features, treatment modalities, prognostic criteria, and overall survival (OS) rates of patients revieved. In consolidation treatment, 22 patients were treated with actinomycin-D and 32 patients with carboplatin (500 mg/m2/dose), 24 patients could not receive consolidation treatment. The 5- and 10-year OS rates of the patients were compared. Results: The 5- and 10-year OS rates of the 82 patients with ES were 46% and 40%, respectively. The 5-year OS rates in the group with localized disease (n = 55) and metastasis (n = 27) at diagnosis were 54% and 26%, respectively (p = 0.006). When evaluated according to the consolidation treatment administered both the 5- and 10-year OS rates of the patients receiving actinomycin-D were 50%. The 5-year OS rate was 58% in the carboplatin group, and the 5- and 10-year OS rates of patients that did not receive consolidation treatment was 20%. Conclusions: Survival was significantly worse in the group that did not receive consolidation treatment. Furthermore, our results suggested that carboplatin could be used effectively as an alternative to actinomycin-D in ES consolidation treatment.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: CWS/RMS-96 was an international multicenter trial with randomization between two therapy arms of the standard four-drug therapy (vincristine, ifosfamide, adriamycin, dactinomycin [VAIA]) versus an intensified six-drug regimen (carboplatin, epirubicin, vincristine, dactinomycin, ifosfamide, and etoposide [CEVAIE]) for high-risk rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS), extraskeletal Ewing sarcoma (EES), and undifferentiated sarcoma (UDS) in children, adolescents, and young adults aiming to improve their survival. Intensified chemotherapy with CEVAIE did not improve outcome. METHODS: Patients younger than 21 years with a previously untreated localized HR-RMS, EES, and UDS were enrolled from Cooperative Weichteilsarkom Studiengruppe (CWS) centers in Germany, Austria, Poland, Switzerland, and from Italian Soft Tissue Sarcoma Committee (STSC) centers. Randomization (1:1) to receive either 9 × 21 days cycles of VAIA or CEVAIE was performed separately in CWS and STSC. Hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (32-44.8 Gy) was added at week 9-12 according to histology and response to chemotherapy. A secondary microscopically complete nonmutilating resection was performed if possible. Primary endpoints were response to chemotherapy, event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Five hundred fifty-seven patients (HR-RMS: n = 416, EES and UDS: n = 141) underwent randomization: VAIA (n = 273) or CEVAIE (n = 284). Radiotherapy was given to 70% of patients in both groups. A secondary resection was performed in 47% and 48% patients, respectively. The 5-year EFS and OS for the VAIA and CEVAIE treatment arms were 59.8% and 60.8% (p = .89), and 74.2% and 68.3% (p = .16), respectively. No differences in response, toxicity, or second malignancies emerged in the two groups. CONCLUSION: The use of an intensified regimen failed to show a significant improvement in tumor response and outcome of patients with localized HR-RMS, EES, and UDS.