ESMO Recommendations on clinical reporting of genomic test results for solid cancers.

BACKGROUND: Genomic tumour profiling has a crucial role in the management of patients with solid cancers, as it helps selecting and prioritising therapeutic interventions based on prognostic and predictive biomarkers, as well as identifying markers of hereditary cancers. Harmonised approaches to interpret the results of genomic testing are needed to support physicians in their decision making, prevent inequalities in precision medicine and maximise patient benefit from available cancer management options. METHODS: The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Translational Research and Precision Medicine Working Group assembled a group of international experts to propose recommendations for preparing clinical genomic reports for solid cancers. These recommendations aim to foster best practices in integrating genomic testing within clinical settings. After review of available evidence, several rounds of surveys and focused discussions were conducted to reach consensus on the recommendation statements. Only consensus recommendations were reported. Recommendation statements were graded in two tiers based on their clinical importance: level A (required to maintain common standards in reporting) and level B (optional but necessary to achieve ideal practice). RESULTS: Genomics reports should present key information in a front page(s) followed by supplementary information in one or more appendices. Reports should be structured into sections: (i) patient and sample details; (ii) assay and data analysis characteristics; (iii) sample-specific assay performance and quality control; (iv) genomic alterations and their functional annotation; (v) clinical actionability assessment and matching to potential therapy indications; and (vi) summary of the main findings. Specific recommendations to prepare each of these sections are made. CONCLUSIONS: We present a set of recommendations aimed at structuring genomics reports to enhance physician comprehension of genomic profiling results for solid cancers. Communication between ordering physicians and professionals reporting genomic data is key to minimise uncertainties and to optimise the impact of genomic tests in patient care.

A randomized study of 6 vs 3 years of adjuvant imatinib in patients with localized GIST at high risk of relapse.

BACKGROUND: The administration of adjuvant imatinib during three years is indicated after resection of primary localized GIST at high risk of recurrence, but many patients relapse afterwards. METHODS: IMADGIST (NCT02260505) was a multicenter open-label, randomized phase III study evaluating the maintenance of imatinib for 3 more years (6-years arm) compared to Interruption (3-years arm) from the day of randomization, conducted in the French Sarcoma Group. The primary endpoint was intent-to treat disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints include overall survival, time to imatinib resistance, response after imatinib reintroduction at relapse, safety. RESULTS: From December 24th 2014 to April 4th 2023; 136 patients aged ≥18, ECOG PS ≤2, with a localized GIST with a R0 or R1 surgery, and a risk of tumor recurrence ≥35% according to NCCN risk classification were randomized in 14 centers. Sixty-five patients were randomized to the 3-Years arm vs. 71 in the 6-Years arm. There were 68 males and females. Primary sites were gastric and small bowel in 60 (44%) and 64 (47%) patients respectively. Respectively 52 (38%) and 71 (52%) of patients had a risk of relapse of 35-70% and >70%.. With a median follow-up of 55 (IQR=46-59) months post randomization, DFS was significantly superior in the 6-Years arm (HR: 0.40 [0.20-0.69], p=0.0008). Time to imatinib resistance, survival, adverse events and quality of life are not different in the 2 arms. CONCLUSIONS: Three additional years of adjuvant imatinib reduces the risk of relapse in patients who have received 3 years of adjuvant imatinib with an acceptable tolerance.

Improved nationwide survival of sarcoma patients with a network of reference centers.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the impact of the implementation of a network of reference centers for sarcomas (NETSARC) on the care and survival of sarcoma patients in France since 2010. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NETSARC (netsarc.org) is a network of 26 reference sarcoma centers with specialized multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs), funded by the French National Cancer Institute (INCa) since 2010. Its aims are to improve the quality of diagnosis and care of sarcoma patients. Patients' characteristics, treatments, and outcomes are collected in a nationwide database. The objective of this analysis was to compare the survival of patients in three periods: 2010-2012 (non-exhaustive), 2013-2015, and 2016-2020. RESULTS: A total of 43 975 patients with sarcomas, gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), or connective tissue tumors of intermediate malignancy were included in the NETSARC+ database since 2010 (n = 9266 before 2013, n = 12 274 between 2013 and 2015, n = 22 435 in 2016-2020). Median age was 56 years, 50.5% were women, and 13.2% had metastasis at diagnosis. Overall survival was significantly superior in the period 2016-2020 versus 2013-2015 versus 2010-2012 for the entire population, for patients >18 years of age, and for both metastatic and non-metastatic patients in univariate and multivariate analyses (P < 0.0001). Over the three periods, we observed a significantly improved compliance to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) nationwide: the proportion of patients biopsied before surgery increased from 62.9% to 72.6%; the percentage of patients presented to NETSARC MDTBs before first surgery increased from 31.7% to 44.4% (P < 0.0001). The proportion of patients with R0 resection on first surgery increased (from 36.1% to 46.6%), while R2 resection rate decreased (from 10.9% to 7.9%), with a better compliance and improvement in NETSARC centers. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of the national reference network for sarcoma was associated with an improvement of overall survival and compliance to guidelines nationwide in sarcoma patients. Referral to expert networks for sarcoma patients should be encouraged, though a better compliance to CPGs can still be achieved.

Clinical utility of circulating tumor DNA sequencing with a large panel: a National Center for Precision Medicine (PRISM) study.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) sequencing is a promising approach for tailoring therapy in patients with cancer. We report hereby the results from a prospective study where we investigated the impact of comprehensive molecular profiling of ctDNA in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Genomic analysis was performed using the FoundationOne Liquid CDx Assay [324 genes, tumor mutational burden (TMB), microsatellite instability status]. Each individual genomic report was reviewed and discussed weekly by a multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB). Actionable targets were classified by ESMO Scale for Clinical Actionability of Molecular Targets (ESCAT) tier leading to molecular-based treatment suggestions wherever it was possible. RESULTS: Between December 2020 and November 2021, 1772 patients with metastatic solid tumors underwent molecular profiling. Median time to assay results was 12 days. Results were contributive for 1658 patients (94%). At least one actionable target was detected in 1059 patients (64%) with a total of 1825 actionable alterations including alteration of the DNA damage repair response pathway (n = 336, 18%), high TMB (>16 mutations/Mb; n = 243, 13%), PIK3CA mutations (n = 150, 8%), ERBB family pathway alterations (n = 127, 7%), PTEN alterations (n = 95, 5%), FGFR alterations (n = 67, 4%) and MET activations (n = 13, 0.7%). The MTB recommended a matched therapy for 597 patients (56%) with a total of 819 therapeutic orientations: clinical trials (n = 639, 78%), off-label/compassionate use (n = 81, 10%), approved drug (n = 51, 6%), and early access program (n = 48, 6%). In total, 122 patients (21%) were treated. Among the assessable patients (n = 107), 4 (4%) had complete response, 35 (33%) had partial response, 27 (25%) had stable disease, and 41 (38%) a progressive disease as best response. The median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 4.7 months (95% confidence interval 2.7-6.7 months) and 8.3 months (95% confidence interval 4.7-11.9 months) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ctDNA sequencing with a large panel is an efficient approach to match patients with advanced cancer with targeted therapies.

ESMO recommendations on the use of circulating tumour DNA assays for patients with cancer: a report from the ESMO Precision Medicine Working Group.

Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) assays conducted on plasma are rapidly developing a strong evidence base for use in patients with cancer. The European Society for Medical Oncology convened an expert working group to review the analytical and clinical validity and utility of ctDNA assays. For patients with advanced cancer, validated and adequately sensitive ctDNA assays have utility in identifying actionable mutations to direct targeted therapy, and may be used in routine clinical practice, provided the limitations of the assays are taken into account. Tissue-based testing remains the preferred test for many cancer patients, due to limitations of ctDNA assays detecting fusion events and copy number changes, although ctDNA assays may be routinely used when faster results will be clinically important, or when tissue biopsies are not possible or inappropriate. Reflex tumour testing should be considered following a non-informative ctDNA result, due to false-negative results with ctDNA testing. In patients treated for early-stage cancers, detection of molecular residual disease or molecular relapse, has high evidence of clinical validity in anticipating future relapse in many cancers. Molecular residual disease/molecular relapse detection cannot be recommended in routine clinical practice, as currently there is no evidence for clinical utility in directing treatment. Additional potential applications of ctDNA assays, under research development and not recommended for routine practice, include identifying patients not responding to therapy with early dynamic changes in ctDNA levels, monitoring therapy for the development of resistance mutations before clinical progression, and in screening asymptomatic people for cancer. Recommendations for reporting of results, future development of ctDNA assays and future clinical research are made.

Impact of acetaminophen on the efficacy of immunotherapy in cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Acetaminophen (APAP) use has been associated with blunted vaccine immune responses. This study aimed to assess APAP impact on immunotherapy efficacy in patients with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Exposure to APAP was assessed by plasma analysis and was correlated with clinical outcome in three independent cohorts of patients with advanced cancer who were treated with immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs). The immunomodulatory effects of APAP were evaluated on a preclinical tumor model and on human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from healthy donors. RESULTS: Detectable plasma APAP levels at treatment onset were associated with a significantly worse clinical outcome in ICB-treated cancer patients, independently of other prognostic factors. APAP significantly reduced ICB efficacy in the preclinical MC38 model, as well as the production of PD-1 blockade-related interferon-γ secretion by human PBMCs. Moreover, reduction of ICB efficacy in vivo was associated with significantly increased tumor infiltration by regulatory T cells (Tregs). Administration of APAP over 24 h induced a significant expansion of peripheral Tregs in healthy individuals. In addition, interleukin-10, a crucial mediator of Treg-induced immune suppression, was significantly up-regulated upon treatment with ICB in cancer patients taking APAP. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides strong preclinical and clinical evidence of the role of APAP as a potential suppressor of antitumor immunity. Hence, APAP should be used with caution in patients treated with ICB.

Circulating L-arginine predicts the survival of cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: The discovery of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has revolutionized the systemic approach to cancer treatment. Most patients receiving ICIs, however, do not derive benefits. Therefore, it is crucial to identify reliable predictive biomarkers of response to ICIs. One important pathway in regulating immune cell reactivity is L-arginine (ARG) metabolism, essential to T-cell activation. We therefore aimed to evaluate the association between baseline plasma ARG levels and the clinical benefit of ICIs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The correlation between ARG levels and clinical ICI activity was assessed by analyzing plasma samples obtained before treatment onset in two independent cohorts of patients with advanced cancer included in two institutional molecular profiling programs (BIP, NCT02534649, n = 77; PREMIS, NCT03984318, n = 296) and from patients in a phase 1 first-in-human study of budigalimab monotherapy (NCT03000257). Additionally, the correlation between ARG levels and ICI efficacy in preclinical settings was evaluated using a syngeneic mouse model of colorectal cancer responsive to ICIs. Using matched peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) plasma samples, we analyzed the correlation between ARG levels and PBMC features through multiplexed flow cytometry analysis. RESULTS: In both discovery and validation cohorts, low ARG levels at baseline (<42 µM) were significantly and independently associated with a worse clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Moreover, at the preclinical level, the tumor rejection rate was significantly higher in mice with high baseline ARG levels than in those with low ARG levels (85.7% versus 23.8%; P = 0.004). Finally, PBMC immunophenotyping showed that low ARG levels were significantly associated with increased programmed death-ligand 1 expression in several immune cell subsets from the myeloid lineage. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that baseline ARG levels predict ICI response. Plasma ARG quantification may therefore represent an attractive biomarker to tailor novel therapeutic regimens targeting the ARG pathway in combination with ICIs.

Treatment with a retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I) agonist as monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors: results from two phase 1 studies.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated MK-4621, an oligonucleotide that binds and activates retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I), as monotherapy (NCT03065023) and in combination with the anti-programmed death 1 antibody pembrolizumab (NCT03739138). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were ≥ 18 years with histologically/cytologically confirmed advanced/metastatic solid tumors with injectable lesions. MK-4621 (0.2‒0.8 mg) was administered intratumorally as a stable formulation with jetPEI™ twice weekly over a 4-week cycle as monotherapy and weekly in 3-week cycles for up to 6 cycles in combination with 200 mg pembrolizumab every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles. Primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), treatment-related adverse events (AEs), and treatment discontinuation due to AEs. RESULTS: Fifteen patients received MK-4621 monotherapy and 30 received MK-4621 plus pembrolizumab. The only DLT, grade 3 pleural effusion that subsequently resolved, occurred in a patient who received MK-4621/jetPEI™ 0.8 mg plus pembrolizumab. 93% of patients experienced ≥ 1 treatment-related AE with both monotherapy and combination therapy. No patients experienced an objective response per RECIST v1.1 with MK-4621 monotherapy; 4 (27%) had stable disease. Three (10%) patients who received combination therapy had a partial response. Serum and tumor biomarker analyses provided evidence that MK-4621 treatment induced an increase in gene expression of interferon signaling pathway members and associated chemokines and cytokines. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with MK-4621 monotherapy or in combination with pembrolizumab experienced tolerable safety and modest antitumor activity, and there was evidence that MK-4621 activated the RIG-I pathway. At the doses tested, MK-4621 did not confer meaningful clinical benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03065023 and NCT03739138.

Health-related quality of life with pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with previously treated advanced microsatellite instability high/mismatch repair deficient endometrial cancer in the KEYNOTE-158 study.

OBJECTIVE: Pembrolizumab demonstrated a clinically meaningful objective response rate in patients with previously treated, advanced MSI-H/dMMR endometrial cancer in the multicohort phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02628067). We present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) results for these patients. METHODS: This analysis included patients from cohorts D (endometrial cancer with any MSI status) and K (any MSI-H/dMMR solid tumor except colorectal) who had previously treated, advanced MSI-H/dMMR endometrial cancer. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W for 35 cycles. EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires were administered at baseline, at regular intervals during treatment, and 30 days after treatment discontinuation. Pre-specified exploratory analyses included changes from baseline to week 9 in QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QoL and EQ-5D-3L visual analog scale (VAS) score for all patients and by best overall response. RESULTS: 84 of 90 enrolled patients completed ≥1 HRQoL questionnaire and were included in the analysis. QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-3L compliance rates were 90% and 94%, respectively, at baseline, and 92% and 93% at week 9. Mean (95% CI) QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL scores improved from baseline to week 9 by 6.08 (0.71-11.46) points in the overall population, with greater improvement in patients who achieved complete or partial response (11.67 [5.33-18.00]-point increase). Mean (95% CI) EQ-5D-3L VAS scores improved by 6.00 (2.25-9.75) points in the overall population and 9.11 (5.24-12.98) points in patients with CR/PR. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab maintained or improved HRQoL in patients with previously treated, advanced MSI-H/dMMR endometrial cancer, further supporting efficacy and safety results from KEYNOTE-158 and pembrolizumab use in this setting.

Plasma proteomics identifies leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) as a novel predictive biomarker of immune-checkpoint blockade resistance.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) are now widely used in oncology. Most patients, however, do not derive benefit from these agents. Therefore, there is a crucial need to identify novel and reliable biomarkers of resistance to such treatments in order to prescribe potentially toxic and costly treatments only to patients with expected therapeutic benefits. In the wake of genomics, the study of proteins is now emerging as the new frontier for understanding real-time human biology. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed the proteome of plasma samples, collected before treatment onset, from two independent prospective cohorts of cancer patients treated with ICB (discovery cohort n = 95, validation cohort n = 292). We then investigated the correlation between protein plasma levels, clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival and overall survival by Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: By using an unbiased proteomics approach, we show that, in both discovery and validation cohorts, elevated baseline serum level of leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) is associated with a poor clinical outcome in cancer patients treated with ICB, independently of other prognostic factors. We also demonstrated that the circulating level of LIF is inversely correlated with the presence of tertiary lymphoid structures in the tumor microenvironment. CONCLUSION: This novel clinical dataset brings strong evidence for the role of LIF as a potential suppressor of antitumor immunity and suggests that targeting LIF or its pathway may represent a promising approach to improve efficacy of cancer immunotherapy in combination with ICB.

Final analysis of the randomized trial on imatinib as an adjuvant in localized gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) from the EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (STBSG), the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG), UNICANCER, French Sarcoma Group (FSG), Italian Sarcoma Group (ISG), and Spanish Group for Research on Sarcomas (GEIS)☆.

BACKGROUND: In 2004, we started an intergroup randomized trial of adjuvant imatinib versus no further therapy after R0-R1 surgery in localized, high/intermediate-risk gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) patients. Interim analysis results were published in 2015 upon recommendation from an independent data review committee. We report the final outcome of the study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a randomized, open-label, multicenter phase III trial carried out at 112 hospitals in 12 countries. Patients were randomized to 2 years of imatinib, 400 mg daily, or no further therapy after surgery. The primary endpoint was imatinib failure-free survival (IFFS), while relapse-free survival (RFS), relapse-free interval (RFI), overall survival (OS) and toxicity were secondary endpoints. Adjusting for the interim analyses, results on IFFS were assessed on a 4.3% significance level; for the other endpoints, 5% was used. RESULTS: Nine hundred and eight patients were randomized between January 2005 and October 2008: 454 to imatinib and 454 to observation; 835 patients were eligible. With a median follow-up of 9.1 years, 5 (10)-year IFFS was 87% (75%) in the imatinib arm versus 83% (74%) in the control arm [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.87, 95.7% confidence interval (CI) (0.65; 1.15), P = 0.31]; RFS was 70% versus 63% at 5 years and 63% versus 61% at 10 years, [HR = 0.71, 95% CI (0.57; 0.89), P = 0.002]; OS was 93% versus 92% at 5 years and 80% versus 78% at 10 years [HR = 0.88, 95% CI (0.65; 1.21), P = 0.43]. Among 526 patients with high-risk GIST by local pathology, 10-year IFFS and RFS were 69% versus 61%, and 48% versus 43%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With 9.1 years of follow-up, a trend toward better long-term IFFS in imatinib-treated patients was observed in the high-risk subgroup. Although the difference was not statistically significant and the surrogacy value of such an endpoint is not validated, this may be seen as supporting the results reported by the Scandinavian/German trial, showing a sustained small but significant long-term OS benefit in high-risk GIST patients treated with 3 years of adjuvant imatinib.

A randomized phase III trial comparing trabectedin to best supportive care in patients with pre-treated soft tissue sarcoma: T-SAR, a French Sarcoma Group trial.

BACKGROUND: The French Sarcoma Group assessed the efficacy, safety, and quality of life (QoL) of trabectedin versus best supportive care (BSC) in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III study included adults with STS who progressed after 1-3 prior treatment lines. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to receive trabectedin 1.5 mg/m2 every 3 weeks or BSC, stratified into L-STS (liposarcoma/leiomyosarcoma) and non-L-STS groups (other histotypes). Patients from the BSC arm were allowed to cross over to trabectedin at progression. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) confirmed by blinded central review and analyzed in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between 26 January 2015 and 5 November 2015, 103 heavily pre-treated patients (60.2% with L-STS) from 16 French centers were allocated to receive trabectedin (n = 52) or BSC (n = 51). Median PFS was 3.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-5.9 months] in the trabectedin arm versus 1.5 months (0.9-2.6 months) in the BSC arm (hazard ratio = 0.39, 95% CI 0.24-0.64, P < 0.001) with benefits observed across almost all analyzed subgroups, but particularly in patients with L-STS (5.1 versus 1.4 months, P = 0.0001). Seven patients (13.7%) in the trabectedin arm (all with L-STS) achieved a partial response, while no objective responses were observed in the BSC arm (P = 0.004). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (44.2% of patients), leukopenia (34.6%), and transaminase increase (32.7%). Health-related 30-item core European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire evidenced no statistical differences between the arms for any domain and at any time point. After progression, 91.8% of patients crossed over from BSC to trabectedin. CONCLUSION: Trabectedin demonstrates superior disease control to BSC without impairing QoL in patients with recurrent STS of multiple histologies, with greater impact in patients with L-STS.

Phase I study of emactuzumab single agent or in combination with paclitaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors reveals depletion of immunosuppressive M2-like macrophages.

BACKGROUND: Emactuzumab is a monoclonal antibody against the colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor and targets tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs). This study assessed the safety, clinical activity, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of emactuzumab, as monotherapy and in combination with paclitaxel, in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label, phase Ia/b study comprised two parts (dose escalation and dose expansion), each containing two arms (emactuzumab, every 2 or 3 weeks, as monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly). The dose-escalation part explored the maximum tolerated dose and optimal biological dose (OBD). The dose-expansion part extended the safety assessment and investigated the objective response rate. A PK/PD analysis of serial blood, skin and tumor biopsies was used to explore proof of mechanism and confirm the OBD. RESULTS: No maximum tolerated dose was reached in either study arm, and the safety profile of emactuzumab alone and in combination does not appear to preclude its use. No patients receiving emactuzumab monotherapy showed an objective response; the objective response rate for emactuzumab in combination with paclitaxel was 7% across all doses. Skin macrophages rather than peripheral blood monocytes or circulating colony-stimulating factor-1 were identified as an optimal surrogate PD marker to select the OBD. Emactuzumab treatment alone and in combination with paclitaxel resulted in a plateau of immunosuppressive TAM reduction at the OBD of 1000 mg administered every 2 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Emactuzumab showed specific reduction of immunosuppressive TAMs at the OBD in both treatment arms but did not result in clinically relevant antitumor activity alone or in combination with paclitaxel. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01494688).

Surgery in reference centers improves survival of sarcoma patients: a nationwide study.

BACKGROUND: NETSARC (netsarc.org) is a network of 26 sarcoma reference centers with specialized multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTB) aiming to improve the outcome of sarcoma patients. Since 2010, presentation to an MDTB and expert pathological review are mandatory for sarcoma patients nationwide. In the present work, the impact of surgery in a reference center on the survival of sarcoma patients investigated using this national NETSARC registry. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients' characteristics and follow-up are prospectively collected and data monitored. Descriptive, uni- and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors were conducted in the entire series (N = 35 784) and in the subgroup of incident patient population (N = 29 497). RESULTS: Among the 35 784 patients, 155 different histological subtypes were reported. 4310 (11.6%) patients were metastatic at diagnosis. Previous cancer, previous radiotherapy, neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), and Li-Fraumeni syndrome were reported in 12.5%, 3.6%, 0.7%, and 0.1% of patients respectively. Among the 29 497 incident patients, 25 851 (87.6%) patients had surgical removal of the sarcoma, including 9949 (33.7%) operated in a NETSARC center. Location, grade, age, size, depth, histotypes, gender, NF1, and surgery outside a NETSARC center all correlated to overall survival (OS), local relapse free survival (LRFS), and event-free survival (EFS) in the incident patient population. NF1 history was one of the strongest adverse prognostic factors for LRFS, EFS, and OS. Presentation to an MDTB was associated with an improved LRFS and EFS, but was an adverse prognostic factor for OS if surgery was not carried out in a reference center. In multivariate analysis, surgery in a NETSARC center was positively correlated with LRFS, EFS, and OS [P < 0.001 for all, with a hazard ratio of 0.681 (95% CI 0.618-0.749) for OS]. CONCLUSION: This nationwide registry of sarcoma patients shows that surgical treatment in a reference center reduces the risk of relapse and death.

Localized high grade endometrial stromal sarcoma and localized undifferentiated uterine sarcoma: a retrospective series of the French Sarcoma Group.

OBJECTIVE: High grade endometrial stromal sarcoma and undifferentiated uterine sarcomas are associated with a very poor prognosis. Although large surgical resection is the standard of care, the optimal adjuvant strategy remains unclear. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients with localized high grade endometrial stromal sarcoma and undifferentiated uterine sarcomas (stages I-III) treated in 10 French Sarcoma Group centers was conducted. RESULTS: 39 patients with localized high grade endometrial stromal sarcoma and undifferentiated uterine sarcomas treated from 2008 to 2016 were included. 24/39 patients (61.5%) were stage I at diagnosis. 38/39 patients underwent surgical resection, with total hysterectomy and bilateral oophorectomy completed in 26/38 (68%). Surgeries were mostly resection complete (R0, 23/38, 60%) and microscopically incomplete resection (R1, 6/38, 16%). 22 patients (58%) underwent postoperative radiotherapy (including brachytherapy in 11 cases), and 11 (29%) underwent adjuvant chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 33 months (range 2.6-112), 17/39 patients were alive and 21/39 (54%) had relapsed (9 local relapses and 16 metastases). The 3 year and 5 year overall survival rates were 49.8% and 31.1%, respectively, and 3 year and 5 year disease free survival rates were 42.7% and 16.0%, respectively. Median overall survival and disease free survival were 32.7 (95% CI 16.3-49.1) and 23 (4.4-41.6) months, respectively. Medians were, respectively, 46.7 months and 39.0 months among those who underwent adjuvant radiotherapy and 41.0 months and 10.3 months for those who underwent adjuvant chemotherapy. In multivariate analysis, adjuvant radiotherapy was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (P=0.012) and disease free survival (P=0.036). Chemotherapy, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics I-II stages, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-performance status 0 correlated with improved overall survival (P=0.034, P=0.002, P=0.006), and absence of vascular invasion (P=0.014) was associated with better disease free survival. CONCLUSIONS: The standard treatment of primary localized high grade endometrial stromal sarcoma and undifferentiated uterine sarcomas is total hysterectomy and bilateral oophorectomy. The current study shows that adjuvant radiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy appear to improve overall survival. A prospective large study is warranted to validate this therapeutic management.

The Genomic Grade Index predicts postoperative clinical outcome in patients with soft-tissue sarcoma.

Background: Soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs) are a group of rare, heterogeneous, and aggressive tumors, with high metastatic risk and relatively few efficient systemic therapies. We hypothesized that the Genomic Grade Index (GGI), a 108-gene signature previously developed in early-stage breast cancer, might improve the prognostic assessment of patients with early-stage STS. Patients and methods: We collected gene expression and clinicopathological data of 678 operated STS, and searched for correlations between the GGI-based classification and clinicopathological variables, including the metastasis-free survival (MFS). Results: Based on GGI, 275 samples (41%) were classified as 'GGI-low' and 403 (59%) as 'GGI-high'. The 'GGI-high' class was more associated with poor-prognosis features than the 'GGI-low' class: pathological grade 3 (P = 9.50E-11), undifferentiated sarcomas and leiomyosarcomas (P < 1.00E-06), location in extremities (P < 1.00E-06), and complex genetic profile (P = 2.1E-20). The 5-year MFS was 53% (95%CI 47-59) in the 'GGI-high' class versus 78% (95%CI 72-85) in the 'GGI-low' class (P = 3.02E-11), with a corresponding hazard ratio for metastatic relapse equal to 2.92 (95%CI 2.10-4.07; P = 2.23E-10). In multivariate analysis, the GGI-based classification remained significant, whereas the pathological grade did not. In fact, the GGI-based classification stratified the patients with pathological grades 1 and 2 and those with pathological grade 3 in two classes with different 5-year MFS. Comparison of the GGI and CINSARC multigene signatures revealed similar correlations with clinicopathological variables, which were, however, stronger with GGI than with CINSARC, a strong concordance (71%) in terms of low-risk or high-risk classifications, and independent prognostic value for MFS in multivariate analysis, suggesting complementary prognostic information. Conclusion: GGI refines the prediction of MFS in operated STS and might improve the tailoring of adjuvant chemotherapy. Further clinical validation is warranted in larger retrospective, then prospective series, as well as the functional validation of relevant genes that could provide new therapeutic targets.

CHK1 inhibition in soft-tissue sarcomas: biological and clinical implications.

Background: Inhibition of ChK1 appears as a promising strategy for selectively potentiate the efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents in G1 checkpoint-defective tumor cells such as those that lack functional p53 protein. The p53 pathway is commonly dysregulated in soft-tissue sarcomas (STS) through mutations affecting TP53 or MDM2 amplification. GDC-0575 is a selective ATP-competitive inhibitor of CHK1. Methods: We have performed a systematic screening of a panel of 10 STS cell lines by combining the treatment of GDC-0575 with chemotherapy. Cell proliferation, cell death and cell cycle analysis were evaluated with high throughput assay. In vivo experiments were carried out by using TP53-mutated and TP53 wild-type patient-derived xenograft models of STS. Clinical activity of GDC-0575 combined with chemotherapy in patients with TP53-mutated and TP53 wild-type STS was also assessed. Results: We found that GDC-0575 abrogated DNA damage-induced S and G2-M checkpoints, exacerbated DNA double-strand breaks and induced apoptosis in STS cells. Moreover, we observed a synergistic or additive effect of GDC-0575 together with gemcitabine in vitro and in vivo in TP53-proficient but not TP53-deficient sarcoma models. In a phase I study of GDC-0575 in combination with gemcitabine, two patients with metastatic TP53-mutated STS had an exceptional, long-lasting response despite administration of a very low dose of gemcitabine whereas one patient with wild-type TP53 STS had no clinical benefit. Genetic profiling of samples from a patient displaying secondary resistance after 1 year showed loss of one preexisting loss-of-function mutation in the helical domain of DNA2. Conclusion: We provide the first preclinical and clinical evidence that potentiation of chemotherapy activity with a CHK1 inhibitor is a promising strategy in TP53-deficient STS and deserves further investigation in the phase II setting.

Phase I study of the checkpoint kinase 1 inhibitor GDC-0575 in combination with gemcitabine in patients with refractory solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) inhibition following chemotherapy-elicited DNA damage overrides cell cycle arrest and induces mitotic catastrophe and cell death. GDC-0575 is a highly-selective oral small-molecule Chk1 inhibitor that results in tumor shrinkage and growth delay in xenograft models. We evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic properties of GDC-0575 alone and in combination with gemcitabine. Antitumor activity and Chk1 pathway modulation were assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase I open-label study, in the dose escalation stage, patients were enrolled in a GDC-0575 monotherapy Arm (1) or GDC-0575 combination with gemcitabine Arm (2) to determine the maximum tolerated dose. Patients in arm 2 received either i.v. gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (arm 2a) or 500 mg/m2 (arm 2b), followed by GDC-0575 (45 or 80 mg, respectively, as RP2D). Stage II enrolled disease-specific cohorts. RESULTS: Of 102 patients treated, 70% were female, the median age was 59 years (range 27-85), and 47% were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS 0. The most common tumor type was breast (37%). The most frequent adverse events (all grades) related to GDC-0575 and/or gemcitabine were neutropenia (68%), anemia (48%), nausea (43%), fatigue (42%), and thrombocytopenia (35%). Maximum concentrations of GDC-0575 were achieved within 2 hours of dosing, and half-life was ∼23 hours. No pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction was observed between GDC-0575 and gemcitabine. Among patients treated with GDC-0575 and gemcitabine, there were four confirmed partial responses, three occurring in patients with tumors harboring TP53 mutation. Pharmacodynamic data were consistent with GDC-0575 inhibition of gemcitabine-induced expression of pCDK1/2. CONCLUSION: GDC-0575 can be safely administered as a monotherapy and in combination with gemcitabine; however, overall tolerability with gemcitabine was modest. Hematological toxicities were frequent but manageable. Preliminary antitumor activity was observed but limited to a small number of patients with a variety of refractory solid tumors treated with GDC-0575 and gemcitabine. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01564251.

Activity and safety of crizotinib in patients with alveolar soft part sarcoma with rearrangement of TFE3: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) phase II trial 90101 'CREATE'.

Background: Alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS) is an orphan malignancy associated with a rearrangement of transcription factor E3 (TFE3), leading to abnormal MET gene expression. We prospectively assessed the efficacy and safety of the MET tyrosine kinase inhibitor crizotinib in patients with advanced or metastatic ASPS. Patients and methods: Eligible patients with reference pathology-confirmed ASPS received oral crizotinib 250 mg bd. By assessing the presence or absence of a TFE3 rearrangement, patients were attributed to MET+ and MET- sub-cohorts. The primary end point was the objective response rate (ORR) according to local investigator. Secondary end points included duration of response, disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), progression-free rate, overall survival (OS) and safety. Results: Among 53 consenting patients, all had a centrally confirmed ASPS and 48 were treated. A total of 45 were eligible, treated and assessable. Among 40 MET+ patients, 1 achieved a confirmed partial response (PR) that lasted 215 days and 35 had stable disease (SD) as best response (ORR: 2.5%, 95% CI 0.6% to 80.6%). Further efficacy end points in MET+ cases were DCR: 90.0% (95% CI 76.3% to 97.2%), 1-year PFS rate: 37.5% (95% CI 22.9% to 52.1%) and 1-year OS rate: 97.4% (95% CI 82.8% to 99.6%). Among 4 MET- patients, 1 achieved a PR that lasted 801 days and 3 had SD (ORR: 25.0%, 95% CI 0.6% to 80.6%) for a DCR of 100% (95% CI 39.8% to 100.0%). The 1-year PFS rate in MET- cases was 50% (95% CI 5.8% to 84.5%) and the 1-year OS rate was 75% (95% CI 12.8% to 96.1%). One patient with unknown MET status due to technical failure achieved SD but stopped treatment due to progression after 17 cycles. The most common crizotinib-related adverse events were nausea [34/48 (70.8%)], vomiting [22/48 (45.8%)], blurred vision [22/48 (45.8%)], diarrhoea (20/48 (41.7%)] and fatigue [19/48 (39.6%)]. Conclusion: According to European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) efficacy criteria for soft tissue sarcoma, our study demonstrated that crizotinib has activity in TFE3 rearranged ASPS MET+ patients. Clinical trial number: EORTC 90101, NCT01524926.