Moderately hypofractionated, preoperative radiotherapy in patients with soft tissue sarcomas (HYPORT-STS): Updated local control, late toxicities, and patient-reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Moderately hypofractionated, preoperative radiotherapy in patients with soft tissue sarcomas (HYPORT-STS; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03819985) investigated a radiobiologically equivalent, moderately hypofractionated course of preoperative radiotherapy (RT) 15 × 2.85 Gy in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Here, the authors report longer term follow-up to update local control and report late toxicities, as well as functional and patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: HYPORT-STS was a single-center, open-label, single-arm, prospective phase 2 clinical trial that enrolled 120 eligible adult patients with localized STS of the extremities or superficial trunk between 2018 and 2021. Patients received a 3-week course of preoperative RT followed by surgery 4-8 weeks later. End points and follow-up were analyzed from the date of surgery. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 43 months (interquartile range, 37-52 months), and the 4-year local recurrence-free survival rate was 93%. Overall RT-related late toxicities improved with time from local therapy (p < .001), and few patients had grade ≥2 toxicities (9%; n = 8 of 88) at 2 years. These included: 2% grade ≥2 skin toxicity, 2% fibrosis, 3% lymphedema, and 1% joint stiffness. Four patients (3%) had bone fractures. Both functional outcomes, as measured by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Rating Scale (p < .001), and quality of life, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (p < .001), improved with time from treatment, and both measures were better in follow-up at 2 years compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term follow up suggests that moderately hypofractionated preoperative RT for patients with STS is safe and effective. Higher grade late toxicities affect a minority of patients. Late toxicities decrease over time, whereas functional outcomes and health-related quality of life seem to improve with more time from combined modality treatment.

Pediatric Ewing Sarcoma Presentation, Treatment, and Outcomes Across Sociodemographic Groups.

INTRODUCTION: In this study, we evaluate the association between sociodemographics and disease presentation, treatment, and survival for children, adolescents, and young adults with Ewing sarcoma. METHODS: Case-level data were downloaded from The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Cases included patients ages 0-24 who were diagnosed with Ewing sarcoma between 2004 and 2020. RESULTS: One thousand two hundred forty four patients were included in the analysis. When compared to non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients, Hispanic patients were more likely to present with tumors ≥8 cm (odds ratio (OR) = 1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.24-2.36) and metastases (OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.23-2.20). Black patients were less likely to receive chemotherapy (OR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.07-0.97). The 5-year disease-specific survival rate was 73% for NHW patients, 65% for Black patients, 67% for Asian patients and 66% for Hispanic patients. When accounting for confounding factors, Hispanic and Asian patients had higher probabilities of death due to cancer compared to NHW patients (HR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.10-1.81; HR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.09-2.48, respectively). Young adults and adolescents were significantly more likely to present with metastases, experience ≥1 month between diagnosis and treatment, and had lower survival. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in Ewing sarcoma presentation, treatment, and survival were observed across age groups and race/ethnicity. Future work should focus on expanding access to care in underserved groups. Further qualitative studies could assist in determining the exact factors that prevent patients from accessing care or examine how genetic factors that contribute to Ewing sarcoma severity differ across demographic groups.

Does a Concise Patient-reported Outcome Measure Provide a Valid Measure of Physical Function for Cancer Patients After Lower Extremity Surgery?

BACKGROUND: Current functional assessment tools for orthopaedic oncology are long surveys that contribute to patients' survey fatigue and yet lack the ability to discern meaningful differences in a patient population that is often mobile but unable to perform strenuous activities. We sought to determine whether a shorter, novel tool based on existing, validated surveys could better capture differences in a sample of orthopaedic oncology patients. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Can a concise fixed-item functional tool derived from the 50 items in the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score for the lower extremity (TESS LE) and the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) demonstrate similar responsiveness in terms of sensitivity and specificity? (2) What is the precision and accuracy of the concise tool compared with the TESS LE and LEFS? METHODS: Functional outcome data were collected and maintained in a longitudinally maintained database at a single institution. Patients were included in the study if (1) they had undergone a tumor excision or a nononcologic orthopaedic procedure (for example, arthroplasty for osteoarthritis) for a bone or soft tissue tumor affecting lower extremity function, and (2) they had completed the LEFS, TESS LE, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health tool on at least two clinic visits. Between September 2014 and April 2022, we treated 14,234 patients for primary bone or soft tissue sarcoma, metastatic disease to bone, or orthopaedic sequelae of chronic cancer care. Approximately 6% (854 of 14,234) were excluded due to the need of a language translator. Approximately 2% (278 of 13,380) refused or were unable to participate. Seventy-two percent (9433 of 13,102) of the patients had an operation on a lower extremity. Of these, 4% (339 of 9433) of the patients completed the TESS LE, LEFS, and Item 3 of the PROMIS global health tool on ≥ 2 clinic visits. Of the patients in the current study, 49% (167 of 339) were women, and 27% (93 of 339) had metastatic carcinoma. Twelve percent (41 of 339) of the patients died before the end of the study period. Spearman rank-order correlation, principal component analysis (PCA), and item response theory (IRT) modeling identified 14 highly discriminating items from the TESS LE and LEFS. Multiple linear stepwise regression (MLSR) was performed with the dependent variable being the summary score of the 14 items derived from the TESS LE and LEFS and standardized to a percentage of 100. The beta coefficient from the MLSR was used to derive a weight for each of the 14 items. Evaluation of the model with 10 to 17 variables was performed to ensure that the model with the 14 items met the most criteria for fit with the PCA, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and the IRT modeling criteria. The responsiveness (sensitivity and specificity) of the change scores in the shortened 14-item survey, the 30-item TESS LE, and the 20-item LEFS as compared with the dichotomized changes in Item 3 of the PROMIS global health tool was evaluated using ROCs. The concordance (accuracy and precision) of the 14 items derived from the LEFS and TESS LE was evaluated. RESULTS: The responsiveness (sensitivity and specificity) of the shortened 14-item survey, the TESS LE, and the LEFS to the criterion target of the PROMIS global health tool (Item 3) was similar, with areas under the curve (AUCs) ranging from 0.62 to 0.65 for the ROC curves. The responsiveness of the 14-item survey to the TESS LE showed sensitivity of 96% and specificity of 90%, with an AUC of 0.98 (p < 0.001). The responsiveness of the 14 items to the LEFS showed sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 86%, with an AUC of 0.96. The validity of the 14 items to the TESS LE was measured by concordance, with a precision of 0.98 and an accuracy of 0.97. Concordance of the 14 items to the LEFS showed a precision of 0.98 and accuracy of 0.83. CONCLUSION: The concise 14 items derived from patient-reported responses in the TESS LE and LEFS outcome measures showed similar responsiveness (sensitivity and specificity) as the original TESS LE and LEFS for cancer patients after lower extremity orthopaedic surgery performed for oncologic and nononcologic indications. The concise 14 items have a similar ability to the TESS LE and LEFS to tell the clinician or patient how they are functioning compared with other patients. These 14 items are shorter than the combined 50 items of the TESS LE and LEFS while retaining the capacity to describe a broad range of lower extremity function for orthopaedic oncology patients. We have named the 14-item survey the Lower Extremity Oncology Functional Assessment Tool.Level of Evidence Level II, diagnostic study.

Can Periprosthetic Joint Infection of Tumor Prostheses Be Controlled With Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention?

BACKGROUND: Two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients who have undergone segmental replacement of the distal femur or proximal tibia after tumor resection can be associated with considerable morbidity, pain, and risk of complications because the procedure often results in removal of long, well-fixed stems from the diaphysis. A less-aggressive surgical approach, such as debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR), may be attractive to patients and surgeons because of less morbidity, but the likelihood of eradicating infection in comparison to the traditional two-stage revision is not well established for oncology patients. Furthermore, the relative risk of subsequent amputation for DAIR versus two-stage revision has not been defined for this population. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) How does DAIR compare with two-stage revision in terms of infection control for patients with distal femoral or proximal tibial segmental modular endoprostheses? (2) Is DAIR as an initial procedure associated with an increased risk of amputation compared with two-stage revision for infection? METHODS: From the longitudinally maintained orthopaedic oncology surgical database at our institution, we identified 69 patients who had been treated for a clinical diagnosis of PJI at the knee between 1993 and 2015. We excluded 32% (22) of patients who did not meet at least one of the major criteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) for PJI, 3% (2) of patients who underwent immediate amputation, 3% (2) of patients who had a follow-up time of < 24 months, and 7% (5) of patients who did not have a primary tumor of the distal femur or proximal tibia. The study consisted of 38 patients, of whom eight underwent two-stage revision, 26 underwent DAIR, and four underwent extended DAIR (removal of all segmental components but with retention of stems and components fixed in bone) for their initial surgical procedure. To be considered free of infection, patients had to meet MSIS standards, including no positive cultures, drainage, or surgical debridement for a minimum of 2 years from the last operation. Factors associated with time-dependent risk of infection relapse, clearance, amputation, and patient survival were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves and the log-rank test to compare factors. Association of demographic and treatment factors was assessed using chi-square and Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: Continuous infection-free survival at 5 years was 16% (95% CI 2% to 29%) for patients undergoing DAIR compared with 75% (95% CI 45% to 100%) for patients undergoing two-stage revision (p = 0.006). The median (range) number of total surgical procedures was 3 per patient (1 to 10) for DAIR and 2 (2 to 5) for two-stage revision. Twenty-nine percent (11 of 38) of patients eventually underwent amputation. Survival without amputation was 69% (95% CI 51% to 86%) for DAIR compared with 88% (95% CI 65% to 100%) for two-stage revision at 5 years (p = 0.34). The cumulative proportion of patients achieving infection-free status (> 2 years continuously after last treatment) and limb preservation was 58% (95% CI 36% to 80%) for patients initially treated with DAIR versus 87% (95% CI 65% to 100%) for patients first treated with two-stage revision (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Infection control was better with two-stage revision than DAIR. The chance of eventual clearance of infection with limb preservation was better when two-stage revision was chosen as the initial treatment. However, the loss to follow-up in the two-stage revision group would likely make the true proportion of infection control lower than our estimate. Our experience would suggest that the process of infection eradication is a complex and difficult one. Most patients undergo multiple operations. Nearly one-third of patients eventually underwent amputation, and this was a serious risk for both groups. While we cannot strongly recommend one approach over the other based on our data, we would still consider the use of DAIR in patients who present with acute short duration of symptoms (< 3 weeks), no radiographic signs of erosion around fixed implants, and organisms other than Staphylococcus aureus. We would advocate the extended DAIR procedure with removal of all segmental or modular components, and we would caution patients that there is a high likelihood of needing further surgery. A prospective trial with strict adherence to indications may be needed to evaluate the relative merits of an extended DAIR procedure versus a two-stage revision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Reconstruction of Bony Defects With Motorized Intramedullary Nails After Tumor Resection.

Motorized intramedullary lengthening nails allow for transport of a bone segment for limb lengthening, deformity correction, healing of nonunion, and intercalary distraction osteogenesis. Resection of tumors involving the bone can result in substantial defects that require reconstruction. Use of these nails allows for a biologic reconstruction with the incorporation of allograft or by distraction osteogenesis. Limb lengthening after an internal hemipelvectomy where the hip joint is resected can be performed to improve gait, decrease pain, and prevent the need for a custom shoe or shoe lift. Using these nails in compression aids the incorporation of intercalary allografts and prevents stress shielding and stress risers within the graft when compared with plating. It also allows for a subsequent lengthening of the limb using the same implant. Plate-assisted bone segment transport or the use of a bone transport nail allows for a true biologic reconstruction of an intercalary defect using distraction osteogenesis. These implants provide the orthopaedic oncologist with more options for reconstruction and the potential to improve the function and outcomes of their patients.

Practice Pattern Variability in the Management of Regional Lymph Node Metastasis in Extremity and Trunk Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A Survey of the Society of Surgical Oncology and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Membership.

BACKGROUND: Regional lymph node metastasis in extremity and trunk soft tissue sarcoma (ETSTS) is rare with no standardized management. We sought to determine management patterns for regional lymph node metastasis in ETSTS. METHODS: A survey regarding the management of ETSTS lymph node metastasis was distributed to the membership of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) and the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) in January 2022. The survey queried the type of training (surgical oncology, orthopedic oncology), details of their practice setting, and management decisions of hypothetical ETSTS scenarios that involved potential or confirmed lymph node metastasis. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 349 MSTS members (open rate of 63%, completion rate 21%) and 3026 SSO members (open rate of 55%, completion rate 4.7%) and was completed by 214 respondents, of whom 73 (34.1%) and 141 (65.9%) were orthopedic oncology and surgical oncology fellowship-trained, respectively. The majority of respondents practiced in an academic setting (n = 171, 79.9%) and treat >10 extremity sarcoma cases annually (n = 138, 62.2%). In scenarios with confirmed nodal disease for clear cell and epithelioid sarcoma, surgical oncologists were inclined to perform lymphadenectomy, while orthopedic oncologists were inclined to offer targeted lymph node excision with adjuvant radiation (p < 0.001). There was heterogeneity of responses regarding the management of nodal disease regardless of training background. CONCLUSION: Self-reported management of nodal disease in ETSTS was variable among respondent groups with differences and similarities based on training background. These data highlight the variability of practice for nodal disease management and the need for consensus-based guidelines.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Extremity and Truncal Soft Tissue Sarcomas: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Regional lymph node metastasis (RLNM) occurs infrequently in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS), although certain STS subtypes have a higher propensity for RLNM. The identification of RLNM has significant implications for staging and prognosis; however, the precise impact of node-positive disease on patient survival remains a topic of controversy. Although the benefits of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) are well documented in patients with melanoma and breast cancer, whether this procedure offers a benefit in STS is controversial. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed and articles reviewed to determine if SLNB in patients with extremity/truncal STS impacts disease-free or overall survival. RESULTS: Six studies were included. Rates of sentinel lymph node positivity were heterogeneous (range 4.3-50%). The impact of SLNB on patient outcomes remains unclear. The overall quality of available evidence was low, as assessed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. CONCLUSIONS: The literature addressing the impact of nodal basin evaluation on the staging and management of patients with extremity/truncal STS is confounded by heterogeneous patient cohorts and clinical practices. Multicenter prospective studies are warranted to determine the true incidence of RLNM and whether SLNB could benefit patients with clinically occult RLNM at diagnosis.

What Is the Prosthetic Survival After Resection and Intercalary Endoprosthetic Reconstruction for Diaphyseal Bone Metastases of the Humerus and Femur?

BACKGROUND: Large metastatic lesions of the diaphysis can cause considerable pain and result in difficult surgical challenges. Resection and cemented intercalary endoprosthetic reconstruction offer one solution to the problem, but it is an extensive operation that might not be tolerated well by a debilitated patient. The risk of aseptic loosening and revision after intercalary endoprosthetic replacement has varied in previous reports, which have not examined the risk of revision in the context of patient survival. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) In a small case series from one institution, what is the survivorship of patients after cemented intercalary endoprosthetic replacement for diaphyseal metastasis, and what is the cumulative incidence of revision for any reason? (2) What are the complications associated with cemented intercalary reconstruction? (3) What is the functional outcome after the procedure as assessed by the MSTS93 score? METHODS: We retrospectively studied 19 patients with diaphyseal long bone metastases who were treated with resection and cemented intercalary endoprosthetic reconstruction by five participating surgeons at one referral center from 2006 to 2017. There were 11 men and eight women with a median age of 59 years (range 46 to 80 years). The minimum follow-up required for this series was 12 months; however, patients who reached an endpoint (death, radiographic loosening, or implant revision) before that time were included. One of these 19 patients was lost to follow-up but was not known to have died. The median follow-up was 24 months (range 0 to 116 months). Eight of the 19 patients presented with pathologic fractures. Ten of 19 lesions involved the femur, and nine of 19 were in the humerus. The most common pathologic finding was renal cell carcinoma (in 10 of 19). Survival estimates of the patients were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. A competing risks estimator was used to evaluate implant survival, using death of the patient as the competing risk. We also estimated the cumulative incidence of aseptic loosening in a competing risk analysis. Radiographs were analyzed for radiolucency at the bone-cement-implant interfaces, fracture, integrity of the cement mantle, and component position stability. Complications were assessed using record review that was performed by an individual who was not involved in the initial care of the patients. Functional outcomes were assessed using the MSTS93 scoring system. RESULTS: Patient survivorship was 68% (95% CI 50% to 93%) at 1 year, 53% (95% CI 34% to 81%) at 2 years, and 14% (95% CI 4% to 49%) at 5 years; the median patient survival time after reconstruction was 25 months (range 0 to 116 months). In the competing risk analysis, using death as the competing risk, the cumulative incidence of implant revision was 11% (95% CI 2% to 29%) at 1 year and 16% (95% CI 4% to 36%) at 5 years after surgery; however, the cumulative incidence of aseptic loosening (with death as a competing risk) was 22% (95% CI 6% to 43%) at 1 year and 33% (95% CI 13% to 55%) at 5 years after surgery. Other complications included one patient who died postoperatively of cardiac arrest, one patient with delayed wound healing, two patients with bone recurrence, and one patient who experienced local soft tissue recurrence that was excised without implant revision. Total MSTS93 scores improved from a mean of 12.6 ± 8.1 (42% ± 27%) preoperatively to 21.5 ± 5.0 (72% ± 17%) at 3 months postoperatively (p < 0.001) and 21.6 ± 8.5 (72% ± 28%) at 2 years postoperatively (p = 0.98; 3 months versus 2 years). CONCLUSION: Resection of diaphyseal metastases with intercalary reconstruction can provide stability and short-term improvement in function for patients with advanced metastatic disease and extensive cortical destruction. Aseptic loosening is a concern, particularly in the humerus; however, the competing risk analysis suggests the procedure is adequate for most patients, because many in this series died of disease without undergoing revision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study .

Hypofractionated, 3-week, preoperative radiotherapy for patients with soft tissue sarcomas (HYPORT-STS): a single-centre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The standard preoperative radiotherapy regimen of 50 Gy delivered in 25 fractions for 5 weeks for soft tissue sarcomas results in excellent local control, with major wound complications occurring in approximately 35% of patients. We aimed to investigate the safety of a moderately hypofractionated, shorter regimen of radiotherapy, which could be more convenient for patients. METHODS: This single-centre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial (HYPORT-STS) was done at a single tertiary cancer care centre (MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA). We administered preoperative radiotherapy to a dose of 42·75 Gy in 15 fractions of 2·85 Gy/day for 3 weeks (five fractions per week) to adults (aged ≥18 years) with non-metastatic soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities or superficial trunk and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-3. The primary endpoint was a major wound complication occurring within 120 days of surgery. Major wound complications were defined as those requiring a secondary operation, or operations, under general or regional anaesthesia for wound treatment; readmission to the hospital for wound care; invasive procedures for wound care; deep wound packing to an area of wound measuring at least 2 cm in length; prolonged dressing changes; repeat surgery for revision of a split thickness skin graft; or wet dressings for longer than 4 weeks. We analysed our primary outcome and safety in all patients who enrolled. We monitored safety using a Bayesian, one-arm, time-to-event stopping rule simulator comparing the rate of major wound complications at 120 days post-surgery among study participants with the historical rate of 35%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03819985, recruitment is complete, and follow-up continues. FINDINGS: Between Dec 18, 2018, and Jan 6, 2021, we assessed 157 patients for eligibility, of whom 120 were enrolled and received hypofractionated preoperative radiotherapy. At no time did the stopping rule computation indicate that the trial should be stopped early for lack of safety. Median postoperative follow-up was 24 months (IQR 17-30). Of 120 patients, 37 (31%, 95% CI 24-40) developed a major wound complication at a median time of 37 days (IQR 25-59) after surgery. No patient had acute radiation toxicity (during radiotherapy or within 4 weeks of the radiotherapy end date) of grade 3 or worse (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] version 4.0) or an on-treatment serious adverse event. Four (3%) of 115 patients had late radiation toxicity (≥6 months post-surgery) of at least grade 3 (CTCAE or Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Late Radiation Morbidity Scoring Scheme): femur fractures (n=2), lymphoedema (n=1), and skin ulceration (n=1). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Moderately hypofractionated preoperative radiotherapy delivered to patients with soft tissue sarcomas was safe and could therefore be a more convenient alternative to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. Patients can be counselled about these results and potentially offered this regimen, particularly if it facilitates care at a sarcoma specialty centre. Results on long-term oncological, late toxicity, and functional outcomes are awaited. FUNDING: The National Cancer Institute.

Certain risk factors for patients with desmoid tumors warrant reconsideration of local therapy strategies.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate treatment outcomes for patients with desmoid tumors (DTs) receiving local therapy with surgery alone, radiation therapy (RT) alone, or combined modality therapy (RT and surgery). METHODS: This was a cross-sectional cohort study of 412 patients with nonmesenteric DTs who received local therapy at the authors' institution between 1965 and 2018. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 95 months (range, 1-509 months). Local recurrence occurred in 127 patients (31%) at a median time of 21 months (interquartile range, 12-38 months). The 5-year local control (LC) rate was 67%. Patient or tumor factors that were significantly associated with poorer 5-year LC in a multivariable analysis included an age ≤ 30 years (57% vs 75% for an age > 30 years; hazard ratio [HR], 1.73; P = .004), an extremity location (57% vs 71% for a nonextremity location; HR, 1.77; P = .004), and large tumors (59% for >10 cm [HR, 2.17; P = .004] and 65% for 5.1-10 cm [HR, 1.71; P = .02] vs 76% for ≤5 cm). Subset analyses of these high-risk patients revealed no local therapy strategy to be superior for young patients ≤ 30 years old (HR for surgery, 1.42; P = .33; HR for RT, 1.36; P = .38) or for large tumors > 10 cm (HR for surgery, 1.55; P = .46; HR for RT, 0.91; P = .91). However, for patients with extremity tumors, surgery alone was significantly associated with inferior LC (HR for surgery, 5.15; P < .001; HR for RT, 1.51; P = .38). CONCLUSIONS: Local therapy provides durable tumor control in the majority of patients with DTs. However, young patients, patients with an extremity location, and patients with large tumors are at increased risk of recurrence. When active treatment is indicated, systemic therapy should perhaps be considered as a first-line option in these high-risk subsets. Prospective multi-institutional studies evaluating this strategy are warranted.

BMTP-11 is active in preclinical models of human osteosarcoma and a candidate targeted drug for clinical translation.

Osteosarcoma occurs predominantly in children and young adults. High-grade tumors require multidisciplinary treatment consisting of chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, along with surgical intervention. Despite this approach, death from respiratory failure secondary to the development and progression of pulmonary metastases remains a significant problem. Here, we identify the IL-11 receptor α subunit (IL-11Rα) as a cell surface marker of tumor progression that correlates with poor prognosis in patients with osteosarcoma. We also show that both IL-11Rα and its ligand, IL-11, are specifically up-regulated in human metastatic osteosarcoma cell lines; engagement of this autocrine loop leads to tumor cell proliferation, invasion, and anchorage-independent growth in vitro. Consistently, IL-11Rα promotes lung colonization by human metastatic osteosarcoma cells in vivo in an orthotopic mouse model. Finally, we evaluate the IL-11Rα-targeted proapoptotic agent bone metastasis-targeting peptidomimetic (BMTP-11) in preclinical models of primary intratibial osteosarcomas, observing marked inhibition of both tumor growth and lung metastases. This effect was enhanced when BMTP-11 was combined with the chemotherapeutic drug gemcitabine. Our combined data support the development of approaches targeting IL-11Rα, and establish BMTP-11 as a leading drug candidate for clinical translation in patients with high-risk osteosarcoma.

Local recurrence of Ewing sarcoma: Is wide excision an acceptable treatment?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Local recurrence in Ewing sarcoma (ES) is associated with poor prognosis. The purpose of the study is to determine what factors affect overall survival after local recurrence and whether wide excision constitutes appropriate treatment. METHODS: From 1992 to 2017, 26 patients were treated for local recurrence of ES. Sixteen patients presented with local recurrence only while 10 had metastasis. The median follow-up was 23 months (range, 3-255 months). Overall survival was assessed with Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: At the last follow-up, seven of 26 (27%) patients were alive. Overall survival after local recurrence was 28% at 5 years. Later onset of local recurrence (P = .041), surgical treatment (P < .001), and complete eradication of all recurrent disease (P < .001) predicted better survival. Metastasis was associated with worse survival (P = .014). All three patients who survived more than 10 years were treated with wide local excision. A second local recurrence developed in seven patients (28%) but did not predict worse overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Overall survival after local recurrence is better for patients with nonmetastatic disease treated surgically. Wide excision can be compatible with long survival. We do not advocate amputation on a routine basis for local recurrence. Complete eradication of all diseases is associated with better survival.

Do Early Results of Proximal Humeral Allograft-Prosthetic Composite Reconstructions Persist at 5-year Followup?

BACKGROUND: Insufficiency of the rotator cuff is a major problem after resections of proximal humeral tumors and can limit shoulder motion despite preservation of the deltoid muscle and axillary nerve. Allograft-prosthetic composite reconstruction offers one method to reattach the rotator cuff tendons and has been successful in small studies with short followup. However, data are lacking with regard to implant durability, changes in Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scores over time, and delayed complications with extended followup. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the cumulative incidence of allograft-prosthetic composite revision surgery 5 years after the procedure? (2) What are the early- and intermediate-term MSTS scores of allograft-prosthetic composite reconstruction of the shoulder? (3) What are the complications of allograft-prosthetic composite reconstruction? METHODS: Twenty-one patients underwent allograft-prosthetic composite reconstruction after tumor resection of the proximal humerus between 2000 and 2015. Six patients who were lost to followup were not included. All patients had malignant or aggressive benign tumors that could be treated with a wide intraarticular approach preserving the deltoid muscle, axillary nerve, and glenoid. Cumulative incidence of implant revision was calculated with death of the patient as a competing risk. Minimum followup was 24 months (with the exception of one patient who died at 22 months), and median followup was 97 months (range, 20-198 months). The upper extremity MSTS score was used to assess function. Various complications were identified from radiographs and charts. RESULTS: The cumulative risk of implant revision was 10.1% at 5 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6%-28.0%). Mean MSTS scores were 86% (± SD 9%) at 1 year and 78% (± SD 13%) at 5 years (mean difference ± SD 9% ± 14%, p = 0.015). Mean active forward elevation was 101° (± SD 33°) at 1 year and 92° (± SD 34°) at 5 years (mean difference ± SD 8° ± 36°, p = 0.41). Notable adverse events included progressive radiographic superior subluxation > 1 cm after 12 months followup (12 of 21 patients), delayed union > 12 months (10 of 21 patients), resorption of the greater tuberosity (nine of 21 patients), and aseptic loosening (three of 21 patients). CONCLUSIONS: At intermediate 5-year followup, allograft-prosthetic composite reconstruction of the proximal humerus has an acceptable overall MSTS score and a low incidence of implant revision, but loss of patients to followup and exclusion from the study likely make the results seem better than they actually are. The MSTS score deteriorates between 1 and 5 years. Decreased active forward elevation is not likely to be the sole reason for worsening MSTS scores. A variety of delayed complications including delayed union, resorption of the greater tuberosity, and superior subluxation occurs frequently and may contribute to overall scores. Future studies that compare allograft-prosthetic composites against other forms of reconstruction should attempt to control for possible selection bias and have sufficiently long followup to detect the deterioration of MSTS scores that occur with time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Phase II study of neoadjuvant checkpoint blockade in patients with surgically resectable undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma and dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Soft tissue sarcomas are a heterogeneous and rare group of solid tumors of mesenchymal origin that can arise anywhere in the body. Although surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment for patients with localized disease, disease recurrence is common and 5-year overall survival is poor (~ 65%). Both radiation therapy and conventional chemotherapy are used to reduce local and distant recurrence. However, the utility of radiation therapy is often limited by disease location (in the case of retroperitoneal sarcomas, for instance) while systemic therapy with conventional lines of chemotherapy offer limited efficacy and are often poorly tolerated and associated with significant toxicity. Within the past decade, major advances have been made in the treatment of other malignancies including melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, and non-small cell lung carcinoma with the advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors such as ipilimumab (anti-CTLA4), pembrolizumab (anti-PD1), and nivolumab (anti-PD1). The recently published SARC028 (NCT02301039), an open label, phase II, multicenter trial of pembrolizumab in patients with advanced bone and soft tissue sarcomas reported promising activity in select histologic subtypes of advanced STS, including undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma and dedifferentiated liposarcoma. METHODS: There is a clear need for novel and effective adjuncts in the treatment of STS. We hypothesize that immune checkpoint blockade will be effective in patients with surgically resectable primary or locally recurrent dedifferentiated liposarcoma and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma when administered in the neoadjuvant setting. The primary aim of this phase II, single-center, open label, randomized non-comparative trial is to determine the pathologic response to neoadjuvant nivolumab monotherapy and combination nivolumab/ipilimumab in patients with resectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma of the retroperitoneum or undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma of the trunk or extremity treated with concurrent standard of care neoadjuvant radiation therapy. DISCUSSION: This study will help define the role of single agent anti-PD1 and combination anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1 therapy in patients with surgically resectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03307616 , registered October 12, 2017.

Mesenchymal Chondrosarcoma: a Review with Emphasis on its Fusion-Driven Biology.

Mesenchymal chondrosarcoma is a rare but deadly form of chondrosarcoma that typically affects adolescents and young adults. While curative intent is possible for patients with localized disease, few options exist for patients in the unresectable/metastatic setting. Thus, it is imperative to understand the fusion-driven biology of this rare malignant neoplasm so as to lead to the future development of better therapeutics for this disease. This manuscript will briefly review the clinical and pathologic features of mesenchymal chondrosarcoma followed by an appraisal of existing data linked to the fusions, HEY1-NCOA2 and IRF2BP2-CDX1, and the associated downstream pathways.

Is a Cephalomedullary Nail Durable Treatment for Patients With Metastatic Peritrochanteric Disease?

BACKGROUND: Although cephalomedullary nail fixation is often used for metastatic peritrochanteric lesions of the femur, there is concern regarding the durability of the implant in comparison to endoprosthetic reconstruction. Previous studies have reported the proportion of patients who undergo reoperation for loss of stability, but the adequacy of the construct has not been critically evaluated in a competing risk analysis that incorporates death of the patient in the calculation. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the cumulative incidence of reoperation of cephalomedullary nails with death as a competing risk for metastatic lesions of the proximal femur? (2) What is the survival of patients with metastases to the proximal femur after cephalomedullary nailing? (3) What clinical factors are associated with implant stability in these patients? METHODS: Between 1990 and 2009, 11 surgeons at one center treated 217 patients with cephalomedullary nails for metastatic proximal femoral lesions. This represented 40% (217 of 544) of the patients undergoing surgery for metastases in this location during the study period. In general, we used cephalomedullary nails when there was normal bone in the femoral head, no fracture in the neck, and a moderate-sized lesion; we favored bipolar hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures and disease affecting the femoral head; finally, we used proximal femoral endoprosthetic replacement for large lesions with severe bone destruction. A retrospective study was conducted of 199 patients with cephalomedullary nails for peritrochanteric metastases from 1990 to 2009. Pathologic fracture, defined as a breach in cortex with a clear fracture line either with or without displacement, was present in 61 patients. The most common primary cancers were breast (42 of 199 patients [21%]), lung (37 of 199 patients [18%]), and renal cell (34 of 199 patients [17%]). A competing risk analysis was performed to describe the cumulative incidence of implant revision. Patient overall survival was assessed by Kaplan-Meier survivorship. A univariate analysis was performed to determine whether there was an association between revision surgery and various patient factors, including tumor histology, pathologic fracture, cementation, and radiation. RESULTS: Loss of implant stability necessitating revision surgery occurred in 19 of 199 patients (10%). In a competing risk analysis with death of the patient as the competing event, the cumulative incidence of revision surgery was 5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3%-9%) at 12 months and 9% (95% CI, 5%-13%) at 5 years. Using Kaplan-Meier analysis, the overall patient survival was 31% (95% CI, 25%-37%) at 12 months and 5% (95% CI, 3%-9%) at 60 months. Patients with lung cancer had the shortest overall survival of 11% (95% CI, 1%-21%) at 12 months, and patients with multiple myeloma had the longest overall survival of 71% (95% CI, 49%-94%) at 12 months (p < 0.001). Duration of patient survival beyond the median 7 months was the only factor associated with a greater likelihood of revision surgery. Factors not associated with revision included tumor histology, pathologic fracture, closed versus open nailing, cementation, gender, age, and postoperative radiation. CONCLUSIONS: The competing risk analysis demonstrates a relatively low cumulative incidence of reoperation and suggests that cephalomedullary nailing is reasonable for patients with moderate-sized proximal femoral metastasis not affecting the femoral head. For the large majority of patients, the construct achieves the goal of stabilizing the femur for the duration of the patient's life. Longer patient survival was associated with greater risk of revision surgery, but no particular tumor histology was found to have a greater cumulative incidence of reoperation. Future work with a larger number of patients and stricter surgical indications may be needed to corroborate these findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Bone and Soft-Tissue Tumors for the General Orthopaedic Surgeon: Diagnosis, Management, and Avoiding Errors.

Orthopaedic surgeons will encounter a variety of bone and soft-tissue lesions throughout their careers. Although most of these lesions will be benign and nonaggressive, many others will require management that is time consuming, challenging, and stressful for surgeons and patients. Errors in management, if they occur, may delay diagnosis and hinder efforts to perform limb-sparing surgery. A systematic approach to the evaluation of adult and pediatric patients with bone or soft-tissue tumors will help general orthopaedic surgeons correctly diagnose and manage tumors, understand when to refer patients to an orthopaedic oncologist, and avoid management errors.