The IMRiS Trial: A Phase 2 Study of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy in Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma.

PURPOSE: Primary soft tissue sarcoma (STS) is rare, with many tumors occurring in extremities. Local management is limb-sparing surgery and preoperative/postoperative radiation therapy (RT) for patients at high risk of local recurrence. We prospectively investigated late normal tissue toxicity and limb function observed after intensity modulated RT (IMRT) in extremity STS. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with extremity STS, age ≥16 years. Two treatment cohorts: IMRT 50 Gy in 25 × 2 Gy fractions (preoperative) or 60/66 Gy in 30/33 × 2 Gy fractions (postoperative). The primary endpoint was the rate of grade ≥2 late soft tissue fibrosis (subcutaneous tissue) at 24 months after IMRT (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group late radiation morbidity scoring). RESULTS: One hundred sixty-eight patients were registered between March 2016 and July 2017. Of those, 159 (95%) received IMRT (106, 67% preoperative RT; and 53, 33% postoperative RT) with a median follow-up of 35.2 months (IQR, 32.9-36.6); 62% men, median age 58 years. Of 111 patients assessable for the primary endpoint at 24 months, 12 (10.8%; 95% CI, 5.7%-18.1%) had grade ≥2 subcutaneous fibrosis. The overall rate at 24 months of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group late skin, bone, and joint toxicity was 7 of 112 (6.3%), 3 of 112 (2.7%), and 10 of 113 (8.8%), respectively, and for Stern's scale edema was 6 of 113 (5.3%). More wound complications were observed with preoperative than postoperative RT (29.2% vs 3.8%). Overall survival at 24 months was 84.6%, and the local recurrence event rate at 24 months was 10%. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of grade ≥2 subcutaneous fibrosis at 24 months after IMRT was 10.8%, consistent with other recent trials of IMRT and lower than historically reported rates in patients treated with 3-dimensional conformal RT. This trial provides further evidence for the benefits of IMRT in this patient population.

UK guidelines for the management of soft tissue sarcomas.

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare tumours arising in mesenchymal tissues and can occur almost anywhere in the body. Their rarity, and the heterogeneity of subtype and location, means that developing evidence-based guidelines is complicated by the limitations of the data available. This makes it more important that STS are managed by expert multidisciplinary teams, to ensure consistent and optimal treatment, recruitment to clinical trials, and the ongoing accumulation of further data and knowledge. The development of appropriate guidance, by an experienced panel referring to the evidence available, is therefore a useful foundation on which to build progress in the field. These guidelines are an update of the previous versions published in 2010 and 2016 [1, 2]. The original guidelines were drawn up by a panel of UK sarcoma specialists convened under the auspices of the British Sarcoma Group (BSG) and were intended to provide a framework for the multidisciplinary care of patients with soft tissue sarcomas. This iteration of the guidance, as well as updating the general multidisciplinary management of soft tissue sarcoma, includes specific sections relating to the management of sarcomas at defined anatomical sites: gynaecological sarcomas, retroperitoneal sarcomas, breast sarcomas, and skin sarcomas. These are generally managed collaboratively by site specific multidisciplinary teams linked to the regional sarcoma specialist team, as stipulated in the recently published sarcoma service specification [3]. In the UK, any patient with a suspected soft tissue sarcoma should be referred to a specialist regional soft tissues sarcoma service, to be managed by a specialist sarcoma multidisciplinary team. Once the diagnosis has been confirmed using appropriate imaging and a tissue biopsy, the main modality of management is usually surgical excision performed by a specialist surgeon, combined with pre- or post-operative radiotherapy for tumours at higher risk for local recurrence. Systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) may be utilised in cases where the histological subtype is considered more sensitive to systemic treatment. Regular follow-up is recommended to assess local control, development of metastatic disease, and any late effects of treatment.

Axitinib in patients with advanced/metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (Axi-STS): an open-label, multicentre, phase II trial in four histological strata.

BACKGROUND: Axitinib is an oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor with anti-tumour activity in renal, thyroid, and pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Axi-STS was a pathologically-stratified, non-randomised, open-label, multi-centre, phase II trial of continuous axitinib treatment in patients ≥16 years, performance status ≤2, with pathologically-confirmed advanced/metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Patients were recruited within four tumour strata, each analysed separately: angiosarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, synovial sarcoma, or other eligible STSs. The primary outcome was progression-free survival at 12 weeks (PFS12). A Simon's two-stage design with activity defined as PFS12 rate of 40% determined a sample size of 33 patients per strata. RESULTS: Between 31-August-2010 and 29-January-2016, 145 patients were recruited: 38 angiosarcoma, 37 leiomyosarcoma, 36 synovial sarcoma, and 34 other subtypes. PFS12 rate for each stratum analysed was 42% (95% lower confidence interval (LCI); 29), 45% (95% LCI; 32), 57% (95% LCI; 42), and 33% (95% LCI; 21), respectively. There were 74 serious adverse events including two treatment-related deaths of pulmonary haemorrhage and gastrointestinal bleeding. Fatigue and hypertension were the most common grade 3 adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Axitinib showed clinical activity in all STS strata investigated. The adverse event profile was acceptable, supporting further investigation in phase III trials. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 60791336.

Technical development and validation of a clinically applicable microenvironment classifier as a biomarker of tumour hypoxia for soft tissue sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare, heterogeneous tumours and biomarkers are needed to inform management. We previously derived a prognostic tumour microenvironment classifier (24-gene hypoxia signature). Here, we developed/validated an assay for clinical application. METHODS: Technical performance of targeted assays (Taqman low-density array, nanoString) was compared in 28 prospectively collected formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) biopsies. The nanoString assay was biologically validated by comparing to HIF-1α/CAIX immunohistochemistry (IHC) in clinical samples. The Manchester (n = 165) and VORTEX Phase III trial (n = 203) cohorts were used for clinical validation. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Both assays demonstrated excellent reproducibility. The nanoString assay detected upregulation of the 24-gene signature under hypoxia in vitro, and 16/24 hypoxia genes were upregulated in tumours with high CAIX expression in vivo. Patients with hypoxia-high tumours had worse OS in the Manchester (HR 3.05, 95% CI 1.54-5.19, P = 0.0005) and VORTEX (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.19-3.77, P = 0.009) cohorts. In the combined cohort, it was independently prognostic for OS (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.42-3.53, P = 0.00096) and associated with worse local recurrence-free survival (HR 2.17, 95% CI 1.01-4.68, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: This study comprehensively validates a microenvironment classifier befitting FFPE STS biopsies. Future uses include: (1) selecting high-risk patients for perioperative chemotherapy; and (2) biomarker-driven trials of hypoxia-targeted therapies.

Heritable defects in telomere and mitotic function selectively predispose to sarcomas.

Cancer genetics has to date focused on epithelial malignancies, identifying multiple histotype-specific pathways underlying cancer susceptibility. Sarcomas are rare malignancies predominantly derived from embryonic mesoderm. To identify pathways specific to mesenchymal cancers, we performed whole-genome germline sequencing on 1644 sporadic cases and 3205 matched healthy elderly controls. Using an extreme phenotype design, a combined rare-variant burden and ontologic analysis identified two sarcoma-specific pathways involved in mitotic and telomere functions. Variants in centrosome genes are linked to malignant peripheral nerve sheath and gastrointestinal stromal tumors, whereas heritable defects in the shelterin complex link susceptibility to sarcoma, melanoma, and thyroid cancers. These studies indicate a specific role for heritable defects in mitotic and telomere biology in risk of sarcomas.

Best clinical management of tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT): A consensus paper from the community of experts.

Tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT) is a rare, locally aggressive, mesenchymal tumor arising from the joints, bursa and tendon sheaths. TGCT comprises a nodular- and a diffuse-type, with the former exhibiting mostly indolent course and the latter a locally aggressive behavior. Although usually not life-threatening, TGCT may cause chronic pain and adversely impact function and quality of life (QoL). CSFR1 inhibitors are effective with benefit on symptoms and QoL but are not available in most countries. The degree of uncertainty in selecting the most appropriate therapy and the lack of guidelines on the clinical management of TGCT make the adoption of new treatments inconsistent across the world, with suboptimal outcomes for patients. A global consensus meeting was organized in June 2022, involving experts from several disciplines and patient representatives from SPAGN to define the best evidence-based practice for the optimal approach to TGCT and generate the recommendations presented herein.

Survival after high-dose chemotherapy for refractory and recurrent Ewing sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: outcome of primary refractory or recurrent Ewing sarcoma (RRES) is poor and the role of high-dose therapy (HDT) remains uncertain. We retrospectively reviewed all patients treated for RRES in the London Sarcoma Service (LSS) over a 22-year period with the aim of adding to the current literature and developing a prognostic risk score to aid clinical decision-making. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-six patients were included; 64 patients received HDT, 98 standard non-HDT chemotherapy and 34 no systemic therapy. At RRES, median age was 20 years and seventy-four per cent of patients had progressed or relapsed within 24 months. Median overall survival for HDT and non-HDT patients was 76 months (95% CI 34.8-117.2) and 10.5 months (95% CI 8.9-12.1), respectively. Two and five-year post-relapse survival (PRS) for HDT patients was 67.9% (SE 5.9) and 52.7% (SE 6.5), and for non-HDT patients, 20.5% (SE 4.2) and 2% (SE 1.5). Four prognostic factors significant on multivariate analysis were assigned a score of one point each, creating good (score 0), intermediate (score 1-2) and poor (score 3-4) prognosis groups. The increased score was significantly associated with reduced PRS. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that in RRES, HDT is associated with superior outcomes compared with non-HDT chemotherapy. RRES patients can be risk-stratified according to a predictive prognostic index we have developed, with the potential benefit of HDT observed even in patients with poor prognostic scores.

Magnetic resonance imaging of trunk and extremity myxoid liposarcoma: diagnosis, staging, and response to treatment.

Myxoid liposarcoma (MLS) accounts for approximately 30% of all liposarcomas. The majority are intermediate-grade tumours, but the presence of >5% round cell component renders it a high-grade sarcoma with subsequent poorer outcome. MLS most commonly arises in the lower extremities, has a predilection for extra-pulmonary sites of metastatic disease, and is recognized to be radiosensitive. The purpose of the current article is to review the role of MRI in the management of MLS, including the characteristic features of the primary tumour, features which help to identify a round cell component and thus determine prognosis, the role of whole-body MRI for evaluation of extra-pulmonary metastatic disease, and the utility of MRI for assessing treatment response. The MRI differential diagnosis of MLS is also considered.

Seeking international consensus on approaches to primary tumour treatment in Ewing sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: The local treatment of Ewing sarcoma of bone involves surgery, radiotherapy or both. The selection of treatment depends on the anatomical extent of the tumour, the effectiveness of the proposed treatment, its morbidity, and the expectation of cure. However, not only are there variations in the approach to local treatment between individual patients, but also between treatment centres and countries. Our aim was to explore variation in practice and develop consensus statements about local treatment. METHODS: A three stage modified Delphi technique was used with international collaborators. This involved an expert panel to identify areas of controversy, an online survey of international collaborators and a consensus meeting in London, UK in June 2017. In the consensus meeting, teams of clinicians discussed the local management of selected cases and their responses were collected with electronic voting. RESULTS: Areas of greater or less consensus were identified. The lack of evidence underpinning different approaches was noted and areas for collaborative research became apparent. CONCLUSION: This has demonstrated that there is an international consensus around many aspects of the local treatment of Ewing sarcoma of bone, including the use of specialist MultiDisciplinary Team (MDT) meetings with access to all appropriate treatments. However, considerable variation remains including the use of different staging investigations, decision making, definitions of response, and radiotherapy doses and timing. Further collaborative work should be undertaken to determine the impact of these variations in order to define best practice.

Continuous 14 Day Infusional Ifosfamide for Management of Soft-Tissue and Bone Sarcoma: A Single Centre Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

Ifosfamide is used to treat soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) and bone sarcoma (BS), with improved efficacy at doses above 9 g/m2/cycle. To mitigate treatment-associated toxicity with higher doses, continuous infusional ifosfamide is increasingly used. However, clinical outcome data remain limited. Single-centre retrospective analysis of patients treated with four-weekly infusional ifosfamide (14 g/m2/14d) between August 2012 and February 2019 was conducted. Radiological response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity were evaluated. Eighty patients were treated-46 with STS and 34 with BS. Patients received a median of three cycles of infusional ifosfamide (1-24). Overall disease control rate (DCR) in STS was 50% (23 of 46 patients), with a median PFS of 3.8 months, and median OS of 13.0 months. In synovial sarcoma (SS), DCR was 80% (12/15), median PFS 8.1 months and median OS 20.9 months. Overall DCR in BS (34 patients) was 30%, with a median PFS of 2.5 months and median OS of 6.2 months. Five patients (6%) stopped treatment due to toxicity alone within the first two cycles. A further 10 patients stopped treatment due to toxicity during later treatment cycles (12%) and 18 patients (23%) required dose modification. Forty-five patients (56%) experienced grade (G) 3/4 haematological toxicity, with 12 episodes of febrile neutropenia and one treatment-related death. Twenty-seven patients (34%) experienced G3/4 non-haematological toxicity, most commonly nausea and vomiting (10, 13%). In summary, infusional ifosfamide has efficacy in STS, most notable in SS. Benefit appears limited in BS. Treatment is associated with toxicity that requires specialist supportive care.

A randomized double-blind phase II study evaluating the role of maintenance therapy with cabozantinib in high-grade uterine sarcoma after stabilization or response to doxorubicin ± ifosfamide following surgery or in metastatic first line treatment (EORTC62113).

BACKGROUND: Uterine sarcomas are a group of rare tumors that include different subtypes. Patients with histopathological high-grade diseases are at high-risk of recurrence or progression, and have a poor prognosis. We aim to explore the most appropriate management in patients with uterine high-grade sarcomas. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of maintenance treatment with cabozantinib in patients with high-grade uterine sarcomas who achieved clinical benefit after standard chemotherapy. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: Maintenance treatment with cabozantinib after standard chemotherapy given as an adjuvant treatment after curative surgery, or in locally advanced or metastatic disease, increases progression-free survival compared with placebo TRIAL DESIGN: This is a randomized double blinded phase II trial. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: The study is enrolling adult patients with high-grade undifferentiated uterine sarcomas, high-grade endometrial stromal sarcomas, high-grade leiomyosarcoma, and high-grade adenosarcoma, FIGO (Federation International gynecologue Obstétricien) stage II/III to IV in stable disease or who achieved complete or partial response with doxorubicin ± ifosfamide, who are assigned 1:1 to 60 mg daily cabozantinib (experimental arm) or placebo (control arm), as maintenance therapy. Exclusion criteria include low-grade sarcoma. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: Progression-free survival at 4 months. SAMPLE SIZE: The study plans to enroll 90 patients to allow the randomization of 54 patients to detect an improvement in 4-month progression-free survival from 50% to 80% with 15% significance level and 85% power. Estimated dates for accrual completion: recruitment for the trial started in February 2015, and has currently enrolled 83 patients, of whom 35 patients have been randomized. The end of recruitment is anticipated for December 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01979393.

Early results and volumetric analysis after spot-scanning proton therapy with concomitant hyperthermia in large inoperable sacral chordomas.

OBJECTIVE: Large inoperable sacral chordomas show unsatisfactory local control rates even when treated with high dose proton therapy (PT). The aim of this study is assessing feasibility and reporting early results of patients treated with PT and concomitant hyperthermia (HT). METHODS:: Patients had histologically proven unresectable sacral chordomas and received 70 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) in 2.5 Gy fractions with concomitant weekly HT. Toxicity was assessed according to CTCAE_v4. A volumetric tumor response analysis was performed. RESULTS:: Five patients were treated with the combined approach. Median baseline tumor volume was 735 cc (range, 369-1142). All patients completed PT and received a median of 5 HT sessions (range, 2-6). Median follow-up was 18 months (range, 9-26). The volumetric analysis showed an objective response of all tumors (median shrinkage 46%; range, 9-72). All patients experienced acute Grade 2-3 local pain. One patient presented with a late Grade 3 iliac fracture. CONCLUSION: Combining PT and HT in large inoperable sacral chordomas is feasible and causes acceptable toxicity. Volumetric analysis shows promising early results, warranting confirmation in the framework of a prospective trial. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:: This is an encouraging first report of the feasibility and early results of concomitant HT and PT in treating inoperable sacral chordoma.

Cediranib in patients with alveolar soft-part sarcoma (CASPS): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS) is a rare soft-tissue sarcoma that is unresponsive to chemotherapy. Cediranib, a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor, has shown substantial activity in ASPS in non-randomised studies. The Cediranib in Alveolar Soft Part Sarcoma (CASPS) study was designed to discriminate the effect of cediranib from the intrinsically indolent nature of ASPS. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 2 trial, we recruited participants from 12 hospitals in the UK (n=7), Spain (n=3), and Australia (n=2). Patients were eligible if they were aged 16 years or older; metastatic ASPS that had progressed in the previous 6 months; had an ECOG performance status of 0-1; life expectancy of more than 12 weeks; and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function. Participants had to have no anti-cancer treatment within 4 weeks before trial entry, with exception of palliative radiotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1), with allocation by use of computer-generated random permuted blocks of six, to either cediranib (30 mg orally, once daily) or matching placebo tablets for 24 weeks. Treatment was supplied in number-coded bottles, masking participants and clinicians to assignment. Participants were unblinded at week 24 or sooner if they had progression defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1); those on placebo crossed over to cediranib and all participants continued on treatment until progression or death. The primary endpoint was percentage change in sum of target marker lesion diameters between baseline and week 24 or progression if sooner, assessed in the evaluable population (all randomly assigned participants who had a scan at week 24 [or sooner if they progressed] with target marker lesions measured). Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01337401; the European Clinical Trials database, number EudraCT2010-021163-33; and the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN63733470 recruitment is complete and follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2011, and July 29, 2016, of 48 participants recruited, all were randomly assigned to cediranib (n=32) or placebo (n=16). 23 (48%) were female and the median age was 31 years (IQR 27-45). Median follow-up was 34·3 months (IQR 23·7-55·6) at the time of data cutoff for these analyses (April 11, 2018). Four participants in the cediranib group were not evaluable for the primary endpoint (one did not start treatment, and three did not have their scan at 24 weeks). Median percentage change in sum of target marker lesion diameters for the evaluable population was -8·3% (IQR -26·5 to 5·9) with cediranib versus 13·4% (IQR 1·1 to 21·3) with placebo (one-sided p=0·0010). The most common grade 3 adverse events on (blinded) cediranib were hypertension (six [19%] of 31) and diarrhoea (two [6%]). 15 serious adverse reactions in 12 patients were reported; 12 of these reactions occurred on open-label cediranib, and the most common symptoms were dehydration (n=2), vomiting (n=2), and proteinuria (n=2). One probable treatment-related death (intracranial haemorrhage) occurred 41 days after starting open-label cediranib in a patient who was assigned to placebo in the masked phase. INTERPRETATION: Given the high incidence of metastatic disease and poor long-term prognosis of ASPS, together with the lack of efficacy of conventional chemotherapy, our finding of significant clinical activity with cediranib in this disease is an important step towards the goal of long-term disease control for these young patients. Future clinical trials in ASPS are also likely to involve immune checkpoint inhibitors. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and AstraZeneca.

The hypoxia marker CAIX is prognostic in the UK phase III VorteX-Biobank cohort: an important resource for translational research in soft tissue sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Despite high metastasis rates, adjuvant/neoadjuvant systemic therapy for localised soft tissue sarcoma (STS) is not used routinely. Progress requires tailoring therapy to features of tumour biology, which need exploration in well-documented cohorts. Hypoxia has been linked to metastasis in STS and is targetable. This study evaluated hypoxia prognostic markers in the phase III adjuvant radiotherapy VorteX trial. METHODS: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour biopsies, fresh tumour/normal tissue and blood were collected before radiotherapy. Immunohistochemistry for HIF-1α, CAIX and GLUT1 was performed on tissue microarrays and assessed by two scorers (one pathologist). Prognostic analysis of disease-free survival (DFS) used Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression. RESULTS: Biobank and outcome data were available for 203 out of 216 randomised patients. High CAIX expression was associated with worse DFS (hazard ratio 2.28, 95% confidence interval: 1.44-3.59, P<0.001). Hypoxia-inducible factor-1α and GLUT1 were not prognostic. Carbonic anhydrase IX remained prognostic in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The VorteX-Biobank contains tissue with linked outcome data and is an important resource for research. This study confirms hypoxia is linked to poor prognosis in STS and suggests that CAIX may be the best known marker. However, overlap between single marker positivity was poor and future work will develop an STS hypoxia gene signature to account for tumour heterogeneity.

Gemcitabine and docetaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line treatment in previously untreated advanced unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas (GeDDiS): a randomised controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: For many years, first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma has been doxorubicin. This study compared gemcitabine and docetaxel versus doxorubicin as first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma. METHODS: The GeDDiS trial was a randomised controlled phase 3 trial done in 24 UK hospitals and one Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) hospital. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma of Trojani grade 2 or 3, disease progression before enrolment, and no previous chemotherapy for sarcoma or previous doxorubicin for any cancer. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive six cycles of intravenous doxorubicin 75 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks, or intravenous gemcitabine 675 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m2 on day 8 every 3 weeks. Treatment was assigned using a minimisation algorithm incorporating a random element. Randomisation was stratified by age (≤18 years vs >18 years) and histological subtype. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients alive and progression free at 24 weeks in the intention-to-treat population. Adherence to treatment and toxicity were analysed in the safety population, consisting of all patients who received at least one dose of their randomised treatment. The trial was registered with the European Clinical Trials (EudraCT) database (no 2009-014907-29) and with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry (ISRCTN07742377), and is now closed to patient entry. FINDINGS: Between Dec 3, 2010, and Jan 20, 2014, 257 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups (129 to doxorubicin and 128 to gemcitabine and docetaxel). Median follow-up was 22 months (IQR 15·7-29·3). The proportion of patients alive and progression free at 24 weeks did not differ between those who received doxorubicin versus those who received gemcitabine and docetaxel (46·3% [95% CI 37·5-54·6] vs 46·4% [37·5-54·8]); median progression-free survival (23·3 weeks [95% CI 19·6-30·4] vs 23·7 weeks [18·1-20·0]; hazard ratio [HR] for progression-free survival 1·28, 95% CI 0·99-1·65, p=0·06). The most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were neutropenia (32 [25%] of 128 patients who received doxorubicin and 25 [20%] of 126 patients who received gemcitabine and docetaxel), febrile neutropenia (26 [20%] and 15 [12%]), fatigue (eight [6%] and 17 [14%]), oral mucositis (18 [14%] and two [2%]), and pain (ten [8%] and 13 [10%]). The three most common serious adverse events, representing 111 (39%) of all 285 serious adverse events recorded, were febrile neutropenia (27 [17%] of 155 serious adverse events in patients who received doxorubicin and 15 [12%] of 130 serious adverse events in patients who received gemcitabine and docetaxel, fever (18 [12%] and 19 [15%]), and neutropenia (22 [14%] and ten [8%]). 154 (60%) of 257 patients died in the intention-to-treat population: 74 (57%) of 129 patients in the doxorubicin group and 80 (63%) of 128 in the gemcitabine and docetaxel group. No deaths were related to the treatment, but two deaths were due to a combination of disease progression and treatment. INTERPRETATION: Doxorubicin should remain the standard first-line treatment for most patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma. These results provide evidence for clinicians to consider with their patients when selecting first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Sarcoma UK, and Clinical Trial Unit Kantonsspital St Gallen.

UK clinical practice guidelines for the management of gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST).

BACKGROUND: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare tumours arising in mesenchymal tissues. Gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) is the commonest STS and arises within the wall of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. While most GISTs occur in the stomach they do occur in all parts of the GI tract. As with other STS, it is important that GISTs are managed by expert teams, to ensure consistent and optimal treatment, as well as recruitment to clinical trials, and the ongoing accumulation of further knowledge of the disease. The development of appropriate guidance, by an experienced panel referring to the evidence available, is therefore a useful foundation on which to build progress in the field. METHODOLOGY: British Sarcoma Group guidelines for the management of GIST were initially developed by a panel of physicians experienced in the management of GIST. This current version has been updated and amended with reference to other European and US guidance. We have received input from representatives of all diagnostic and treatment disciplines as well as patient representatives. Levels of evidence and strength of recommendation gradings are those used by ESMO adapted from those published by the Infectious Disease Society of America. CONCLUSIONS: The guidelines cover aetiology, genetics and underlying molecular mechanisms, diagnosis and initial investigations, staging and risk stratification, surgery, neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, the management of advanced disease and follow-up. The importance of mutational analysis in guiding treatment is highlighted, since this can indicate the most effective treatment and avoid administration of ineffective drugs, emphasising the need for management in specialist centres.

UK guidelines for the management of soft tissue sarcomas.

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare tumours arising in mesenchymal tissues, and can occur almost anywhere in the body. Their rarity, and the heterogeneity of subtype and location means that developing evidence-based guidelines is complicated by the limitations of the data available. However, this makes it more important that STS are managed by teams, expert in such cases, to ensure consistent and optimal treatment, as well as recruitment to clinical trials, and the ongoing accumulation of further data and knowledge. The development of appropriate guidance, by an experienced panel referring to the evidence available, is therefore a useful foundation on which to build progress in the field. These guidelines are an update of the previous version published in 2010 (Grimer et al. in Sarcoma 2010:506182, 2010). The original guidelines were drawn up following a consensus meeting of UK sarcoma specialists convened under the auspices of the British Sarcoma Group (BSG) and were intended to provide a framework for the multidisciplinary care of patients with soft tissue sarcomas. This current version has been updated and amended with reference to other European and US guidance. There are specific recommendations for the management of selected subtypes of disease including retroperitoneal and uterine sarcomas, as well as aggressive fibromatosis (desmoid tumours) and other borderline tumours commonly managed by sarcoma services. An important aim in sarcoma management is early diagnosis and prompt referral. In the UK, any patient with a suspected soft tissue sarcoma should be referred to one of the specialist regional soft tissues sarcoma services, to be managed by a specialist sarcoma multidisciplinary team. Once the diagnosis has been confirmed using appropriate imaging, plus a biopsy, the main modality of management is usually surgical excision performed by a specialist surgeon. In tumours at higher risk of recurrence or metastasis pre- or post-operative radiotherapy should be considered. Systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) may be utilized in some cases where the histological subtype is considered more sensitive to systemic treatment. Regular follow-up is recommended to assess local control, development of metastatic disease, and any late-effects of treatment. For local recurrence, and more rarely in selected cases of metastatic disease, surgical resection would be considered. Treatment for metastases may include radiotherapy, or systemic therapy guided by the sarcoma subtype. In some cases, symptom control and palliative care support alone will be appropriate.

Monogenic and polygenic determinants of sarcoma risk: an international genetic study.

BACKGROUND: Sarcomas are rare, phenotypically heterogeneous cancers that disproportionately affect the young. Outside rare syndromes, the nature, extent, and clinical significance of their genetic origins are not known. We aimed to investigate the genetic basis for bone and soft-tissue sarcoma seen in routine clinical practice. METHODS: In this genetic study, we included 1162 patients with sarcoma from four cohorts (the International Sarcoma Kindred Study [ISKS], 966 probands; Project GENESIS, 48 probands; Asan Bio-Resource Center, 138 probands; and kConFab, ten probands), who were older than 15 years at the time of consent and had a histologically confirmed diagnosis of sarcoma, recruited from specialist sarcoma clinics without regard to family history. Detailed clinical, pathological, and pedigree information was collected, and cancer diagnoses in probands and relatives were independently verified. Targeted exon sequencing using blood (n=1114) or saliva (n=48) samples was done on 72 genes (selected due to associations with increased cancer risk) and rare variants were stratified into classes approximating the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) clinical classification for genetic variation. We did a case-control rare variant burden analysis using 6545 Caucasian controls included from three cohorts (ISKS, 235 controls; LifePool, 2010 controls; and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Exome Sequencing Project [ESP], 4300 controls). FINDINGS: The median age at cancer diagnosis in 1162 sarcoma probands was 46 years (IQR 29-58), 170 (15%) of 1162 probands had multiple primary cancers, and 155 (17%) of 911 families with informative pedigrees fitted recognisable cancer syndromes. Using a case-control rare variant burden analysis, 638 (55%) of 1162 sarcoma probands bore an excess of pathogenic germline variants (combined odds ratio [OR] 1·43, 95% CI 1·24-1·64, p<0·0001), with 227 known or expected pathogenic variants occurring in 217 individuals. All classes of pathogenic variants (known, expected, or predicted) were associated with earlier age of cancer onset. In addition to TP53, ATM, ATR, and BRCA2, an unexpected excess of functionally pathogenic variants was seen in ERCC2. Probands were more likely than controls to have multiple pathogenic variants compared with the combined control cohort group and the LifePool control cohort (OR 2·22, 95% CI 1·57-3·14, p=1·2 × 10(-6)) and the cumulative burden of multiple variants correlated with earlier age at cancer diagnosis (Mantel-Cox log-rank test for trend, p=0·0032). 66 of 1162 probands carried notifiable variants following expert clinical review (those recognised to be clinically significant to health and about which patients should be advised), whereas 293 (25%) probands carried variants with potential therapeutic significance. INTERPRETATION: About half of patients with sarcoma have putatively pathogenic monogenic and polygenic variation in known and novel cancer genes, with implications for risk management and treatment. FUNDING: Rainbows for Kate Foundation, Johanna Sewell Research Foundation, Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Cancer Australia, Sarcoma UK, National Cancer Institute, Liddy Shriver Sarcoma Initiative.

UK guidelines for the management of bone sarcomas.

This document is an update of the British Sarcoma Group guidelines published in 2010. The aim is to provide a reference standard for the clinical care of patients in the UK with bone sarcomas. Recent recommendations by the European Society of Medical Oncology, The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence have been incorporated, and the literature since 2010 reviewed. The standards represent a consensus amongst British Sarcoma Group members in 2015. It is acknowledged that these guidelines will need further updates as care evolves. The key recommendations are that bone pain or a palpable mass should always lead to further investigation and that patients with clinico-radiological findings suggestive of a primary bone tumour at any site in the skeleton should be referred to a specialist centre and managed by a fully accredited bone sarcoma multidisciplinary team. Treatment recommendations are provided for the major tumour types and for localised, metastatic and recurrent disease. Follow up schedules are suggested.

Can postoperative radiotherapy be omitted in localised standard-risk Ewing sarcoma? An observational study of the Euro-E.W.I.N.G group.

BACKGROUND: The role of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) in Ewing sarcoma (ES) is unclear. We assessed the impact of PORT on local control in patients with localised ES and good histological response to chemotherapy (<10% cells). PATIENTS AND METHODS: All randomised patients in the EE99-R1 trial (comparing two consolidation chemotherapy regimens) undergoing surgery after induction chemotherapy were included. Local relapse (LR) cumulative incidence was estimated using a competing risk approach. Impact of PORT was assessed in multivariable models, adjusted for country, age, tumour site and volume, quality of resection and histological response. We also evaluated the heterogeneity of PORT effect by patient and tumour characteristics. RESULTS: One hundred forty-two (24%) of the 599 patients included from 1999 to 2009 received PORT (median dose: 45 Grays). With median follow-up of 6.2 years, 67 patients had an LR (with concomitant metastases in 28), leading to an 8-year LR-incidence = 11.9% (standard error [se] = 1.4%). Overall survival (OS) = 21% (se = 5%) 3 years after LR (31% in isolated LR). Controlling for possible confounders, we observed a statistically significant reduction of LR in patients treated by surgery + PORT compared to surgery alone (subdistribution-hazard ratio = 0.43, 95% confidence interval, 0.21-0.88, p = 0.02). The benefit of PORT was particularly marked for tumours larger than 200 ml at diagnosis and 100% necrosis. We observed a non-significant trend for benefit associated with PORT for disease-free, event-free and OS. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy appears to improve local control. We now recommend PORT in case of incomplete removal of the tissues involved by the pre-chemotherapy tumour volume. Further studies are required to assess the balance between benefit and risks.