Doxorubicin alone versus intensified doxorubicin plus ifosfamide for first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective targeted treatment is unavailable for most sarcomas and doxorubicin and ifosfamide-which have been used to treat soft-tissue sarcoma for more than 30 years-still have an important role. Whether doxorubicin alone or the combination of doxorubicin and ifosfamide should be used routinely is still controversial. We assessed whether dose intensification of doxorubicin with ifosfamide improves survival of patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma compared with doxorubicin alone. METHODS: We did this phase 3 randomised controlled trial (EORTC 62012) at 38 hospitals in ten countries. We included patients with locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic high-grade soft-tissue sarcoma, age 18-60 years with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. They were randomly assigned (1:1) by the minimisation method to either doxorubicin (75 mg/m(2) by intravenous bolus on day 1 or 72 h continuous intravenous infusion) or intensified doxorubicin (75 mg/m(2); 25 mg/m(2) per day, days 1-3) plus ifosfamide (10 g/m(2) over 4 days with mesna and pegfilgrastim) as first-line treatment. Randomisation was stratified by centre, performance status (0 vs 1), age (<50 vs ≥50 years), presence of liver metastases, and histopathological grade (2 vs 3). Patients were treated every 3 weeks till progression or unacceptable toxic effects for up to six cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00061984. FINDINGS: Between April 30, 2003, and May 25, 2010, 228 patients were randomly assigned to receive doxorubicin and 227 to receive doxorubicin and ifosfamide. Median follow-up was 56 months (IQR 31-77) in the doxorubicin only group and 59 months (36-72) in the combination group. There was no significant difference in overall survival between groups (median overall survival 12·8 months [95·5% CI 10·5-14·3] in the doxorubicin group vs 14·3 months [12·5-16·5] in the doxorubicin and ifosfamide group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·83 [95·5% CI 0·67-1·03]; stratified log-rank test p=0·076). Median progression-free survival was significantly higher for the doxorubicin and ifosfamide group (7·4 months [95% CI 6·6-8·3]) than for the doxorubicin group (4·6 months [2·9-5·6]; HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·60-0·90], stratified log-rank test p=0·003). More patients in the doxorubicin and ifosfamide group than in the doxorubicin group had an overall response (60 [26%] of 227 patients vs 31 [14%] of 228; p<0·0006). The most common grade 3 and 4 toxic effects-which were all more common with doxorubicin and ifosfamide than with doxorubicin alone-were leucopenia (97 [43%] of 224 patients vs 40 [18%] of 223 patients), neutropenia (93 [42%] vs 83 [37%]), febrile neutropenia (103 (46%) vs 30 [13%]), anaemia (78 [35%] vs 10 [5%]), and thrombocytopenia (75 [33%]) vs one [<1%]). INTERPRETATION: Our results do not support the use of intensified doxorubicin and ifosfamide for palliation of advanced soft-tissue sarcoma unless the specific goal is tumour shrinkage. These findings should help individualise the care of patients with this disease. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, EORTC Charitable Trust, UK NHS, Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, Amgen.

Small round cell sarcomas.

Small round cell sarcomas are the most aggressive of the tumors morphologically and clinically encountered in children and adults, and in some ways the most leukemia- or lymphoma-like of sarcomas. Small round cell sarcomas often are associated with chromosomal translocations, like hematologic malignancies, and are usually more sensitive to chemotherapy than other sarcoma subtypes. They have a high risk of mortality, but chemotherapy (in addition to surgery and often radiation therapy) provides a good cure rate, although treatment is often long and intensive. The biology of these tumors is very telling in terms of some of the mechanisms of cancer cell survival and proliferation. Although there is some overlap of the discussion below with the section on translocation associated sarcomas, we have highlighted some of the key issues with these sarcomas below, with some ideas that may bear fruit both in terms of the management of these, other sarcomas, and other cancers alike.

Epithelioid soft tissue tumors.

Epithelioid neoplasms are generally carcinomas. As confirmation that every rule is meant to be broken, some sarcomas demonstrate epithelioid morphology, and can even express cytokeratins. These sarcomas have unique behavior, for example, a much higher rate of lymph node metastasis than other sarcomas. This group of sarcomas also presents diagnostic and therapeutic challenges to those clinicians who help patients contend with these difficult tumors. In this review, some of the major categories of epithelioid soft tissue tumors are described, with clinical data reported as available. Some of these tumors provide excellent opportunities to examine newer protein-targeted agents in investigational settings.

Changing concepts in the pathological basis of soft tissue and bone sarcoma treatment.

Though soft tissue sarcomas are rare considerable progress has been made in the clinical and biological understanding of these neoplasms. This has led to the launch of a new WHO classification of soft tissue tumours in 2002, which integrate morphological data with tumour specific (cyto-) genetics. Moreover worldwide consensus has grown how to predict clinical behaviour based on a specific grading system and which specific types of tumours seem not to obey these rules. As a consequence entry criteria for multi-institute prospective trials have changed over the last few years. The recent identification of tumour specific drug targets by immunohistochemistry has had impact on specimen requirements and handling as well as laboratory standards. These changes in concepts, classification, and processing of soft tissue sarcomas have had impact on patient selection and treatment and formats of multi-institute trials.