Nirogacestat, a γ-Secretase Inhibitor for Desmoid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Desmoid tumors are rare, locally aggressive, highly recurrent soft-tissue tumors without approved treatments. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, international, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of nirogacestat in adults with progressing desmoid tumors according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive the oral γ-secretase inhibitor nirogacestat (150 mg) or placebo twice daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: From May 2019 through August 2020, a total of 70 patients were assigned to receive nirogacestat and 72 to receive placebo. Nirogacestat had a significant progression-free survival benefit over placebo (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.15 to 0.55; P<0.001); the likelihood of being event-free at 2 years was 76% with nirogacestat and 44% with placebo. Between-group differences in progression-free survival were consistent across prespecified subgroups. The percentage of patients who had an objective response was significantly higher with nirogacestat than with placebo (41% vs. 8%; P<0.001), with a median time to response of 5.6 months and 11.1 months, respectively; the percentage of patients with a complete response was 7% and 0%, respectively. Significant between-group differences in secondary patient-reported outcomes, including pain, symptom burden, physical or role functioning, and health-related quality of life, were observed (P≤0.01). Frequent adverse events with nirogacestat included diarrhea (in 84% of the patients), nausea (in 54%), fatigue (in 51%), hypophosphatemia (in 42%), and maculopapular rash (in 32%); 95% of adverse events were of grade 1 or 2. Among women of childbearing potential receiving nirogacestat, 27 of 36 (75%) had adverse events consistent with ovarian dysfunction, which resolved in 20 women (74%). CONCLUSIONS: Nirogacestat was associated with significant benefits with respect to progression-free survival, objective response, pain, symptom burden, physical functioning, role functioning, and health-related quality of life in adults with progressing desmoid tumors. Adverse events with nirogacestat were frequent but mostly low grade. (Funded by SpringWorks Therapeutics; DeFi ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03785964.).

Vimseltinib versus placebo for tenosynovial giant cell tumour (MOTION): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT) is a locally aggressive neoplasm for which few systemic treatment options exist. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of vimseltinib, an oral, switch-control, CSF1R inhibitor, in patients with symptomatic TGCT not amenable to surgery. METHODS: MOTION is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done in 35 specialised hospitals in 13 countries. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of TGCT for which surgical resection could potentially worsen functional limitation or cause severe morbidity. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) with interactive response technology to vimseltinib (30 mg orally twice weekly) or placebo, administrated in 28-day cycles for 24 weeks. Patients and site personnel were masked to treatment assignment until week 25, unless progressive disease was confirmed earlier. The primary endpoint was objective response rate by independent radiological review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST) at week 25 in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received the study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05059262, and enrolment is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 21, 2022, and Feb 21, 2023, 123 patients were randomly assigned (83 to vimseltinib and 40 to placebo). 73 (59%) patients were female and 50 (41%) were male. Nine (11%) of 83 patients assigned to vimseltinib and five (13%) of 40 patients assigned to placebo discontinued treatment before week 25; one patient in the placebo group did not receive any study drug. Objective response rate per RECIST was 40% (33 of 83 patients) in the vimseltinib group vs 0% (none of 40) in the placebo group (difference 40% [95% CI 29-51]; p<0·0001). Most treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were grade 1 or 2; the only grade 3 or 4 TEAE that occurred in more than 5% of patients receiving vimseltinib was increased blood creatine phosphokinase (eight [10%] of 83). One patient in the vimseltinib group had a treatment-related serious TEAE of subcutaneous abscess. No evidence of cholestatic hepatotoxicity or drug-induced liver injury was noted. INTERPRETATION: Vimseltinib produced a significant objective response rate and clinically meaningful functional and symptomatic improvement in patients with TGCT, providing an effective treatment option for these patients. FUNDING: Deciphera Pharmaceuticals.

Pathological and radiological response following neoadjuvant treatments in primary localized resectable myxofibrosarcoma and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma of the extremities and trunk wall.

BACKGROUND: To explore the correlation between pathological and radiological response to preoperative treatments and outcome in surgically treated patients with myxofibrosarcoma (MFS) and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS). METHODS: All consecutive patients with primary localized MFS and UPS of the extremities and trunk wall surgically treated with curative intent at our center (2005-2021) were included. Clinical data including residual visible tumor (VT%) on surgical specimen and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST) were retrieved. Kaplan-Meier curves for overall survival and disease-free survival, and cumulative incidence of local relapse and distant metastasis were estimated in a competing risk framework according to RECIST and VT%, overall and by treatment group. Cox and Fine and Gray multivariable models were performed. RESULTS: Of 693 patients affected by primary MFS and UPS, 233 (66 MFS and 167 UPS) were treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy (naChT), radiotherapy (naRT), or both (naChT-RT). VT% was ≤5% in 13/46 (28.2%), 24/99 (24.2%), and 40/88 (45.4%) patients, respectively. There were 11/46 (29.7%), 22/99 (22.7%), and 23/88 (26.1%) RECIST partial responses and 18/46 (48.6%), 59/99 (60.8%), and 60/88 (68.2%) RECIST stable disease, respectively. In naChT, a trend for a better survival was observed when VT% ≤5% (p = .09), whereas RECIST partial responses and stable disease had the same outcome. VT% was not associated with outcome in naRT or naChT-RT, whereas RECIST response was. CONCLUSION: In primary localized MFS and UPS treated with neoadjuvant therapies, VT% seems more relevant than size reduction after naChT, whereas the opposite is true when naRT is administered alone or concurrent to ChT.

New Molecular Insights, and the Role of Systemic Therapies and Collaboration for Treatment of Epithelioid Hemangioendothelioma (EHE).

OPINION STATEMENT: Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is an ultra-rare, translocated vascular sarcoma. EHE can have different clinical presentations from indolent to rapidly evolving cases, behaving as a high-grade sarcoma. Serosal effusion and systemic symptoms such as fever and severe pain are known as adverse prognostic factors; however, outcome prediction at disease onset remains a major challenge. In spite of its rarity, an international collaborative effort is in place with the support of patient advocates to increase the knowledge of EHE biology, develop new treatment options, and improve patient access to new active medications. Currently, systemic therapies are indicated only for patients suffering from progressive and/or symptomatic disease and in patients with a high risk of organ dysfunction. Standard systemic agents available so far for treatment of sarcomas, and in particular anthracycline-based chemotherapy, have marginal activity in EHE. On this background, EHE patients should be always considered for clinical study when available. The MEK inhibitor trametinib has been recently investigated prospectively in advanced EHE showing some activity, but the publication of the full dataset is still awaited to better interpret the results. Besides, there are data on response to antiangiogenics such as sorafenib and bevacizumab and, from retrospective studies, interferon, thalidomide, and sirolimus. Unfortunately, none of these agents is formally approved for EHE patients and access to treatments varies greatly between countries causing a huge disparity in patient care from one country to another.

Pexidartinib Provides Modest Pain Relief in Patients With Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumor: Results From ENLIVEN.

BACKGROUND: The double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 study of orally administered PLX3397 in patients with pigmented villonodular synovitis or giant cell tumor of the tendon sheath (ENLIVEN) showed that pexidartinib provides a robust objective tumor response in adults with tenosynovial giant cell tumors (TGCT) not amenable to improvement with surgery. Based on these results, in 2019, pexidartinib received accelerated approval in the United States in this population as a breakthrough therapy under an orphan drug designation. However, the ability of pexidartinib to relieve pain in ENLIVEN was not fully detailed, and the relationship between pain relief and objective tumor response was not described. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What level of pain relief was achieved by pexidartinib treatment in ENLIVEN? (2) How was pain relief related to objective tumor responses? (3) How durable was pain relief? METHODS: The current study included planned primary and exploratory assessments of patient-assessed worst pain at the site of the tumor in the ENLIVEN trial. ENLIVEN was a phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial in which adults with TGCT not amenable to improvement with surgery received pexidartinib or placebo for 24 weeks, after which eligible patients could receive open-label pexidartinib. Of 174 patients assessed for eligibility, 121 were randomized (50% [60] to placebo, 50% [61] to pexidartinib), and 120 were given either placebo or pexidartinib (59 received placebo and 61 received pexidartinib) and were included in an intent-to-treat analysis. Fifty-nine percent (71 of 120) of the overall treated population was female, and 88% (106 of 120) were White. Mean age was 45 ± 13 years. Tumors were mostly in the lower extremities (92% [110 of 120]), most commonly in the knee (61% [73 of 120]) and ankle (18% [21 of 120]). As a secondary outcome, patients scored worst pain at the site of the tumor in the past 24 hours on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS). The primary definition of a pain response was a decrease of at least 30% in the weekly mean worst-pain NRS score and increase of less than 30% in narcotic analgesic use between baseline and week 25. Planned exploratory assessments of pain included the frequency of a pain response using alternative thresholds, including a decrease in worst-pain NRS score of 50% or more and a decrease of at least 2 points (minimum clinically important difference [MCID]), the magnitude of pain reduction between baseline and week 25, correlation between worst-pain NRS score and tumor shrinkage by RECIST 1.1 criteria, and the durability of the pain response during the open-label extension. Pain responses during the randomized portion of the trial were compared according to intention-to-treat analysis, with a one-sided threshold of p < 0.025 to reduce the risk of false-positive results. Pain assessment was complete for 59% (35 of 59) of patients in the placebo group and 54% (33 of 61) of patients in the pexidartinib group. Demographic and disease characteristics did not differ between the two treatment groups. RESULTS: A difference in the primary assessment of a pain response was not detected between pexidartinib and placebo (response percentage 31% [19 of 61] [95% CI 21% to 44%] versus 15% [9 of 59] [95% CI 8% to 27%]; one-sided p = 0.03). In the exploratory analyses, pexidartinib provided a modest improvement in pain (response percentage 26% [16 of 61] [95% CI 17% to 38%] versus 10% [6 of 59] [95% CI 5% to 20%]; one-sided p = 0.02 using the 50% threshold and 31% [19 of 61] [95% CI 21% to 44%] versus 14% [8 of 59] [95% CI 7% to 25%]; one-sided p = 0.02 using the MCID threshold). The least-squares mean change in the weekly mean worst-pain NRS score between baseline and week 25 was larger in patients treated with pexidartinib than placebo (-2.5 [95% CI -3.0 to -1.9] versus -0.3 [95% CI -0.9 to 0.3]; p < 0.001), although the mean difference between the two groups (-2.2 [95% CI -3.0 to -1.4]) was just over the MCID. Improvement in the weekly mean worst-pain NRS score correlated with the reduction in tumor size (r = 0.44; p < 0.001) and tumor volume score (r = 0.61; p < 0.001). For patients in the open-label extension, the change in the worst-pain NRS score from baseline was similar to the change at the end of the randomized portion and just above the MCID (mean -2.7 ± 2.2 after 25 weeks and -3.3 ± 1.7 after 50 weeks of receiving pexidartinib). CONCLUSION: Based on the current study, a modest reduction in pain, just larger than the MCID, may be an added benefit of pexidartinib in these patients, although the findings are insufficient to justify the routine use of pexidartinib for pain relief. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

First-line chemotherapy in advanced intra-abdominal well-differentiated/dedifferentiated liposarcoma: An EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: No prospective trial with anthracycline-based chemotherapy has individually assessed response in a well-differentiated (WD)/dedifferentiated (DD) liposarcoma patient cohort. We conducted a retrospective analysis of first-line chemotherapy in liposarcoma of intra-abdominal origin (IA-LPS) in patients who had entered the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)/Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (STBSG) trials. METHODS: We searched for all adult patients treated with first-line chemotherapy for advanced IA-LPS in the EORTC STBSG phase 2 and 3 trials from 1978. Treatment was aggregated into 5 groups: anthracycline alone, ifosfamide alone, doxorubicin plus ifosfamide (D+IFO), doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/vincristine/dacarbazine, and "other" (brostallicin, trabectedin). Response was assessed prospectively by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors or World Health Organization criteria. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were computed by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients with IA-LPS from 13 trials were identified (104 evaluable for response). Overall, there were 10/109 (9.2%) responders: 3/48 (6.3%) in the anthracycline alone group, 2/15 (13%) in the ifosfamide alone group, and 4/18 (22%) in the D+IFO group. At the 10-month median follow-up (interquartile range, 6-24), the median OS was 19 months (95% CI, 15-21) and median PFS 4 months (95% CI, 3-6). D+IFO achieved a not statistically significant longer median PFS (12 months) and median OS (31 months) than observed with other regimens. Univariate/multivariate analysis did not identify prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: Cytotoxic chemotherapy, in particular anthracycline alone, had marginal activity in advanced IA-LPS. Ifosfamide-containing regimens showed higher activity, although it was not statistically significant and in a small number of cases, with the combination of doxorubicin and ifosfamide appearing to be the more active regimen available in fit patients. This series provides a benchmark for future trials on new drugs in WD/DD liposarcoma.

Weekly cisplatin with or without imatinib in advanced chordoma: A retrospective case-series analysis from the Italian Rare Cancers Network.

BACKGROUND: To report on a retrospective case-series analysis of weekly cisplatin (wCDDP) as a single agent or combined with imatinib (wCDDP/I) in patients with advanced chordoma treated within the Italian Rare Cancer Network. METHODS: Adult patients with a diagnosis of advanced, brachyury-positive chordoma, treated from April 2007 to October 2020 with wCDDP or wCDDP/I were retrospectively identified. Imatinib was withheld at the same time as wCDDP. Response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-three consecutive patients were identified (wCDDP as front-line n = 8 [24.2%]; wCDDP as a further line n = 25 [75.8%]; prior imatinib n = 25 [75.8%]; evidence of progression before starting wCDDP n = 33). Of 32 patients evaluable for response (wCDDP, n = 22 [68.8%]; wCDDP/I, n = 10 [31.3%]), best response was stable disease (SD) in 27 patients (84.3%) and progression in 5 patients (15.6%). At a median follow-up of 54 months, the median OS (m-OS) was 30.3 months (interquartile range [IQR], 18.1-56.6), the m-PFS was 8.0 months (IQR, 5.1-17.0), the 6-month PFS rate was 65.2%, and the 12-month PFS rate was 30.3%. Of 22 patients who received wCDDP, the best response was SD in 18 patients (81.8%) and progression in 4 patients (18.2%), and the m-PFS was 8.0 months (IQR, 5.1-17.0 months). Of 10 patients who received treatment with wCDDP/I, the best response was SD in 9 patients (90%) and progression in 1 patient (10%), and the m-PFS was 9.3 months (IQR, 4.9-26.5 months). CONCLUSIONS: This series suggests that wCDDP, both as a single agent and combined with imatinib, has antitumor activity in chordoma. Although no dimensional responses were observed, 65% and 30% of previously progressive patients were progression-free at 6 and 12 months, respectively. A prospective study is warranted.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk soft tissue sarcomas: A Sarculator-based risk stratification analysis of the ISG-STS 1001 randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) is not completely understood. This study investigated the benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to prognostic stratification based on the Sarculator nomogram for STS. METHODS: This study analyzed data from ISG-STS 1001, a randomized study that tested 3 cycles of neoadjuvant anthracycline plus ifosfamide (AI) or histology-tailored (HT) chemotherapy in adult patients with STS. The 10-year predicted overall survival (pr-OS) was estimated with the Sarculator and was stratified into higher (10-year pr-OS < 60%) and lower risk subgroups (10-year pr-OS ≥ 60%). RESULTS: The median pr-OS was 0.63 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.51-0.72) for the entire study population, 0.62 (IQR, 0.51-0.70) for the AI arm, and 0.64 (IQR, 0.51-0.73) for the HT arm. Three- and 5-year overall survival (OS) were 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-0.93) and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71-0.86) in lower risk patients and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.70-0.85) and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.51-0.72) in the higher risk patients (log-rank test, P = .004). In higher risk patients, the 3- and 5-year Sarculator-predicted and study-observed OS rates were 0.68 and 0.58, respectively, and 0.85 and 0.66, respectively, in the AI arm (P = .04); the corresponding figures in the HT arm were 0.69 and 0.60, respectively, and 0.69 and 0.55, respectively (P > .99). In lower risk patients, the 3- and 5-year Sarculator-predicted and study-observed OS rates were 0.85 and 0.80, respectively, and 0.89 and 0.82, respectively, in the AI arm (P = .507); the corresponding figures in the HT arm were 0.87 and 0.81, respectively, and 0.86 and 0.74, respectively (P = .105). CONCLUSIONS: High-risk patients treated with AI performed better than predicted, and this adds to the evidence for the efficacy of neoadjuvant AI in STS. LAY SUMMARY: People affected by soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities and trunk wall are at some risk of developing metastasis after surgery. Preoperative or postoperative chemotherapy has been tested in clinical trials to reduce the chances of distant metastasis. However, study findings have not been conclusive. This study stratified the risk of metastasis for people affected by sarcomas who were included in a clinical trial testing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Exploiting the prognostic nomogram Sarculator, it found a benefit for chemotherapy when the predicted risk, based on patient and tumor characteristics, was high.

Refining the Approach to Patients with Primary Soft Tissue Sarcoma of the Extremities and Trunk Wall: Outcome Improvement Over Time at a Single Institution.

BACKGROUND: The improved outcome of extremity soft tissue sarcoma patients surgically treated until 2007 at the authors' institution was previously reported. This study updates the analysis at a later follow-up and extends the patients' cohort to assess changes in outcomes over time for extremity and superficial trunk soft tissue sarcoma (ESTSTS) treated at a single referral center. METHODS: All consecutive patients with primary localized adult-type ESTSTS surgically treated at the authors' institution between 1987 and 2017 were included and divided into group 1 (1987-2002) and group 2 (2003-2017) according to primary surgery year. Crude cumulative incidence (CCI) of sarcoma-specific mortality (SSM), local recurrence (LR), and distant metastases (DM) were calculated in a competing-risks framework. DM-free survival (DMFS) and post-DM survival were also assessed. RESULTS: The study identified 2382 patients. The median follow-up was 104 months (range, 63-127 months), and the post-DM follow-up was 76 months (range, 37-126 months). Since 2003, an increased adoption of preoperative treatments was observed: the use of chemotherapy, radiotherapy and combined chemoradiotherapy went from 10.5% to 23.7%, from 1.7% to 17.8%, and from 1% to 11.8% respectively. This change in treatment strategies was associated to an improvement in CCI-SSM (27.8% vs 19.5%; P < 0.001), CCI-LR (14.1 vs 7.5%; P < 0.001), DMFS (57.9% vs 65.8%; P = 0.004), and post-DM (12.2% vs 20.1%; P = 0.012), but not in CCI-DM. CONCLUSIONS: Increased adoption of preoperative treatments and greater availability of medical agents in the recent years were associated to better outcomes. New treatments are eagerly awaited for further improvement of outcome for ESTSTS patients because no major changes have been observed since 2003.

Management of Locally Recurrent Retroperitoneal Sarcoma in the Adult: An Updated Consensus Approach from the Transatlantic Australasian Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Working Group.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS), but local recurrence is common. Biologic behavior and recurrence patterns differ significantly among histologic types of RPS, with implications for management. The Transatlantic Australasian RPS Working Group (TARPSWG) published a consensus approach to primary RPS, and to complement this, one for recurrent RPS in 2016. Since then, additional studies have been published, and collaborative discussion is ongoing to address the clinical challenges of local recurrence in RPS. METHODS: An extensive literature search was performed, and the previous consensus statements for recurrent RPS were updated after review by TARPSWG members. The search included the most common RPS histologic types: liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, solitary fibrous tumor, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, and malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor. RESULTS: Recurrent RPS management was evaluated from diagnosis to follow-up evaluation. For appropriately selected patients, resection is safe. Nomograms currently are available to help predict outcome after resection. These and other new findings have been combined with expert recommendations to provide 36 statements, each of which is attributed a level of evidence and grade of recommendation. In this updated document, more emphasis is placed on histologic type and clarification of the intent for surgical treatment, either curative or palliative. Overall, the fundamental tenet of optimal care for patients with recurrent RPS remains individualized treatment after multidisciplinary discussion by an experienced team with expertise in RPS. CONCLUSIONS: Updated consensus recommendations are provided to help guide decision-making for treatment of locally recurrent RPS and better selection of patients who would potentially benefit from surgery.

Treatment modalities and long-term outcomes of hepatic hemangioendothelioma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: We analyzed the outcomes of patients with hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (HEHE) in the United States after stratification by their most definitive treatment. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was used to identify patients with HEHE between 2004 and 2018. Patients were divided in four treatment groups: no surgical therapy, ablation, liver resection or liver transplantation. Demographics and clinical characteristics were compared, and Kaplan Meier functions and Cox-regression were used for unadjusted and adjusted survival analyses. RESULTS: Among a total of 334 patients, 218 (65.2%) were managed non-surgically, 74 (22.1%) underwent hepatic resections, 35 (10.4%) underwent liver transplantation and 7 (2.1%) underwent ablations. The overall median survival was 111 months (95%CI 73-149) after liver transplantation, 69 months (95%CI 45-92) after hepatic resection, 38 months (95%CI 0-78) after ablation and 80 months (95%CI 70-90) for patients managed by watchful waiting (P < 0.001). After adjustment, patients who underwent liver transplantation were found to have a better survival when compared to other therapies (Hazard Ratio: 0.61, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.38-0.97, p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: This study reports the outcomes of the largest cohort of patients with HEHE. The longest survival was observed after liver transplantation, followed by non-surgical management and hepatic resection. Because of selection bias, future studies to better characterize what criteria should be used for the selection of treatment modalities for HEHE are urgently needed.

Long-term outcomes of pexidartinib in tenosynovial giant cell tumors.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to report on the long-term effects of pexidartinib on tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT). METHODS: This was a pooled analysis encompassing 3 pexidartinib-treated TGCT cohorts: 1) a phase 1 extension study (NCT01004861; 1000 mg/d; n = 39), 2) ENLIVEN patients randomized to pexidartinib (1000 mg/d for 2 weeks and then 800 mg/d; n = 61), and 3) ENLIVEN crossover patients (NCT02371369; 800 mg/d; n = 30). Eligible patients were 18 years old or older and had a histologically confirmed TGCT that was unresectable and symptomatic. Efficacy endpoints included the best overall response (complete or partial response) and the duration of response (DOR) by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and the tumor volume score (TVS). The safety assessment included the frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and hepatic laboratory abnormalities (aminotransferase elevations and mixed/cholestatic hepatotoxicity). The data cutoff was May 31, 2019. RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients with TGCT received pexidartinib (median treatment duration, 19 months; range, 1 to 76+ months); 54 (42%) remained on treatment at the end of the analysis (26 months after initial data cut of March 2017). The RECIST overall response rate (ORR) was 60%; the TVS ORR was 65%. The median times to response were 3.4 (RECIST) and 2.8 months (TVS), with 48 of the responding patients (62%) achieving a RECIST partial response by 6 months and with 72 (92%) doing so by 18 months. The median DOR was reached for TVS (46.8 months). Reported TEAEs were mostly low-grade, with hair color changes being most frequent (75%). Most liver abnormalities (92%) were aminotransferase elevations; 4 patients (3%) experienced mixed/cholestatic hepatotoxicity (all within the first 2 months of treatment), which was reversible in all cases (recovery spanned 1-7 months). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the prolonged efficacy and tolerability of long-term pexidartinib treatment for TGCT.

Activity of sirolimus in patients with progressive epithelioid hemangioendothelioma: A case-series analysis within the Italian Rare Cancer Network.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to report on a retrospective series of patients with epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) who received treatment with sirolimus within the Italian Rare Cancer Network. METHODS: From January 2005, 38 adult patients with advanced EHE received continuous-dosing sirolimus, 5 mg daily, until they developed either toxicity or disease progression. Disease progression in the 6 months before the start of treatment was required. Each pathologic diagnosis was reviewed. The daily dose of sirolimus was adjusted based on plasma levels. Response was retrospectively assessed by local investigators using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST). Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: All 38 patients (WW Domain Containing Transcription Regulator 1 [WWTR1]-positive, n = 37; transcription factor E3 [TFE3]-positive, n = 1) had disease progression before starting sirolimus (at baseline, 13 of 38 patients had the presence of serosal effusions and systemic symptoms). Thirty-seven patients were evaluable for response (there was 1 early interruption). The best RECIST responses were a partial response in 4 patients (10.8%), stable disease in 28 patients (75.7%), and disease progression in 5 patients (13.5%). At a 41.5-month median follow-up (interquartile range [IQR], 23.9-56.8 months), the median PFS was 13 months (95% CI, 3.7 months to not estimated [NE]), and the median OS was 18.8 months (95% CI, 10.6 months to NE). In patients who had serosal effusions at baseline, the median PFS was 4.8 months (IQR, 3.5-11.7 months), and the median OS was 10.6 months (IQR, 5.1-13.0 months), compared with 47.8 months (IQR, 11.4 months to NE) and 47.8 months (IQR, 15.7 months to NE), respectively, in patients without serosal effusions. Overall, sirolimus was fairly well tolerated, with 10 patients reporting irregular menstruation/ovary disfunction. CONCLUSIONS: The current results confirm that sirolimus is active in EHE, leading to prolonged stabilization in most patients who present without serosal effusions. Serosal effusions are confirmed as an unfavorable prognostic sign associated with short survival, and sirolimus displays limited activity in this subgroup.

Ultra-rare sarcomas: A consensus paper from the Connective Tissue Oncology Society community of experts on the incidence threshold and the list of entities.

BACKGROUND: Among sarcomas, which are rare cancers, many types are exceedingly rare; however, a definition of ultra-rare cancers has not been established. The problem of ultra-rare sarcomas is particularly relevant because they represent unique diseases, and their rarity poses major challenges for diagnosis, understanding disease biology, generating clinical evidence to support new drug development, and achieving formal authorization for novel therapies. METHODS: The Connective Tissue Oncology Society promoted a consensus effort in November 2019 to establish how to define ultra-rare sarcomas through expert consensus and epidemiologic data and to work out a comprehensive list of these diseases. The list of ultra-rare sarcomas was based on the 2020 World Health Organization classification, The incidence rates were estimated using the Information Network on Rare Cancers (RARECARENet) database and NETSARC (the French Sarcoma Network's clinical-pathologic registry). Incidence rates were further validated in collaboration with the Asian cancer registries of Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. RESULTS: It was agreed that the best criterion for a definition of ultra-rare sarcomas would be incidence. Ultra-rare sarcomas were defined as those with an incidence of approximately ≤1 per 1,000,000, to include those entities whose rarity renders them extremely difficult to conduct well powered, prospective clinical studies. On the basis of this threshold, a list of ultra-rare sarcomas was defined, which comprised 56 soft tissue sarcoma types and 21 bone sarcoma types. CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, the incidence of ultra-rare sarcomas accounts for roughly 20% of all soft tissue and bone sarcomas. This confirms that the challenges inherent in ultra-rare sarcomas affect large numbers of patients.

Pexidartinib Long-Term Hepatic Safety Profile in Patients with Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Pexidartinib is approved in the U.S. for tenosynovial giant cell tumors (TGCTs). Herein, we assessed the hepatic safety profile of pexidartinib across patients with TGCTs receiving pexidartinib. MATERIALS, AND METHODS: Hepatic adverse reactions (ARs) were assessed by type and magnitude of liver test abnormalities, classified as (a) isolated aminotransferase elevations (alanine [ALT] or aspartate [AST], without significant alkaline phosphatase [ALP] or bilirubin elevations), or (b) mixed or cholestatic hepatotoxicity (increase in ALP with or without ALT/AST and bilirubin elevations, based on adjudication). Median follow-up from initial pexidartinib treatment was 39 months (range, 32-82) in 140 patients with TGCTs across clinical studies NCT01004861, NCT02371369, NCT02734433, and NCT03291288. RESULTS: In total, 95% of patients with TGCTs (133/140) treated with pexidartinib (median duration of exposure, 19 months [range, 1-76]), experienced a hepatic AR. A total of 128 patients (91%) had reversible, low-grade dose-dependent isolated AST/ALT elevations without significant ALP elevations. Five patients (4%) experienced serious mixed or cholestatic injury. No case met Hy's law criteria. Onset of hepatic ARs was predominantly in the first 2 months. All five serious hepatic AR cases recovered 1-7 months following pexidartinib discontinuation. Five patients from the non-TGCT population (N = 658) experienced serious hepatic ARs, two irreversible cases. CONCLUSION: This pooled analysis provides information to help form the basis for the treating physician's risk assessment for patients with TCGTs, a locally aggressive but typically nonmetastatic tumor. In particular, long-term treatment with pexidartinib has a predictable effect on hepatic aminotransferases and unpredictable risk of serious cholestatic or mixed liver injury. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This is the first long-term pooled analysis to report on the long-term hepatic safety of pexidartinib in patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumors associated with severe morbidity or functional limitations and not amenable to improvement with surgery. These findings extend beyond what has been previously published, describing the observed instances of hepatic toxicity following pexidartinib treatment across the clinical development program. This information is highly relevant for medical oncologists and orthopedic oncologists and provides guidance for its proper use for appropriate patients within the Pexidartinib Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Safety program.

Unplanned Excision of Extremity and Trunk Wall Soft Tissue Sarcoma: To Re-resect or Not to Re-resect?

PURPOSE: The need for systematic reexcision in patients who underwent unplanned excision (UE) for extremity and superficial trunk soft tissue sarcoma (ESTSTS) has been questioned. We investigated the outcome of patients who underwent reexcision for ESTSTS compared with primarily resected at our institution and the prognostic impact of microscopic residual disease (MR) in the reexcision specimen. METHODS: Primary ESTSTS patients surgically treated at our institution between 1997 and 2017 were divided in three groups: primarily resected (A), reexcised after macroscopically complete UE (B), and incomplete UE (C). Weighted overall survival (OS), crude cumulative incidence of local relapse (CCI-LR), and distant metastasis (CCI-DM) were calculated and compared. In group B, multivariable models were performed to assess factors associated with the outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1962 patients were identified: 1076, 697 and 189 in groups A, B, and C, respectively. Overall median follow-up was 85 months. Seven-year weighted-OS was 73.8%, 84.1%, and 80.7% (p < 0.001) for groups A, B, and C respectively. Seven-year CCI-LR and DM were 5.0% and 25.3%, 12.1% and 15.8%, and 13.6% and 29.4% (both p < 0.001) for groups A, B, and C, respectively. At multivariable analysis, the presence MR was associated with LR (p < 0.001) but not with OS nor CCI-DM. CONCLUSIONS: UE and the presence of MR at pathology in reexcision specimen are associated to a higher risk of LR but not to a higher risk of DM or lower OS. After macroscopic complete UE, postponing reexcision until a LR occurs may be considered on an individualized basis.

Extraskeletal Myxoid Chondrosarcoma with Molecularly Confirmed Diagnosis: A Multicenter Retrospective Study Within the Italian Sarcoma Group.

BACKGROUND: Extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma (EMC) is a rare sarcoma of uncertain origin, marked by specific chromosomal translocations involving the NR4A3 gene, and usually characterized by an indolent course. Surgery (with or without radiotherapy) is the treatment of choice in localized disease. The treatment for advanced disease remains uncertain. In order to better evaluate prognostic factors and outcome, a retrospective pooled analysis of patients with EMC treated at three Italian Sarcoma Group (ISG) referral centers was carried out. METHODS: All patients with localized EMC surgically treated from 1989 to 2016 were identified. Diagnosis was centrally reviewed according to WHO 2013. Only patients with NR4A3 rearrangement were included. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were identified: 13 (20%) female, 54 (80%) male. Median age was 56 years (range 18-84). Numbers and type of translocation were: 50 (80%) NR4A3-EWS, 10 (16%) NR4A3-TAF15, 1 (2%) NR4A3-TCF12, and 1 (2%) NR4A3-TFG. Median follow-up was 55 months (range 2-312). Five- and ten-year overall survival rates were 94% (86-100 95%CI) and 84% (69-98 95%CI). Thirty-five (52%) patients relapsed: 9 had local recurrence (LR) and 26 had distant metastasis (5 with concomitant LR). The 5- and 10-year disease-free survival rates (DFS) were 51% (38-65 95%CI) and 20% (7-33 95%CI). Size of the primary tumor was significantly related to distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (p = 0.004). Patients carrying the NR4A3-EWS translocation had a trend in favor of better DFS (p = 0.08) and DMFS (p = 0.09) compared with the patients with NR4A3-TAF15. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged survival can be expected in patients with EMC, in spite of a high rate of recurrence. Size is significantly associated with distant relapse. The type of NR4A3 translocation could influence outcome.

Management of Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcoma (RPS) in the Adult: An Updated Consensus Approach from the Transatlantic Australasian RPS Working Group.

BACKGROUND: Retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcomas comprise a heterogeneous group of rare tumors of mesenchymal origin that include several well-defined histologic subtypes. In 2015, the Transatlantic Australasian RPS Working Group (TARPSWG) published consensus recommendations for the best management of primary retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS). Since then, through international collaboration, new evidence and knowledge have been generated, creating the need for an updated consensus document. METHODS: The primary aim of this study was to critically evaluate the current evidence and develop an up-to-date consensus document on the approach to these difficult tumors. The resulting document applies to primary RPS that is non-visceral in origin, with exclusion criteria as previously described. The relevant literature was evaluated and an international group of experts consulted to formulate consensus statements regarding the best management of primary RPS. A level of evidence and grade of recommendation were attributed to each new/updated recommendation. RESULTS: Management of primary RPS was considered from diagnosis to follow-up. This rare and complex malignancy is best managed by an experienced multidisciplinary team in a specialized referral center. The best chance of cure is at the time of primary presentation, and an individualized management plan should be made based on the 29 consensus statements included in this article, which were agreed upon by all of the authors. Whenever possible, patients should be enrolled in prospective trials and studies. CONCLUSIONS: Ongoing international collaboration is critical to expand upon current knowledge and further improve outcomes of patients with RPS. In addition, prospective data collection and participation in multi-institution trials are strongly encouraged.

Contributions of Real-World Evidence and Real-World Data to Decision-Making in the Management of Soft Tissue Sarcomas.

Real-world data are defined as data relating to any aspect of a patient's health status collected in the context of routine health surveillance and medical care delivery. Sources range from insurance billing claims through to electronic surveillance data (e.g., activity trackers). Real-world data derive from large populations in diverse clinical settings and thus can be extrapolated more readily than clinical trial data to patients in different clinical settings or with a variety of comorbidities. Real-world data are used to generate real-world evidence, which might be regarded as a "meta-analysis" of accumulated real-world data. Increasingly, regulatory authorities are recognizing the value of real-world data and real-world evidence, especially for rare diseases where it may be practically unfeasible to conduct randomized controlled trials. However, the quality of real-world evidence depends on the quality of the data collected which, in turn, depends on a correct pathological diagnosis and the homogeneous behaviour of a reliably defined and consistent disease entity. As each of the more than 80 varieties of soft tissue sarcoma (STS) types represents a distinct disease entity, the situation is exceedingly complicated. Discordant diagnoses, which affect data quality, present a major challenge for use of real-world data. As real-world data are difficult to collect, collaboration across sarcoma reference institutions and sophisticated information technology solutions are required before the potential of real-world evidence to inform decision-making in the management of STS can be fully exploited.

Tazemetostat for advanced epithelioid sarcoma: current status and future perspectives.

Epithelioid sarcoma (ES) is an aggressive ultra-rare soft-tissue sarcoma marked by SMARCB1/INI1 deficiency. SMARCB1/INI1 deficiency leads to elevated expression of EZH2, a component of polycomb repressive complex 2, which mediates gene silencing by catalyzing H3K27me3. Tazemetostat is an oral, SAM-competitive inhibitor of EZH2, whose blockade prevents the methylation of histone H3K27, thus decreasing the growth of EZH2 mutated or over-expressing cancer cells. Tazemetostat has been approved for the treatment of patients aged 16 years and older with metastatic or advanced ES not eligible for complete resection, based on the positive results of a single-arm Phase II basket study. Tazemetostat though represents a new treatment option for ES patients, although clinical/molecular predictors of response are still to be identified. The combination of tazemetostat with other drugs like doxorubicin and immunotherapeutic agents is currently under investigation in ES patients.