What is the association of preoperative biopsy with recurrence and survival in retroperitoneal sarcoma? A systematic review by the Australia and New Zealand Sarcoma Association clinical practice guidelines working party.

Preoperative biopsy for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) enables appropriate multidisciplinary treatment planning. A systematic review of literature from 1990 to June 2022 was conducted using the population, intervention, comparison and outcome model to evaluate the local recurrence and overall survival of preoperative biopsy compared to those that had not. Of 3192 studies screened, five retrospective cohort studies were identified. Three reported on biopsy needle tract seeding, with only one study reporting biopsy site recurrence of 2 %. Two found no significant difference in local recurrence and one found higher 5-year local recurrence rates in those who had not been biopsied. Three studies reported overall survival, including one with propensity matching, did not show a difference in overall survival. In conclusion, preoperative core needle biopsy of RPS is not associated with increased local recurrence or adverse survival outcomes.

Clinical activity in general practice prior to sarcoma diagnosis: Australian cohort study.

Background Increased time-to-diagnosis in sarcoma is associated with poor prognosis and patient outcomes. Research is needed to identify if opportunities to expedite the diagnosis of sarcoma in general practice (GP) exist. Aim To examine pre-diagnostic GP clinical activity prior to sarcoma diagnosis. Design and Setting An Australian retrospective cohort study using hospital registry data (Australian Comprehensive Cancer Outcomes and Research Database) linked to two primary care datasets (Patron and MedicineInsight). Method The frequency of GP healthcare utilisation events (GP attendances, prescriptions, blood test and imaging requests) were compared in 377 soft tissue sarcoma (STS) and 64 bone sarcoma (BS) patients in the year pre-diagnosis. Poisson regression models were used to calculate monthly incidence rates and rate ratios (IRR) for the 24 months pre-diagnosis and estimate inflection points for when healthcare use starts to increase from baseline. Results In the six months pre-diagnosis sarcoma patients had a median of 3-4 GP attendances, a third had a GP imaging request (33% BS and 36% STS), and one in five had multiple imaging requests (19% BS and 21% STS). GP imaging requests progressively increased up to 8-fold from 6 months prior to sarcoma diagnosis (IRR 8.43 95%CI 3.92-18.15, p<0.001) and GP attendances increased from 3 months pre-diagnosis. Conclusion Sarcoma patients have increased GP clinical activity from 6 months pre-diagnosis, indicating a diagnostic window where potential opportunities exist for earlier diagnosis. Interventions to help identify patients and promote appropriate use of imaging and direct specialist centre referrals could improve earlier diagnosis and patient outcomes.

High-dose chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma and Rhabdomyosarcoma: A systematic review by the Australia and New Zealand sarcoma association clinical practice guidelines working party.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with high-risk or metastatic Ewing sarcoma (ES) and rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) have a guarded prognosis. High-dose chemotherapy (HDT) with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) has been evaluated as a treatment option to improve outcomes. However, survival benefits remain unclear, and treatment is associated with severe toxicities. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, using the population, intervention, comparison outcome (PICO) model, to evaluate whether utilization of HDT/ASCT impacts the outcome of patients with ES and RMS compared to standard chemotherapy alone, as part of first line treatment or in the relapse setting. Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central were queried for publications from 1990 to October 2022 that evaluated event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities. Each study was screened by two independent reviewers for suitability. A qualitative synthesis of the results was performed. RESULTS: Of 1,172 unique studies screened, 41 studies were eligible for inclusion with 29 studies considering ES, 10 studies considering RMS and 2 studies considering both. In ES patients with high-risk localised disease who received HDT/ASCT after VIDE chemotherapy, consolidation with melphalan-based HDT/ASCT as first line therapy conveyed an EFS and OS benefit over standard chemotherapy consolidation. Efficacy of HDT/ASCT using a VDC/IE backbone, which is now standard care, has not been established. Survival benefits are not confirmed for ES patients with metastatic disease at initial diagnosis. For relapsed/refractory ES, four retrospective studies report improvement in outcomes with HDT/ASCT with the greatest evidence in patients who demonstrate a treatment response before HDT, and in patients under the age of 14. In RMS, there is no proven survival benefit of HDT/ASCT in primary localised, metastatic or relapsed disease. CONCLUSION: Prospective randomised trials are required to determine the utility of HDT/ASCT in ES and RMS. Selected patients with relapsed ES could be considered for HDT/ASCT.

A systematic review of the role of chemotherapy in retroperitoneal sarcoma by the Australia and New Zealand sarcoma association clinical practice guidelines working party.

BACKGROUND: In primary localised resectable retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS), loco-regional and distant relapse occur frequently despite optimal surgical management. The role of chemotherapy in improving outcomes is unclear. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, using the population, intervention, comparison outcome (PICO) model, to evaluate whether neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy improve outcomes in adults with primary localised resectable RPS. Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central were queried for publications from 1946 to June 2022 that evaluated recurrence free survival, overall survival, and post operative complications. Each study was screened by two independent reviewers for suitability. A qualitative synthesis of the results was performed. RESULTS: Twenty three studies were identified; one meta-analysis of retrospective studies and 22 retrospective studies including three with propensity matched cohorts. Most studies did not analyse outcomes by histology, detail treatment regimens, provide baseline characteristics or selection criteria for those receiving chemotherapy. Evidence of selection bias was illustrated in several studies. Newcastle-Ottawa quality of retrospective cohort studies was good for 12 studies and poor for 10 studies. All studies were assessed as Level III-2 evidence by the Australian NHMRC hierarchy. Overall, the addition of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy to surgery was not associated with improvement in local recurrence, metastasis free survival, disease free survival or overall survival in primary localised resectable RPS. There is some evidence of an association of chemotherapy with worse overall survival. One single centre study showed that neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with increased post operative complications compared to surgery alone in primary localised resectable RPS. CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no evidence that demonstrates the addition of chemotherapy to surgery improves outcomes in adult patients with primary localised resectable RPS. Available evidence is limited by its retrospective nature and high likelihood of selection bias with chemotherapy generally administered to patients at higher risk of recurrence and many patients not receiving care in high volume sarcoma centres. Randomised trials are required to conclusively determine the role of chemotherapy in primary localised resectable RPS.

The role of radiation therapy in the management of primary retroperitoneal sarcoma: A systematic review and clinical practice guidelines from the Australia and New Zealand Sarcoma Association.

While surgery is the mainstay of treatment for localised retroperitoneal sarcoma, the use of radiotherapy (RT) remains controversial. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the role of RT for retroperitoneal sarcoma. A systematic review using the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome model from 1990 to 2022 identified 66 studies (a mixture of preoperative and postoperative RT); one randomised controlled trial (RCT) with two publications, 18 registry studies, and 46 retrospective studies. In the RCT of preoperative RT, there was no difference in local/abdominal recurrence. The pooled analysis of this RCT and a retrospective study showed a significant abdominal recurrence free survival benefit with preoperative RT in low grade liposarcoma. The RCT and the majority of retrospective series found RT did not improve recurrence free survival (11 of 16 no difference in combined local and distant RFS, 11 of 13 no difference in distant metastasis free survival), disease specific survival (9 of 12 studies) or overall survival (33 of 49 studies). The majority of studies found no association between RT and perioperative morbidity. In summary, preoperative RT may improve local control for low grade (well-differentiated or grades 1-2 dedifferentiated) liposarcoma, but not other histological subtypes. There is no strong evidence that perioperative RT provides an overall survival benefit. Patients with low grade retroperitoneal liposarcoma can be considered for preoperative RT to improve abdominal recurrence free survival. The rationale and level of evidence in this scenario should be carefully discussed by the multidisciplinary team with patients. RT should not be routinely recommended for other histological subtypes.

Surgery at specialised sarcoma centres improves patient outcomes - A systematic review by the Australia and New Zealand sarcoma association clinical practice guidelines working party.

BACKGROUND: Optimal management of sarcoma requires multidisciplinary team input throughout the process of diagnosis, treatment and follow up. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the impact of surgery performed at specialised sarcoma centres on outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using the population, intervention, comparison and outcome (PICO) model. Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central databases were queried for publications that evaluated the local control, limb salvage rate, 30-day and 90-day surgical mortality, and overall survival in patients undergoing surgery in a specialist sarcoma centre compared with non-specialist centre. Each study was screened by two independent reviewers for suitability. A qualitative synthesis of the results was performed. RESULTS: Sixty-six studies were identified. The majority of studies were Level III-3 as assessed by the NHMRC Evidence Hierarchy, whilst just over half of the studies were of good quality. Definitive surgery performed at specialised sarcoma centres was associated with improved local control as defined by lower rate of local relapse, higher rate of negative surgical margins, improved local recurrence free survival and higher limb conservation rate. Available evidences show a favourable pattern of lower 30-day and 90-day mortality rates, and greater overall survival when surgery was performed in specialist sarcoma centres compared with non-specialised centres. CONCLUSIONS: Evidences support better oncological outcomes when surgery is performed at specialised sarcoma centre. Patients with suspected sarcoma should be referred early to a specialised sarcoma centre for multidisciplinary management, which includes planned biopsy and definitive surgery.

The benefit for radiotherapy at specialised sarcoma centres: A systematic review and clinical practice guidelines from the Australia and New Zealand Sarcoma Association.

Patients with sarcoma are best managed at specialised sarcoma centres as supported by published literature. Optimal management requires multidisciplinary team input to formulate the diagnosis and treatment sequencing taking into consideration multiple clinical and pathologic factors. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the impact on outcomes of radiotherapy at specialised sarcoma centres. A systematic review was conducted using the population, intervention, comparison and outcome model. A literature search was performed using Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central databases for publications from 1990 to February 2022 that evaluated the local control, survival and toxicity of radiotherapy at specialised sarcoma centres. A total of 21 studies were included (17 cancer registry studies, four retrospective comparative studies). Four studies reported the local recurrence endpoint when radiotherapy was part of limb conservation treatment and showed better conformity to clinical practice guidelines and an improved local recurrence free rate when radiotherapy treatment is supported through, but may not be necessarily delivered at a specialised sarcoma centres. Only one retrospective study analysed toxicity specifically and demonstrated that patients who received preoperative radiotherapy at community centres compared to radiotherapy at a specialised sarcoma centre were more likely to develop a major wound complication. Fourteen studies reported overall survival, and 12 of these showed significantly better 5-year overall survival for patients managed at specialised sarcoma centres, however the specific impact of radiotherapy delivered at sarcoma centres could not be determined. In conclusion, patients with sarcoma should be managed through specialised sarcoma centres for better oncological outcomes. Radiotherapy in specialised sarcoma centre is associated with a lower rate of wound complications and may contribute to improved oncological outcomes as part of the limb conservation treatment at a specialised sarcoma centre.