Nationwide trends in the current management of desmoid (aggressive) fibromatosis.

AIMS: The optimal management of desmoid fibromatosis remains unclear, leading to significant variability in patient management. To assess this problem, the current approach of clinicians managing this complex condition in the UK was investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A hypothetical case of intramuscular limb girdle desmoid fibromatosis in a fit 65-year-old patient was devised. Surgical and non-surgical oncology members of the British Sarcoma Group were questioned on how they would manage this case in three scenarios: primary disease with function-sparing surgery possible, primary disease with neurovascular involvement and disease recurrence after a previous R0 resection. Initial management, management of symptomatic disease progression, follow-up preferences and any differences in respondents' management choices in a younger case were investigated. RESULTS: The responses from 14 sarcoma surgeons and 23 oncologists (14 clinical, nine medical) were analysed. Desmoid fibromatosis management is generally shared by surgeons and oncologists within sarcoma multidisciplinary teams in the UK. Variation exists in the chosen initial management of primary desmoid fibromatosis in the UK, with function-sparing surgery possible (observation 51%, resection 51%), primary desmoid fibromatosis with neurovascular involvement (hormone therapy with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs 51%, radiotherapy 27%, observation 22%) and for cases of desmoid fibromatosis recurrence (radiotherapy 41%, hormone therapy and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs 27%, observation 24%). There was a clear preference of surgical resection of symptomatic disease progression in cases of primary desmoid fibromatosis without neurovascular involvement (60%). By contrast, radiotherapy was the preferred treatment for progression in cases with neurovascular involvement (47%) or cases of recurrence after a previous R0 resection (34%). Clinical follow-up was selected 3 months after intervention in 68% of scenarios. Follow-up imaging was selected 3 or 6 months after intervention in 57% and 21% of cases, respectively. Most respondents would not change their chosen management in younger patients. DISCUSSION: Several groups have issued formal guidelines for clinicians managing desmoid fibromatosis, including the British Sarcoma Group, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the European Society for Medical Oncology. However, these are in some ways contradictory and may not reflect recent publications, potentially explaining the significant variation in the management of desmoid fibromatosis in the UK shown by this survey. We propose a review of current evidence; a national consensus or a desmoid fibromatosis registry may help to standardise desmoid fibromatosis care.

Extra-abdominal desmoid fibromatosis--a sarcoma unit review of practice, long term recurrence rates and survival.

INTRODUCTION: Desmoid fibromatosis (DF) carries a significant morbidity and a recognised mortality. Despite this there are currently limited diagnostic or treatment algorithms specific to cases of extra-abdominal DF. Historically surgical excision has formed the cornerstone of treatment. Recently however a paradigm shift has meant many practitioners now adopt a more conservative approach, placing emphasis on active surveillance, function preserving resections, and non-surgical oncologic therapies. METHODS: We performed an 8-year retrospective review of all cases of extra-abdominal DF managed within our region to assess the consistency of diagnostics, management and long-term outcome. RESULTS: 47 eligible cases were identified. Mean age at diagnosis was 41.3 years (1-81 years). Disease location and speciality of diagnosing practitioners were varied. Management was generally inconsistent. Variation was seen in imaging, biopsy techniques, MDT involvement and management. At a median follow up of 4.9 years our local recurrence rate was 19%. DISCUSSION: The optimal management of DF is unknown. This has led to a lack of formalised guidance for practitioners managing this challenging condition, resulting in inconsistencies and areas for improvement in current management. We propose a diagnostic pathway which may improve consistency of care, reduce potentially unnecessary surgery and the associated morbidity, and significantly increase the rate of complete (R0) surgical resections when surgery is deemed appropriate whilst not significantly worsening oncological outcome. Specifically we propose all cases should be imaged appropriately (usually with MRI), undergo a planned biopsy (by radiologically guided core needle biopsy) and be managed centrally in conjunction with multidisciplinary sarcoma units.