Clinical value of a screening tool for tumor predisposition syndromes in childhood cancer patients (TuPS): a prospective, observational, multi-center study.

Recognizing a tumor predisposition syndrome (TPS) in a child with cancer is of clinical relevance. Earlier we developed a screening tool to increase diagnostic accuracy and clinical efficiency of identifying TPSs in children with cancer. Here we report on the value of this tool in clinical practice. TuPS is a prospective, observational, multi-center study including children newly diagnosed with cancer from 2016 to 2019 in the Netherlands. Children in whom a TPS had been diagnosed before the cancer diagnosis were excluded. The screening tool consists of a checklist, 2D and 3D photographic series and digital assessment of these by a clinical geneticist. If a TPS was suspected, the patient was assessed positive and referred for routine genetic consultation. Primary aim was to assess the clinical value of this new screening tool. Of the 363 included patients, 57% (208/363) were assessed positive. In 15% of patients (32/208), the 2D photographic series with (n = 12) or without (n = 20) 3D photographs were decisive in the positive assessment. In 2% (4/208) of positive assessed patients, a TPS was diagnosed, and in an additional 2% (4/208) a germline variant of uncertain significance was found. Thirty-five negatively assessed patients were evaluated through routine genetic consultation as controls, in none a TPS was detected. Using the screening tool, 57% of the patients were assessed as suspected for having a TPS. No false negative results were identified in the negative control group in the clinical care setting. The observed prevalence of TPS was lower than expected, due to selection bias in the cohort.

A novel method to address the association between received dose intensity and survival outcome: benefits of approaching treatment intensification at a more individualised level in a trial of the European Osteosarcoma Intergroup.

PURPOSE: There is lack of consensus on the prognostic value of received high dose intensity in osteosarcoma survivorship. Many studies have not shown a clear survival benefit when dose intensity is increased. The aim of this study is to go beyond chemotherapy intensification by arm-wide escalation of intended dose and/or compression of treatment schedule, while conversely addressing the relationship between treatment intensity and survival at the patient level. The study focusses on the difference in outcome results, based on a novel, progressively more individualised approach to dose intensity. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data from MRC BO06/EORTC 80931 randomised controlled trial for treatment of osteosarcoma was conducted. Three types of post hoc patient groups are formed using the intended regimen: the individually achieved cumulative dose and time on treatment, and the increase of individual cumulative dose over time. Event-free survival is investigated and compared in these three stratifications. RESULTS: The strata of intended regimen and achieved treatment yields equivalent results. Received cumulative dose over time produces groups with evident different survivorship characteristics. In particular, it highlights a group of patients with an estimated 3-year event-free survival much larger (more than 10%) than other patient groups. This group mostly contains patients randomised to an intensified regimen. In addition, adverse events reported by that group show the presence of increased preoperative myelotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: The manuscript shows the benefits of analyzing studies by using longitudinal data, e.g. recorded per cycle. This has impact on the drafting of future trials by showing why such a level of detail is needed for both treatment and adverse event data. The novel method proposed, based on cumulative dose received over time, shows that longitudinal treatment data might be used to link survival outcome with drug metabolism. This is particularly valuable when pharmacogenetics data for metabolism of cytotoxic agents are not collected. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN86294690.

Validation of a clinical screening instrument for tumour predisposition syndromes in patients with childhood cancer (TuPS): protocol for a prospective, observational, multicentre study.

INTRODUCTION: Recognising a tumour predisposition syndrome (TPS) in patients with childhood cancer is of significant clinical relevance, as it affects treatment, prognosis and facilitates genetic counselling. Previous studies revealed that only half of the known TPSs are recognised during standard paediatric cancer care. In current medical practice it is impossible to refer every patient with childhood cancer to a clinical geneticist, due to limited capacity for routine genetic consultation. Therefore, we have developed a screening instrument to identify patients with childhood cancer with a high probability of having a TPS. The aim of this study is to validate the clinical screening instrument for TPS in patients with childhood cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a prospective nationwide cohort study including all newly diagnosed patients with childhood cancer in the Netherlands. The screening instrument consists of a checklist, two- and three-dimensional photographic series of the patient. 2 independent clinical geneticists will assess the content of the screening instrument. If a TPS is suspected based on the instrument data and thus further evaluation is indicated, the patient will be invited for full genetic consultation. A negative control group consists of 20% of the patients in whom a TPS is not suspected based on the instrument; they will be randomly invited for full genetic consultation. Primary outcome measurement will be sensitivity of the instrument. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Medical Ethical Committee of the Academic Medical Centre stated that the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act does not apply to this study and that official approval of this study by the Committee was not required. The results will be offered for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presented at International Conferences on Oncology and Clinical Genetics. The clinical data gathered in this study will be available for all participating centres. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR5605.

Update on targets and novel treatment options for high-grade osteosarcoma and chondrosarcoma.

Osteosarcoma and chondrosarcoma are the 2 most common malignant bone tumors. This review discusses the clinicopathologic features, recent preclinical developments, and targets currently being or to be validated in the clinic.

Osteosarcoma of the hands and feet: a distinct clinico-pathological subgroup.

Osteosarcomas of hands or feet are rare, and seemingly these cases differ in presentation and behavior compared to those in usual locations. The clinico-pathological presentation of patients with osteosarcomas of the hand or foot was studied and compared with published cases. Forty osteosarcomas were identified among 4,221 cases, representing 0.95 % of all osteosarcomas. Thirty of these were well documented. Mean age at diagnosis was 43 years (hands) and 36 years (feet) and male-female ratio was 1.2:1 and 2.0:1, respectively. In the hand, 62 % of the osteosarcomas presented in the metacarpals and 23 % in the phalanges, and only two cases occurred in the carpal bones. Distribution in the foot was tarsal bones 56 %, metatarsal bones 33 %, and phalanges 11 %.Of the cases in the hand 54 % were of high grade and of those in the foot 71 %. Survival of osteosarcomas of the hand or foot was 81 %. Only patients with high-grade osteosarcoma died of the disease. Histological grade was the only significant variable related to survival. High-grade osteosarcoma of the hand or feet should be treated similar to those in conventional sites. Osteosarcomas of hands or feet are rare and in a relative high proportion are of low grade. Survival in high-grade cases is comparable to that in conventional sites.

Intact interferon signaling in peripheral blood leukocytes of high-grade osteosarcoma patients.

High-grade osteosarcoma has a poor prognosis with an overall survival rate of about 60 percent. The recently closed European and American Osteosarcoma Study Group (EURAMOS)-1 trial investigates the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy with or without interferon-α. It is however unknown whether the interferon-signaling pathways in immune cells of osteosarcoma patients are functional. We studied the molecular and functional effects of interferon treatment on peripheral blood lymphocytes and monocytes of osteosarcoma patients, both in vivo and ex vivo. In contrast to other tumor types, in osteosarcoma, interferon signaling as determined by the phosphorylation of signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT)1 at residue 701 was intact in immune cell subsets of 33 osteosarcoma patients as compared to 19 healthy controls. Also, cytolytic activity of interferon-α stimulated natural killer cells against allogeneic (n = 7 patients) and autologous target cells (n = 3 patients) was not impaired. Longitudinal monitoring of three osteosarcoma patients on interferon-α monotherapy revealed a relative increase in the CD16-positive subpopulation of monocytes during treatment. Since interferon signaling is intact in immune cells of osteosarcoma patients, there is a potential for indirect immunological effects of interferon-α treatment in osteosarcoma.

Chemotherapeutic adjuvant treatment for osteosarcoma: where do we stand?

AIM: Since the introduction of chemotherapy, survival in localised high-grade osteosarcoma has improved considerably. However, there is still no worldwide consensus on a standard chemotherapy approach. In this systematic review evidence for effectiveness of each single drug and the role of response guided salvage treatment of adjuvant chemotherapy are addressed, whereas in a meta-analysis the number of drugs in current protocols is considered. METHODS: A systematic literature search for clinical studies in localised high-grade osteosarcoma was undertaken, including both randomised and non-randomised trials. Historical clinical studies from the pre-chemotherapy era were included for comparison purposes. RESULTS: Nine historical studies showed a long-term survival of 16% after only local treatment. Fifty single agent phase II studies showed high response rates for adriamycin (A, 43%), ifosfamide (Ifo, 33%), methotrexate (M, 32%), cisplatin (P, 26%) but only 4% for etposide (E). In 19 neo-adjuvant studies the mean 5-year event free survival (EFS) was 48% for 2-drug regimens and 58% for ⩾3 drug regimens, with a 5-year overall survival (OAS) of 62% and 70%, respectively. Meta-analysis showed that ⩾3 drug regimens including methotrexate plus adriamycin plus cisplatin (plus ifosfamide) (MAP(Ifo)) had significant better outcome (EFS: HR=0.701 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.615-0.799); OAS: HR=0.792 (95% CI: 0.677-0.926) than 2-drug regimens, but there was no significant difference between MAP and MAPIfo (or plus etoposide). Salvage of poor responders by changing drugs, or intensifying treatment postoperatively has not proven to be useful in this analysis. CONCLUSION: Meta-analysis in patients with localised high-grade osteosarcoma shows that 3-drug regimens, for example MAP are the most efficacious drug regimens.

Prognostic factors in pulmonary metastasized high-grade osteosarcoma.

INTRODUCTION: Resection of pulmonary metastases has previously been reported to improve outcome in high-grade osteosarcoma (OS) patients. Factors influencing survival in OS patients with pulmonary metastases are important for clinical decision making. METHODS: All 88 OS patients with pulmonary metastases either at diagnosis or during follow-up treated at the Leiden University Medical Center between January 1, 1990 and January 1, 2008 under the age of 40 were included in this study, including 79 cases of conventional, 8 cases of telangiectatic and 1 case of small cell OS. RESULTS: In total, 56 of 88 patients with pulmonary metastases were treated by metastasectomy. Resectability of pulmonary metastases was the main prognostic factor. In patients with primary non-metastatic OS, a longer relapse free interval to pulmonary metastases was significantly associated with better survival (P = 0.02). Independent risk factors determining worse survival after metastasectomy in multivariate analysis were male sex (P = 0.05), higher number of pulmonary nodules (P = 0.03), and non-necrotic metastases (P = 0.04). Whether surgery for recurrent pulmonary metastases was performed did not influence survival. Histological subtype of the primary tumor, histological response in the primary tumor after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, occurrence of local relapse, local resection or amputation of the primary tumor and age at diagnosis did not influence outcome. CONCLUSION: This cohort of patients with detailed follow-up data enabled us to identify important risk factors determining survival in OS patients with pulmonary metastases. We demonstrate that after repeated metastasectomies, a subset of patients can be cured.

Testing association of a pathway with survival using gene expression data.

MOTIVATION: A recent surge of interest in survival as the primary clinical endpoint of microarray studies has called for an extension of the Global Test methodology to survival. RESULTS: We present a score test for association of the expression profile of one or more groups of genes with a (possibly censored) survival time. Groups of genes may be pathways, areas of the genome, clusters from a cluster analysis or all genes on a chip. The test allows one to test hypotheses about the influence of these groups of genes on survival directly, without the intermediary of single gene testing. The test is based on the Cox proportional hazards model and is calculated using martingale residuals. It is possible to adjust the test for the presence of covariates. We also present a diagnostic graph to assist in the interpretation of the test result, visualizing the influence of genes. The test is applied to a tumor dataset, revealing pathways from the gene ontology database that are associated with survival of patients. AVAILABILITY: The Global Test for survival has been incorporated into the R-package globaltest (version 3.0), available at http://www.bioconductor.org