Background: Conventional cytotoxic drugs are not effective in alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS). Immune checkpoint (programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1) inhibitors (ICIs) are... Show moreBackground: Conventional cytotoxic drugs are not effective in alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS). Immune checkpoint (programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1) inhibitors (ICIs) are promising drugs in ASPS. A worldwide registry explored the efficacy of ICI in ASPS.Materials and methods: Data from adult patients diagnosed with ASPS and treated with ICI for advanced disease in expert sarcoma centers from Europe, Australia and North America were retrospectively collected, including demographics and data related to treatments and outcome.Results: Seventy-six ASPS patients, with a median age at diagnosis of 25 years (range 3-61 years), were registered. All patients received ICI for metastatic disease. Immunotherapy regimens consisted of monotherapy in 38 patients (50%) and combination in 38 (50%) (23 with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor). Among the 68 assessable patients, there were 3 complete responses and 34 partial responses, translating into an overall response rate of 54.4%. After a median follow-up of 36 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 32-40 months] since the start of immunotherapy, 45 (59%) patients have progressed on ICI, with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 16.3 months (95% CI 8-25 months). Receiving ICI in first line (P = 0.042) and achieving an objective response (P = 0.043) correlated with a better PFS. Median estimated overall survival (OS) from ICI initiation has not been reached. The 12-month and 24-month OS rates were 94% and 81%, respectively.Conclusions: This registry constitutes the largest available series of ASPS treated with ICI. Our results suggest that the ICI treatment provides long-lasting disease control and prolonged OS in patients with advanced ASPS, an ultra-rare Show less
Gelderblom, H.; Jones, R.L.; Blay, J.Y.; George, S.; Mehren, M. von; Zalcberg, J.R.; ... ; Bauer, S. 2023
PurposeIn the INTRIGUE trial, ripretinib showed no significant difference versus sunitinib in progression-free survival for patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) previously... Show morePurposeIn the INTRIGUE trial, ripretinib showed no significant difference versus sunitinib in progression-free survival for patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) previously treated with imatinib. We compared the impact of these treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQoL).Patients and methodsPatients were randomised 1:1 to once-daily ripretinib 150 mg or once-daily sunitinib 50 mg (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Cancer-30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) questionnaire at day (D)1, and D29 of all cycles until treatment discontinuation. Change from baseline was calculated. Time without symptoms or toxicity (TWiST) was estimated as the mean number of days without progression, death, or grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events per patient over 1 year of follow-up.ResultsQuestionnaire completion at baseline was 88.1% (199/226) for ripretinib and 87.7% (199/227) for sunitinib and remained high for enrolled patients throughout treatment. Patients receiving sunitinib demonstrated within-cycle variation in self-reported HRQoL, corresponding to the on/off dosing regimen. Patients receiving ripretinib reported better HRQoL at D29 assessments than patients receiving sunitinib on all scales except constipation. HRQoL was similar between treatments at D1 assessments, following 2 weeks without treatment for sunitinib patients. TWiST was greater for ripretinib patients (173 versus 126 days).ConclusionPatients receiving ripretinib experienced better HRQoL than patients receiving sunitinib during the dosing period and similar HRQoL to patients who had not received sunitinib for 2 weeks for all QLQ-C30 domains except constipation. Ripretinib may provide clinically meaningful benefit to patients with advanced GIST previously treated with imatinib. Show less
Blay, J.Y.; Hindi, N.; Bollard, J.; Aguiar, S.; Angel, M.; Araya, B.; ... ; Martin-Broto, J. 2023
BackgroundOwing to the rarity and heterogeneity in biology and presentation, there are multiple areas in the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of soft tissue sarcoma (STS), with no, low-level or... Show moreBackgroundOwing to the rarity and heterogeneity in biology and presentation, there are multiple areas in the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of soft tissue sarcoma (STS), with no, low-level or conflicting evidence.MethodsDuring the first Consensus Conference on the State of Science in Sarcoma (CSSS), we used a modified Delphi process to identify areas of controversy in the field of sarcoma, to name topics with limited evidence-based data in which a scientific and knowledge gap may remain and a consensus statement will help to guide patient management. We determined scientific questions which need to be addressed in the future in order to generate evidence and to inform physicians and caregivers in daily clinical practice in order to improve the outcomes of patients with sarcoma.We conducted a vote on STS key questions and controversies prior to the CSSS meeting, which took place in May 2022.ResultsSixty-two European sarcoma experts participated in the survey.Sixteen strong consensus (≥95%) items were identified by the experts, as well as 30 items with a ≥75% consensus on diagnostic and therapeutic questions. Ultimately, many controversy topics remained without consensus.ConclusionsIn this manuscript, we summarise the voting results and the discussion during the CSSS meeting. Future scientific questions, priorities for clinical trials, registries, quality assurance, and action by stakeholders are proposed. Platforms and partnerships can support innovative approaches to improve management and clinical research in STS. Show less
Schoeffski, P.; George, S.; Heinrich, M.C.; Zalcberg, J.R.; Bauer, S.; Gelderblom, H.; ... ; Mehren, M. von 2022
Background: Ripretinib is a novel switch-control kinase inhibitor that inhibits KIT and PDGFRA signaling. In the INVICTUS phase 3 trial, ripretinib increased median progression-free survival and... Show moreBackground: Ripretinib is a novel switch-control kinase inhibitor that inhibits KIT and PDGFRA signaling. In the INVICTUS phase 3 trial, ripretinib increased median progression-free survival and prolonged overall survival vs. placebo in >= fourth-line advanced GIST. Here, we report prespecified analysis of quality of life (QoL) as assessed by patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and an exploratory analysis evaluating the impact of alopecia on QoL. Methods: In the INVICTUS trial (NCT03353753), QoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30; physical function, role function, overall health, and overall QoL) and the EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5 L; visual analogue scale). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) models compared changes in scores from baseline to treatment cycle 2, day 1 within and between ripretinib and placebo. Within the ripretinib arm, repeated measures models assessed the impact of alopecia on QoL. Results: Patients receiving ripretinib maintained QoL (as assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5 L PRO measures) from baseline to cycle 2, day 1 whereas QoL declined with placebo, resulting in clinically significant differences between treatments (nominal P < 0.01). The most common treatment-emergent adverse event with ripretinib was alopecia; however, QoL was similarly maintained out to treatment cycle 10, day 1 in patients receiving ripretinib who developed alopecia and those who did not. Conclusion: PRO assessments in the INVICTUS trial suggest that patients on ripretinib maintain their QoL out to C2D1, unlike patients receiving placebo. Longitudinal QoL was maintained for patients receiving ripretinib out to cycle 10, day 1 (approximately 8 months; past the point of median progression-free survival with ripretinib [6.3 months]), even if the patients developed alopecia. Show less
Schoeffski, P.; George, S.; Heinrich, M.C.; Zalcberg, J.R.; Bauer, S.; Gelderblom, H.; ... ; Mehren, M. von 2022
Background: Ripretinib is a novel switch-control kinase inhibitor that inhibits KIT and PDGFRA signaling. In the INVIC‑ TUS phase 3 trial, ripretinib increased median progression-free survival and... Show moreBackground: Ripretinib is a novel switch-control kinase inhibitor that inhibits KIT and PDGFRA signaling. In the INVIC‑ TUS phase 3 trial, ripretinib increased median progression-free survival and prolonged overall survival vs. placebo in ≥fourth-line advanced GIST. Here, we report prespecifed analysis of quality of life (QoL) as assessed by patientreported outcome (PRO) measures and an exploratory analysis evaluating the impact of alopecia on QoL. Methods: In the INVICTUS trial (NCT03353753), QoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30; physical function, role function, overall health, and overall QoL) and the EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5 L; visual analogue scale). Analysis of covari‑ ance (ANCOVA) models compared changes in scores from baseline to treatment cycle 2, day 1 within and between ripretinib and placebo. Within the ripretinib arm, repeated measures models assessed the impact of alopecia on QoL. Results: Patients receiving ripretinib maintained QoL (as assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5 L PRO meas‑ ures) from baseline to cycle 2, day 1 whereas QoL declined with placebo, resulting in clinically signifcant diferences between treatments (nominal P<0.01). The most common treatment-emergent adverse event with ripretinib was alopecia; however, QoL was similarly maintained out to treatment cycle 10, day 1 in patients receiving ripretinib who developed alopecia and those who did not. Conclusion: PRO assessments in the INVICTUS trial suggest that patients on ripretinib maintain their QoL out to C2D1, unlike patients receiving placebo. Longitudinal QoL was maintained for patients receiving ripretinib out to cycle 10, day 1 (approximately 8 months; past the point of median progression-free survival with ripretinib [6.3 months]), even if the patients developed alopecia. Show less
PURPOSE Sunitinib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is approved for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) after imatinib failure. Ripretinib is a switch-control TKI... Show morePURPOSE Sunitinib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is approved for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) after imatinib failure. Ripretinib is a switch-control TKI approved for advanced GIST after prior treatment with three or more TKIs, including imatinib. We compared efficacy and safety of ripretinib versus sunitinib in patients with advanced GIST who were previously treated with imatinib (INTRIGUE, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: ). PATIENTS AND METHODS Random assignment was 1:1 to once-daily ripretinib 150 mg or once-daily sunitinib 50 mg (4 weeks on/2 weeks off) and stratified by KIT/platelet-derived growth factor alpha mutation and imatinib intolerance. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiologic review using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary end points included objective response rate by independent radiologic review, safety, and patient-reported outcome measures. RESULTS Overall, 453 patients were randomly assigned to ripretinib (intention-to-treat [ITT], n = 226; KIT exon 11 ITT, n = 163) or sunitinib (ITT, n = 227; KIT exon 11 ITT, n = 164). Median PFS for ripretinib and sunitinib (KIT exon 11 ITT) was 8.3 and 7.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.16; P = .36); median PFS (ITT) was 8.0 and 8.3 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.33; nominal P = .72). Neither was statistically significant. Objective response rate was higher for ripretinib versus sunitinib in the KIT exon 11 ITT population (23.9% v 14.6%, nominal P = .03). Ripretinib was associated with a more favorable safety profile, fewer grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (41.3% v 65.6%, nominal P < .0001), and better scores on patient-reported outcome measures of tolerability. CONCLUSION Ripretinib was not superior to sunitinib in terms of PFS. However, meaningful clinical activity, fewer grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events, and improved tolerability were observed with ripretinib. Show less
Kantidakis, G.; Litiere, S.; Neven, A.; Vinches, M.; Judson, I.; Blay, J.Y.; ... ; Gelderblom, H. 2022
BackgroundRecently, we performed a meta-analysis based on a literature review for STS trials (published 2003-2018, >= 10 adult patients) to update long-standing reference values for... Show moreBackgroundRecently, we performed a meta-analysis based on a literature review for STS trials (published 2003-2018, >= 10 adult patients) to update long-standing reference values for leiomyosarcomas. This work is extended for liposarcomas (LPS) and synovial sarcomas (SS).Materials and methodsStudy endpoints were progression-free survival rates (PFSRs) at 3 and 6 months. Trial-specific estimates were pooled per treatment line (first-line or pre-treated) with random effects meta-analyses. The choice of the therapeutic benefit to target in future trials was guided by the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS).ResultsInformation was acquired for 1030 LPS patients (25 trials; 7 first-line, 17 pre-treated, 1 both) and 348 SS patients (13 trials; 3 first-line, 10 pre-treated). For LPS, the overall pooled first-line PFSRs were 69% (95%-CI 60-77%) and 56% (95%-CI 45-67%) at 3 and 6 months, respectively. These rates were 49% (95%-CI 40-57%)/28% (95%-CI 22-34%) for >1 lines. For SS, first-line PFSRs were 74% (95%-CI 58-86%)/56% (95%-CI 31-78%) at 3 and 6 months, and pre-treated rates were 45% (95%-CI 34-57%)/25% (95%-CI 16-36%). Following ESMO-MCBS guidelines, the minimum values to target are 79% and 69% for first-line LPS (82% and 69% for SS) at 3 and 6 months. For pre-treated LPS, recommended PFSRs at 3 and 6 months suggesting drug activity are 63% and 44% (60% and 41% for SS).ConclusionsNew benchmarks are proposed for advanced/metastatic LPS or SS to design future histology-specific phase II trials. More data are needed to provide definitive thresholds for the different LPS subtypes. 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Show less
Kantidakis, G.; Litière, S.; Neven, A.; Vinches, M.; Judson, I.; Blay, J.Y.; ... ; Gelderblom, H. 2022
Background: Recently, we performed a meta-analysis based on a literature review for STS trials (published 2003-2018, >= 10 adult patients) to update long-standing reference values for... Show moreBackground: Recently, we performed a meta-analysis based on a literature review for STS trials (published 2003-2018, >= 10 adult patients) to update long-standing reference values for leiomyosarcomas. This work is extended for liposarcomas (LPS) and synovial sarcomas (SS).Materials and methods: Study endpoints were progression-free survival rates (PFSRs) at 3 and 6 months. Trial-specific estimates were pooled per treatment line (first-line or pre-treated) with random effects meta-analyses. The choice of the therapeutic benefit to target in future trials was guided by the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS).Results: Information was acquired for 1030 LPS patients (25 trials; 7 first-line, 17 pre-treated, 1 both) and 348 SS patients (13 trials; 3 first-line, 10 pre-treated). For LPS, the overall pooled first-line PFSRs were 69% (95%-CI 60-77%) and 56% (95%-CI 45-67%) at 3 and 6 months, respectively. These rates were 49% (95%-CI 40-57%)/28% (95%-CI 22-34%) for >1 lines. For SS, first-line PFSRs were 74% (95%-CI 58-86%)/56% (95%-CI 31-78%) at 3 and 6 months, and pre-treated rates were 45% (95%-CI 34-57%)/25% (95%-CI 16-36%). Following ESMO-MCBS guidelines, the minimum values to target are 79% and 69% for first-line LPS (82% and 69% for SS) at 3 and 6 months. For pre-treated LPS, recommended PFSRs at 3 and 6 months suggesting drug activity are 63% and 44% (60% and 41% for SS).Conclusions: New benchmarks are proposed for advanced/metastatic LPS or SS to design future histology-specific phase II trials. More data are needed to provide definitive thresholds for the different LPS subtypes. 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Show less
Background: In ultra-rare sarcomas (URS) the conduction of prospective, randomized trials is challenging. Data from retrospective observational studies (ROS) may represent the best evidence... Show moreBackground: In ultra-rare sarcomas (URS) the conduction of prospective, randomized trials is challenging. Data from retrospective observational studies (ROS) may represent the best evidence available. ROS implicit limitations led to poor acceptance by the scientific community and regulatory authorities. In this context, an expert panel from the Connective Tissue Oncology Society (CTOS), agreed on the need to establish a set of minimum requirements for conducting high-quality ROS on the activity of systemic therapies in URS. Methods: Representatives from > 25 worldwide sarcoma reference centres met in November 2020 and identified a list of topics summarizing the main issues encountered in ROS on URS. An online survey on these topics was distributed to the panel; results were summarized by descriptive statistics and discussed during a second meeting (November 2021). Results: Topics identified by the panel included the use of ROS results as external control data, the criteria for contributing centers selection, modalities for ensuring a correct pathological diagnosis and radiologic assessment, consistency of surveillance policies across centers, study end-points, risk of data duplication, results publication. Based on the answers to the survey (55 of 62 invited experts) and discussion the panel agreed on 18 statements summarizing principles of recommended practice. Conclusions: These recommendations will be disseminated by CTOS across the sarcoma community and incorporated in future ROS on URS, to maximize their quality and favor their use as control data when results from prospective studies are unavailable. These recommendations could help the optimal conduction of ROS also in other rare tumors. Show less
Spierenburg, G.; Grimison, P.; Chevreau, C.; Stacchiotti, S.; Piperno-Neumann, S.; Cesne, A. le; ... ; Gelderblom, H. 2022
Background: Diffuse-type tenosynovial giant cell tumour (D-TGCT) is a nonmalignant but locally aggressive tumour driven by overexpression of colony-stimulating factor-1 (CSF1). CSF1R inhibitors are... Show moreBackground: Diffuse-type tenosynovial giant cell tumour (D-TGCT) is a nonmalignant but locally aggressive tumour driven by overexpression of colony-stimulating factor-1 (CSF1). CSF1R inhibitors are potential therapeutic strategies for patients not amenable to surgery. We report here the long-term outcome of nilotinib in patients with advanced D-TGCT treated within a phase II prospective international study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01261429). Methods: Patients were enrolled between December 2010-September 2012 at 11 cancer centres. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed D-TGCT, not amenable to surgery. Patients received nilotinib until evidence of progression, toxicity or a maximum of one year. Long-term data were retrospectively collected after the completion of the phase II trial. Patients with nilotinib treatment >= 12 weeks and follow-up >= 12 months were included for long-term analysis. Results: Forty-eight of 56 enrolled patients were included. Median treatment duration was 11 months; 31 (65%) patients completed the treatment protocol. After 102 months of follow-up (median; range 12-129), 25 patients (52%) had progression. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 77 months. The five-year PFS rate was 53%. Fifteen patients (n=15/46; 33%) experienced clinical worsening after 11 months (median). Twenty-seven patients (58%) received additional treatment, after which eleven patients (n = 11/27; 41%) had a second relapse. Nine patients required a subsequent treatment, primarily other CSF1R inhibitors (n = 6/9; 67%). No unfavourable long-term effects were observed. Conclusion: This long-term analysis of nilotinib for advanced D-TGCT showed that about half of the patients had progression and underwent additional treatment after 8.5 years follow-up. Contrarily, several patients had ongoing disease control after limited treatment duration, demonstrating the mixed effect of nilotinib. Show less
The phase III clinical study of adjuvant liposomal muramyl tripeptide (MTP-PE) in resected high-grade osteosarcoma (OS) documented positive results that have been translated into regulatory... Show moreThe phase III clinical study of adjuvant liposomal muramyl tripeptide (MTP-PE) in resected high-grade osteosarcoma (OS) documented positive results that have been translated into regulatory approval, supporting initial promise for innate immune therapies in OS. There remains, however, no new approved treatment such as MTP-PE for either metastatic or recurrent OS. Whilst the addition of different agents, including liposomal MTP-PE, to surgery for metastatic or recurrent high-grade osteosarcoma has tried to improve response rates, a mechanistic hiatus exists in terms of a detailed understanding the therapeutic strategies required in advanced disease. Here we report a Bayesian designed multi-arm, multi-centre, open-label phase II study with randomisation in patients with metastatic and/or recurrent OS, designed to investigate how patients with OS might respond to liposomal MTP-PE, either given alone or in combination with ifosfamide. Despite the trial closing because of poor recruitment within the allocated funding period, with no objective responses in eight patients, we report the design and feasibility outcomes for patients registered into the trial. We demonstrate the feasibility of the Bayesian design, European collaboration, tissue collection with genomic analysis and serum cytokine characterisation. Further mechanistic investigation of liposomal MTP-PE alone and in combination with other agents remains warranted in metastatic OS. Show less
Purpose: The effect of high-dose imatinib (800 mg/day) on survival in the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected KIT exon 9-mutated gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) is not established.... Show morePurpose: The effect of high-dose imatinib (800 mg/day) on survival in the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected KIT exon 9-mutated gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) is not established. Here, the association of dose and other clinicopatho-logic variables with survival was evaluated in a large multi-institutional European cohort.Experimental Design: Data from 185 patients were retrospec-tively collected in 23 European GIST reference centers. Propen-sity score matching (PSM) and inverse-probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were used to account for confounders. Uni-variate and multivariate unweighted and weighted Cox propor-tional hazard regression models were estimated for relapse-free survival (RFS), modified-RFS (mRFS) and imatinib failure-free survival (IFFS). Univariate Cox models were estimated for overall survival.Results: Of the 185 patients, 131 (70.8%) received a starting dose of 400 mg/d and the remaining 54 (29.2%) a dose of 800 mg/d. Baseline characteristics were partially unbalanced, suggesting a potential selection bias. PSM and IPTW analyses showed no advantage of imatinib 800 mg/d. In the weighted multivariate Cox models, high-dose imatinib was not associated with the survival outcomes [RFS: hazard ratio (HR), 1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.79-1.94; mRFS: HR, 1.69; 95% CI, 0.92-3.10; IFFS: HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.79- 2.28]. The variables consistently associated with worse survival out-comes were high mitotic index and nongastric tumor location.Conclusions: In this retrospective series of patients with KIT exon 9-mutated GIST treated with adjuvant imatinib, a daily dose of 800 mg versus 400 mg did not show better results in terms of survival outcomes. Prospective evaluation of the more appropriate adjuvant treatment in this setting is warranted. Show less
Main Recommendations: 1 ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) as the best tool to characterize subepithelial lesion (SEL) features (size, location, originating layer, echogenicity, shape... Show moreMain Recommendations: 1 ESGE recommends endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) as the best tool to characterize subepithelial lesion (SEL) features (size, location, originating layer, echogenicity, shape), but EUS alone is not able to distinguish among all types of SEL. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2 ESGE suggests providing tissue diagnosis for all SELs with features suggestive of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) if they are of size > 20 mm, or have high risk stigmata, or require surgical resection or oncological treatment. Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 3 ESGE recommends EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) or mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) equally for tissue diagnosis of SELs >= 20 mm in size. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4 ESGE recommends against surveillance of asymptomatic gastrointestinal (GI) tract leiomyomas, lipomas, heterotopic pancreas, granular cell tumors, schwannomas, and glomus tumors, if the diagnosis is clear. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 5 ESGE suggests surveillance of asymptomatic esophageal and gastric SELs without definite diagnosis, with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) at 3-6 months, and then at 2-3-year intervals for lesions < 10 mm in size, and at 1-2-year intervals for lesions 10-20 mm in size. For asymptomatic SELs > 20 mm in size that are not resected, ESGE suggests surveillance with EGD plus EUS at 6 months and then at 6-12-month intervals. Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 6 ESGE recommends endoscopic resection for type 1 gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms (g-NENs) if they grow larger than 10 mm. The choice of resection technique should depend on size, depth of invasion, and location in the stomach. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7 ESGE suggests considering removal of histologically proven gastric GISTs smaller than 20 mm as an alternative to surveillance. The decision to resect should be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting. The choice of technique should depend on size, location, and local expertise. Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 8 ESGE suggests that, to avoid unnecessary follow-up, endoscopic resection is an option for gastric SELs smaller than 20 mm and of unknown histology after failure of attempts to obtain diagnosis. Weak recommendation, very low quality evidence. 9 ESGE recommends basing the surveillance strategy on the type and completeness of resection. After curative resection of benign SELs no follow-up is advised, except for type 1 gastric NEN for which surveillance at 1-2 years is advised. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 10 For lower or upper GI NEN with a positive or indeterminate margin at resection, ESGE recommends repeating endoscopy at 3-6 months and another attempt at endoscopic resection in the case of residual disease. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. Show less
Purpose: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) clinical phase II trial 90101 "CREATE" showed high antitumor activity of crizotinib, an inhibitor of anaplastic... Show morePurpose: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) clinical phase II trial 90101 "CREATE" showed high antitumor activity of crizotinib, an inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)/ROS1, in patients with advanced inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor (IMFT). However, recent findings suggested that other molecular targets in addition to ALK/ROS1 might also contribute to the sensitivity of this kinase inhibitor. We therefore performed an in-depth molecular characterization of archival IMFT tissue, collected from patients enrolled in this trial, with the aim to identify other molecular alterations that could play a role in the response to crizotinib.Experimental Design: Twenty-four archival IMFT samples were used for histopathological assessment and DNA/RNA evaluation to identify gene fusions, copy-number alterations (CNA), and mutations in the tumor tissue. Results were correlated with clinical parameters to assess a potential association between molecular findings and clinical outcomes.Results: We found 12 ALK fusions with 11 different partners in ALK-positive IMFT cases by Archer analysis whereas we did not identify any ROS1-rearranged tumor. One ALK-negative patient responding to crizotinib was found to have an ETV6-NTRK fusion in the tumor specimen. The CNA profile and mutational landscape of IMFT revealed extensive molecular heterogeneity. Loss of chromosome 19 (25% of cases) and PIK3CA mutations (9% of cases) were associated with shorter progression-free survival in patients receiving crizotinib.Conclusions: We identified multiple genetic alterations in archival IMFT material and provide further insight into the molecular profile of this ultra-rare, heterogeneous malignancy, which may potentially translate into novel treatment approaches for this orphan disease. Show less
A. Kawai43, K. Kopeckova44, D. A. Krakorova45, A. Le Cesne46, F. Le Grange1, E. Legius47, A. Leithner48, A. Lopez Pousa49, J. Martin-Broto36, O. Merimsky50, C. Messiou51, A. B. Miah52, O. Mir53, M.... Show moreA. Kawai43, K. Kopeckova44, D. A. Krakorova45, A. Le Cesne46, F. Le Grange1, E. Legius47, A. Leithner48, A. Lopez Pousa49, J. Martin-Broto36, O. Merimsky50, C. Messiou51, A. B. Miah52, O. Mir53, M. Montemurro54, B. Morland55, C. Morosi56, E. Palmerini57, M. A. Pantaleo58, R. Piana59, S. Piperno-Neumann60, P. Reichardt61, P. Rutkowski62, A. A. Safwat63, C. Sangalli64, M. Sbaraglia19, S. Scheipl48, P. Schoffski65, S. Sleijfer66, D. Strauss67, K. Sundby Hall13, A. Trama68, M. Unk69, M. A. J. van de Sande70, W. T. A. van der Graaf66,71, W. J. van Houdt72, T. Frebourg73x, R. Ladenstein41z, P. G. Casali2,74z & Show less
Purpose: Most patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) have activating mutations in KIT/PDGFRA and are initially responsive to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). The acquisition of... Show morePurpose: Most patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) have activating mutations in KIT/PDGFRA and are initially responsive to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). The acquisition of secondary mutations leads to refractory/relapsed disease. This study reports the results of an analysis from the phase III INVICTUS study (NCT03353753) characterizing the genomic heterogeneity of tumors from patients with advanced GIST and evaluating ripretinib efficacy across KIT/PDGFRA mutation subgroups.Patients and Methods: Tumor tissue and liquid biopsy samples that captured circulating tumor DNA were collected prior to study enrollment and sequenced using next-generation sequencing. Subgroups were determined by KIT/PDGFRA mutations and correlation of clinical outcomes and KIT/PDGFRA mutational status was assessed.Results: Overall, 129 patients enrolled (ripretinib 150 mg once daily, n = 85; placebo, n = 44). The most common primary mutation subgroup detected by combined tissue and liquid biopsies were in KIT exon 11 (ripretinib, 61.2%; placebo, 77.3%) and KIT exon 9 (ripretinib, 18.8%; placebo, 15.9%). Patients receiving ripretinib demonstrated progression-free survival (PFS) benefit versus placebo regardless of mutation status (HR 0.16) and in all assessed subgroups in Kaplan-Meier PFS analysis (exon 11 , P < 0.0001; exon 9, P = 0.0023; exon 13, P < 0.0001; exon 17, P < 0.0001). Among patients with wild-type KIT/PDGFRA by tumor tissue, PFS ranged from 2 to 23 months for ripretinib versus 0.9 to 10.1 months for placebo.Conclusions: Ripretinib provided clinically meaningful activity across mutation subgroups in patients with advanced GIST, demonstrating that ripretinib inhibits a broad range of KIT/PDGFRA mutations in patients with advanced GIST who were previously treated with three or more TKIs. Show less
