Background and objectives: Bone tumours are relatively rare and, as a consequence, treatment in a centre with expertise is required. Current treatment guidelines also recommend review by a... Show moreBackground and objectives: Bone tumours are relatively rare and, as a consequence, treatment in a centre with expertise is required. Current treatment guidelines also recommend review by a specialised pathologist. Here we report on international consensus-based datasets for the pathology reporting of biopsy and resection specimens of bone sarcomas. The datasets were produced under the auspices of the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR), a global alliance of major (inter-)national pathology and cancer organisations. Methods and results: According to the ICCR's process for dataset development, an international expert panel consisting of pathologists, an oncologic orthopaedic surgeon, a medical oncologist, and a radiologist produced a set of core and noncore data items for biopsy and resection specimens based on a critical review and discussion of current evidence. All professionals involved were bone tumour experts affiliated with tertiary referral centres. Commentary was provided for each data item to explain the rationale for selecting it as a core or noncore element, its clinical relevance, and to highlight potential areas of disagreement or lack of evidence, in which case a consensus position was formulated. Following international public consultation, the documents were finalised and ratified, and the datasets, including a synoptic reporting guide, were published on the ICCR website. Conclusion:These first international datasets for bone sarcomas are intended to promote high-quality, standardised pathology reporting. Their widespread adoption will improve the consistency of reporting, facilitate multidisciplinary communication, and enhance comparability of data, all of which will help to improve management of bone sarcoma patients. Show less
Background and objectivesBone tumours are relatively rare and, as a consequence, treatment in a centre with expertise is required. Current treatment guidelines also recommend review by a... Show moreBackground and objectivesBone tumours are relatively rare and, as a consequence, treatment in a centre with expertise is required. Current treatment guidelines also recommend review by a specialised pathologist. Here we report on international consensus-based datasets for the pathology reporting of biopsy and resection specimens of bone sarcomas. The datasets were produced under the auspices of the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR), a global alliance of major (inter-)national pathology and cancer organisations.Methods and resultsAccording to the ICCR's process for dataset development, an international expert panel consisting of pathologists, an oncologic orthopaedic surgeon, a medical oncologist, and a radiologist produced a set of core and noncore data items for biopsy and resection specimens based on a critical review and discussion of current evidence. All professionals involved were bone tumour experts affiliated with tertiary referral centres. Commentary was provided for each data item to explain the rationale for selecting it as a core or noncore element, its clinical relevance, and to highlight potential areas of disagreement or lack of evidence, in which case a consensus position was formulated. Following international public consultation, the documents were finalised and ratified, and the datasets, including a synoptic reporting guide, were published on the ICCR website.ConclusionThese first international datasets for bone sarcomas are intended to promote high-quality, standardised pathology reporting. Their widespread adoption will improve the consistency of reporting, facilitate multidisciplinary communication, and enhance comparability of data, all of which will help to improve management of bone sarcoma patients. 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
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
Background We aimed at investigating outcome of systemic treatments in advanced breast PT. Methods All cases of advanced breast PT treated with systemic treatments from 1999 to 2019, in one of the... Show moreBackground We aimed at investigating outcome of systemic treatments in advanced breast PT. Methods All cases of advanced breast PT treated with systemic treatments from 1999 to 2019, in one of the referral sarcoma centers involved in the study, were retrospectively reviewed. Results 56 female patients were identified. Median age was 52 (range of 25-76) years. Patients received a median number of 2 systemic treatments (range of 1-4). Best responses according to RECIST were 1 (3.7%) CR, 11 (40.7%) PR, 6 (22.2%) SD, 9 (33.3%) PD with anthracyclines plus ifosfamide (AI); 2 (16.7%) PR, 4 (33.3%) SD, 6 (50.0%) PD with anthracycline alone; 3 (18.8%) PR, 4 (25.0%) SD, 9 (56.3%) PD with high-dose ifosfamide given as a continuous infusion (HD-IFX); 3 (20.0%) SD, 12 (80.0%) PD with a gemcitabine-based regimen (with 2 patients not evaluable); 1 (8.3%) PR, 2 (16.7%) SD, 9 (75.0%) PD with trabectedin (with 1 patient not evaluable); 1 (16.7%) PR, 1 (16.7%) SD, 4 (66.7%) PD with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI). The median PFS were 5.7 (IQR 2.5-9.1) months with AI; 3.2 (IQR 2.2-5.0) months with anthracycline alone; 3.4 (IQR 1.4-6.7) months with HD-IFX; 2.1 (IQR 1.4-5.2) months with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy; 1.8 (IQR 0.7-6.6) months with trabectedin; 3.4 (IQR 3.1-3.8) months with TKI. With a median follow-up of 35.3 (IQR 17.6-66.9) months, OS from the start of first-line systemic treatment was 15.2 (IQR 7.6-39.6) months. Conclusion In this series of advanced PT (to our knowledge, the largest reported so far), AI was associated with a high rate of responses, however, with a median PFS of 5.7 months. Other systemic treatments were poorly active. Show less
BackgroundWe aimed at investigating outcome of systemic treatments in advanced breast PT.MethodsAll cases of advanced breast PT treated with systemic treatments from 1999 to 2019, in one of the... Show moreBackgroundWe aimed at investigating outcome of systemic treatments in advanced breast PT.MethodsAll cases of advanced breast PT treated with systemic treatments from 1999 to 2019, in one of the referral sarcoma centers involved in the study, were retrospectively reviewed.Results56 female patients were identified. Median age was 52 (range of 25–76) years. Patients received a median number of 2 systemic treatments (range of 1–4). Best responses according to RECIST were 1 (3.7%) CR, 11 (40.7%) PR, 6 (22.2%) SD, 9 (33.3%) PD with anthracyclines plus ifosfamide (AI); 2 (16.7%) PR, 4 (33.3%) SD, 6 (50.0%) PD with anthracycline alone; 3 (18.8%) PR, 4 (25.0%) SD, 9 (56.3%) PD with high-dose ifosfamide given as a continuous infusion (HD-IFX); 3 (20.0%) SD, 12 (80.0%) PD with a gemcitabine-based regimen (with 2 patients not evaluable); 1 (8.3%) PR, 2 (16.7%) SD, 9 (75.0%) PD with trabectedin (with 1 patient not evaluable); 1 (16.7%) PR, 1 (16.7%) SD, 4 (66.7%) PD with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI). The median PFS were 5.7 (IQR 2.5–9.1) months with AI; 3.2 (IQR 2.2–5.0) months with anthracycline alone; 3.4 (IQR 1.4–6.7) months with HD-IFX; 2.1 (IQR 1.4–5.2) months with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy; 1.8 (IQR 0.7–6.6) months with trabectedin; 3.4 (IQR 3.1–3.8) months with TKI. With a median follow-up of 35.3 (IQR 17.6–66.9) months, OS from the start of first-line systemic treatment was 15.2 (IQR 7.6–39.6) months.ConclusionIn this series of advanced PT (to our knowledge, the largest reported so far), AI was associated with a high rate of responses, however, with a median PFS of 5.7 months. Other systemic treatments were poorly active. 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
Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is an ultra-rare, translocated, vascular sarcoma. EHE clinical behavior is variable, ranging from that of a low-grade malignancy to that of a high-grade... Show moreEpithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is an ultra-rare, translocated, vascular sarcoma. EHE clinical behavior is variable, ranging from that of a low-grade malignancy to that of a high-grade sarcoma and it is marked by a high propensity for systemic involvement. No active systemic agents are currently approved specifically for EHE, which is typically refractory to the antitumor drugs used in sarcomas. The degree of uncertainty in selecting the most appropriate therapy for EHE patients and the lack of guidelines on the clinical management of the disease make the adoption of new treatments inconsistent across the world, resulting in suboptimal outcomes for many EHE patients. To address the shortcoming, a global consensus meeting was organized in December 2020 under the umbrella of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) involving >80 experts from several disciplines from Europe, North America and Asia, together with a patient representative from the EHE Group, a global, disease-specific patient advocacy group, and Sarcoma Patient EuroNet (SPAEN). The meeting was aimed at defining, by consensus, evidence-based best practices for the optimal approach to primary and metastatic EHE. The consensus achieved during that meeting is the subject of the present publication. Show less
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... Show moreBackground 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. Show less
Sarcomas are a heterogeneous group of malignancies with mesenchymal lineage differentiation. The discovery of neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions as tissue-agnostic oncogenic... Show moreSarcomas are a heterogeneous group of malignancies with mesenchymal lineage differentiation. The discovery of neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions as tissue-agnostic oncogenic drivers has led to new personalized therapies for a subset of patients with sarcoma in the form of tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors. NTRK gene rearrangements and fusion transcripts can be detected with different molecular pathology techniques, while TRK protein expression can be demonstrated with immunohistochemistry. The rarity and diagnostic complexity of NTRK gene fusions raise a number of questions and challenges for clinicians. To address these challenges, the World Sarcoma Network convened two meetings of expert adult oncologists and pathologists and subsequently developed this article to provide practical guidance on the management of patients with sarcoma harboring NTRK gene fusions. We propose a diagnostic strategy that considers disease stage and histologic and molecular subtypes to facilitate routine testing for TRK expression and subsequent testing for NTRK gene fusions. Show less
Background Unlike for extremity sarcomas, the efficacy of radiotherapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma is not established. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of preoperative radiotherapy... Show moreBackground Unlike for extremity sarcomas, the efficacy of radiotherapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma is not established. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of preoperative radiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone on abdominal recurrence-free survival.Methods EORTC-62092 is an open-label, randomised, phase 3 study done in 31 research institutions, hospitals, and cancer centres in 13 countries in Europe and North America. Adults (aged >= 18 years) with histologically documented, localised, primary retroperitoneal sarcoma that was operable and suitable for radiotherapy, who had not been previously treated and had a WHO performance status and American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 2 or lower, were centrally randomly assigned (1:1), using an interactive web response system and a minimisation algorithm, to receive either surgery alone or preoperative radiotherapy followed by surgery. Randomisation was stratified by hospital and performance status. Radiotherapy was delivered as 50.4 Gy (in 28 daily fractions of 1.8 Gy) in either 3D conformal radiotherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy, and the objective of surgery was a macroscopically complete resection of the tumour mass with en-bloc organ resection as necessary. The primary endpoint was abdominal recurrence-free survival, as assessed by the investigator, and was analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in all patients who started their allocated treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01344018.Findings Between Jan 18, 2012 and April 10, 2017, 266 patients were enrolled, of whom 133 were randomly assigned to each group. The median follow-up was 43.1 months (IQR 28.8-59.2). 128 (96%) patients from the surgery alone group had surgery, and 119 (89%) patients in the radiotherapy and surgery group had both radiotherapy and surgery. Median abdominal recurrence-free survival was 4.5 years (95% CI 3.9 to not estimable) in the radiotherapy plus surgery group and 5.0 years (3.4 to not estimable) in the surgery only group (hazard ratio 1.01, 95% CI 0.71-1.44; log rank p=0.95). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were lymphopenia (98 [77%] of 127 patients in the radiotherapy plus surgery group vs one [1%] of 128 patients in the surgery alone group), anaemia (15 [12%] vs ten [8%]), and hypoalbuminaemia (15 [12%] vs five [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 30 (24%) of 127 patients in the radiotherapy plus surgery group, and in 13 (10%) of 128 patients in the surgery alone group. One (1%) of 127 patients in the radiotherapy plus surgery group died due to treatment-related serious adverse events (gastropleural fistula), and no patients in the surgery alone group died due to treatment-related serious adverse events.Interpretation Preoperative radiotherapy should not be considered as standard of care treatment for retroperitoneal sarcoma. Copyright (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Show less
Objective: Aim of the manuscript is to discuss how to improve margins in sacral chordoma.Background: Chordoma is a rare neoplasm, arising in half cases from the sacrum, with reported local failure... Show moreObjective: Aim of the manuscript is to discuss how to improve margins in sacral chordoma.Background: Chordoma is a rare neoplasm, arising in half cases from the sacrum, with reported local failure in >50% after surgery.Methods: A multidisciplinary meeting of the "Chordoma Global Consensus Group" was held in Milan in 2017, focusing on challenges in defining and achieving optimal margins in chordoma with respect to surgery, definitive particle radiation therapy (RT) and medical therapies. This review aims to report on the outcome of the consensus meeting and to provide a summary of the most recent evidence in this field. Possible new ways forward, including on-going international clinical studies, are discussed.Results: En-bloc tumor-sacrum resection is the cornerstone of treatment of primary sacral chordoma, aiming to achieve negative microscopic margins. Radical definitive particle therapy seems to offer a similar outcome compared to surgery, although confirmation in comparative trials is lacking; besides there is still a certain degree of technical variability across institutions, corresponding to different fields of treatment and different tumor coverage. To address some of these questions, a prospective, randomized international study comparing surgery versus definitive high-dose RT is ongoing. Available data do not support the routine use of any medical therapy as (neo)adjuvant/cytoreductive treatment.Conclusion: Given the significant influence of margins status on local control in patients with primary localized sacral chordoma, the clear definition of adequate margins and a standard local approach across institutions for both surgery and particle RT is vital for improving the management of these patients. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved. Show less
Background: Given the rapid evolution in the management of soft tissue sarcoma (STS), it is essential to revisit the evidence regularly. This review examines topics of interest for early management... Show moreBackground: Given the rapid evolution in the management of soft tissue sarcoma (STS), it is essential to revisit the evidence regularly. This review examines topics of interest for early management of STS: the impact of molecular genetics on sarcoma classification; the importance of a correct diagnosis and strategy in the surgical management of STS; current status on use of radiotherapy in STS. Areas covered: Accurate diagnosis of STS combines histomorphology, immunochemistry, and molecular genetics, although morphology is the mainstay of therapeutic planning. As diagnosis of STS is challenging, it is best conducted within a multidisciplinary environment. Expert surgery in STS takes into account multiple parameters including biopsy, imaging, pathological knowledge, technical issues, and a multidisciplinary approach. The sum of these factors informs decisions about whether or not to perform surgery and the choice of surgical technique. Advances in radiotherapy are challenging the paradigm of applying the same dose and treatment schedule to all STS patients irrespective of subtype. Preoperative radiotherapy of specific histotypes appears to be the future although more research is required to address uncertainties such as fraction size, total dose, combined modality regimens, and individual sensitivity to radiotherapy. Expert opinion: STS should be managed in a reference center. Show less
Background: This study was aimed at determining whether patients with high-risk soft tissue sarcoma (STS), as identified using the nomogram Sarculator, benefitted from adjuvant chemotherapy in the... Show moreBackground: This study was aimed at determining whether patients with high-risk soft tissue sarcoma (STS), as identified using the nomogram Sarculator, benefitted from adjuvant chemotherapy in the EORTC-STBSG 62931 randomised controlled trial (RCT), which failed to detect an impact for adjuvant doxorubicin plus ifosfamide (Adj) over observation (Obs).Methods: Patients with extremity and trunk wall STS in the EORTC-STBSG 62931 RCT were analysed (N = 290/351). Ten-year predicted probability of overall survival (pr-OS) was calculated using the prognostic nomogram Sarculator. Patients were grouped into three categories of predicted pr-OS: high (pr-OS>66%), intermediate (51 Show less