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
Background: Clear cell sarcoma (CCS) is a translocated aggressive malignancy with a high incidence of metastases and poor prognosis. There are few studies describing the activity of systemic... Show moreBackground: Clear cell sarcoma (CCS) is a translocated aggressive malignancy with a high incidence of metastases and poor prognosis. There are few studies describing the activity of systemic therapy in CCS. We report a mufti-institutional retrospective study of the outcomes of patients with advanced CCS treated with systemic therapy within the World Sarcoma Network (WSN).Materials and methods: Patients with molecularly confirmed locally advanced or metastatic CCS treated with systemic therapy from June 1985 to May 2021 were included. Baseline demographic and treatment information, including response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) 1.1, was retrospectively collected by local investigators. Descriptive statistics were carried out.Results: Fifty-five patients from 10 institutions were included. At diagnosis, the median age was 30 (15-73) years and 24% (n = 13/55) had metastatic disease. The median age at diagnosis was 30 (15-73) years. Most primary tumours were at aponeurosis (n = 9/55, 16%) or non-aponeurosis limb sites (n = 17/55, 31%). The most common fusion was EWSR1-ATF1 (n = 24/55, 44%). The median number of systemic therapies was 1 (range 1-7). The best response rate was seen for patients treated with sunitinib (30%, n = 3/10), with a median progression-free survival of 4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1-7] months. The median overall survival for patients with advanced/metastatic disease was 15 months (95% CI 3-27 months).Conclusions: Soft tissue sarcoma-type systemic therapies have limited benefit in advanced CCS and response rate was poor. International, multicentre prospective translational studies are required to identify new treatments for this ultrarare subtype, and access to early clinical trial enrolment remains key for patients with CCS. 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
Frezza, A.M.; Ravi, V.; Vullo, S. lo; Vincenzi, B.; Tolomeo, F.; Chen, T.W.W.; ... ; Stacchiotti, S. 2021
Background This observational, retrospective effort across Europe, US, Australia, and Asia aimed to assess the activity of systemic therapies in EHE, an ultra-rare sarcoma, marked by WWTR1-CAMTA1... Show moreBackground This observational, retrospective effort across Europe, US, Australia, and Asia aimed to assess the activity of systemic therapies in EHE, an ultra-rare sarcoma, marked by WWTR1-CAMTA1 or YAP1-TFE3 fusions.Methods Twenty sarcoma reference centres contributed data. Patients with advanced EHE diagnosed from 2000 onwards and treated with systemic therapies, were selected. Local pathologic review and molecular confirmation were required. Radiological response was retrospectively assessed by local investigators according to RECIST. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method.Results Overall, 73 patients were included; 21 had more than one treatment. Thirty-three patients received anthracyclines regimens, achieving 1 (3%) partial response (PR), 25 (76%) stable disease (SD), 7 (21%) progressive disease (PD). The median (m-) PFS and m-OS were 5.5 and 14.3 months respectively. Eleven patients received paclitaxel, achieving 1 (9%) PR, 6 (55%) SD, 4 (36%) PD. The m-PFS and m-OS were 2.9 and 18.6 months, respectively. Twelve patients received pazopanib, achieving 3 (25%) SD, 9 (75%) PD. The m-PFS and m-OS were.2.9 and 8.5 months, respectively. Fifteen patients received INF-alpha 2b, achieving 1 (7%) PR, 11 (73%) SD, 3 (20%) PD. The m-PFS and m-OS were 8.9 months and 64.3, respectively. Among 27 patients treated with other regimens, 1 PR (ifosfamide) and 9 SD (5 gemcitabine +docetaxel, 2 oral cyclophosphamide, 2 others) were reported.Conclusion Systemic therapies available for advanced sarcomas have limited activity in EHE. The identification of new active compounds, especially for rapidly progressive cases, is acutely needed. Show less
Background The objective of this study was to report on the long-term effects of pexidartinib on tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT).Methods This was a pooled analysis encompassing 3 pexidartinib... Show moreBackground The objective of this study was to report on the long-term effects of pexidartinib on tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT).Methods This was a pooled analysis encompassing 3 pexidartinib-treated TGCT cohorts: 1) a phase 1 extension study (NCT01004861; 1000 mg/d; n = 39), 2) ENLIVEN patients randomized to pexidartinib (1000 mg/d for 2 weeks and then 800 mg/d; n = 61), and 3) ENLIVEN crossover patients (NCT02371369; 800 mg/d; n = 30). Eligible patients were 18 years old or older and had a histologically confirmed TGCT that was unresectable and symptomatic. Efficacy endpoints included the best overall response (complete or partial response) and the duration of response (DOR) by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and the tumor volume score (TVS). The safety assessment included the frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and hepatic laboratory abnormalities (aminotransferase elevations and mixed/cholestatic hepatotoxicity). The data cutoff was May 31, 2019.Results One hundred thirty patients with TGCT received pexidartinib (median treatment duration, 19 months; range, 1 to 76+ months); 54 (42%) remained on treatment at the end of the analysis (26 months after initial data cut of March 2017). The RECIST overall response rate (ORR) was 60%; the TVS ORR was 65%. The median times to response were 3.4 (RECIST) and 2.8 months (TVS), with 48 of the responding patients (62%) achieving a RECIST partial response by 6 months and with 72 (92%) doing so by 18 months. The median DOR was reached for TVS (46.8 months). Reported TEAEs were mostly low-grade, with hair color changes being most frequent (75%). Most liver abnormalities (92%) were aminotransferase elevations; 4 patients (3%) experienced mixed/cholestatic hepatotoxicity (all within the first 2 months of treatment), which was reversible in all cases (recovery spanned 1-7 months).Conclusions This study demonstrates the prolonged efficacy and tolerability of long-term pexidartinib treatment for TGCT. Show less
Frezza, A.M.; Assi, T.; Vullo, S. lo; Ben-Ami, E.; Dufresne, A.; Yonemori, K.; ... ; Stacchiotti, S. 2019
Background Intimal sarcoma (InS) is an exceedingly rare neoplasm with an unfavorable prognosis, for which new potentially active treatments are under development. We report on the activity of... Show moreBackground Intimal sarcoma (InS) is an exceedingly rare neoplasm with an unfavorable prognosis, for which new potentially active treatments are under development. We report on the activity of anthracycline-based regimens, gemcitabine-based regimens, and pazopanib in patients with InS. Methods Seventeen sarcoma reference centers in Europe, the United States, and Japan contributed data to this retrospective analysis. Patients with MDM2-positive InS who were treated with anthracycline-based regimens, gemcitabine-based regimens, or pazopanib between October 2001 and January 2018 were selected. Local pathological review was performed to confirm diagnosis. Response was assessed by RECIST1.1. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were computed by Kaplan-Meier method. Results Seventy-two patients were included (66 anthracycline-based regimens; 26 gemcitabine-based regimens; 12 pazopanib). In the anthracycline-based group, 24 (36%) patients were treated for localized disease, and 42 (64%) patients were treated for advanced disease. The real-world overall response rate (rwORR) was 38%. For patients with localized disease, the median RFS was 14.6 months. For patients with advanced disease, the median PFS was 7.7 months. No anthracycline-related cardiac toxicity was reported in patients with cardiac InS (n = 26). For gemcitabine and pazopanib, the rwORR was 8%, and the median PFS was 3.2 and 3.7 months, respectively. Conclusion This retrospective series shows the activity of anthracycline-based regimens in InS. Of note, anthracyclines were used in patients with cardiac InS with no significant cardiac toxicity. The prognosis in patients with InS remains poor, and new active drugs and treatment strategies are needed. Show less
