Purpose: Act.In.Sarc (NCT02379845) demonstrated that the first-in-class radioenhancer NBTXR3, activated by preoperative radi-ation therapy (RT), doubled the rate of pathologic complete response... Show morePurpose: Act.In.Sarc (NCT02379845) demonstrated that the first-in-class radioenhancer NBTXR3, activated by preoperative radi-ation therapy (RT), doubled the rate of pathologic complete response after resection compared with preoperative RT alone in adult patients with locally advanced soft tissue sarcoma of the extremity or trunk wall (16.1% vs 7.9%, P = .045), and more patients achieved R0 resections (77.0% vs 64.0%, P = .042). These are the toxicity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) results. Methods and Materials: Act.In.Sarc randomized eligible patients 1:1 to either NBTXR3 (single intratumoral injection, vol-ume equivalent to 10% of baseline tumor volume, at 53.3 g/L) activated by external-beam RT (arm A) or external-beam RT alone (arm B) (50 Gy in 25 fractions), followed by surgery in both arms. Here, we report the safety analyses in the all-treated population with a long-term follow-up of at least 2 years, and HRQoL in the intention-to-treat full analysis set. Results: During the on-treatment period, serious adverse events (SAEs) of all grades related to NBTXR3 occurred in 10.1% (9/89) of patients (arm A), and SAEs related to RT occurred in 5.6% (5/89) (arm A) versus 5.6% (5/90) (arm B); postsurgery hospitalization owing to SAEs occurred in 15.7% (14/89) (arm A) versus 24.4% (22/90) (arm B). During the follow-up period, posttreatment SAEs (regardless of relationship) occurred in 13.5% (12/89) (arm A) versus 24.4% (22/90) (arm B). NBTXR3 did not negatively affect HRQoL; during the follow-up period, there was an improvement in most mean Toronto extremity salvage, EuroQoL 5-dimension (EQ-5D), EQ5D02-EQ visual analog scale, reintegration to normal living index, and musculoskeletal tumor rating scale scores. Conclusions: NBTXR3 did not negatively affect safety or HRQoL. Long-term safety results reinforce the favorable benefit -risk ratio of NBTXR3 plus RT. (c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. 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
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
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: 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
Mohammadi, M.; IJzerman, N.S.; Hohenberger, P.; Rutkowski, P.; Jones, R.L.; Martin-Broto, J.; ... ; Schrage, Y. 2021
Background: Oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) account for <= 1% of all GISTs. Consequently, evidence to guide clinical decision-making is limited.Methods: Clinicopathological... Show moreBackground: Oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) account for <= 1% of all GISTs. Consequently, evidence to guide clinical decision-making is limited.Methods: Clinicopathological features and outcomes in patients with primary oesophageal GIST from seven European countries were collected retrospectively.Results: Eighty-three patients were identified, and median follow up was 55.0 months. At diagnosis, 59.0% had localized disease, 25.3% locally advanced and 13.3% synchronous metastasis. A biopsy (Fine Needle aspiration n = 29, histological biopsy n = 31) was performed in 60 (72.3%) patients. The mitotic count was low (<5 mitoses/50 High Power Fields (HPF)) in 24 patients and high (>= 5 mitoses/50 HPF) in 27 patients. Fifty-one (61.4%) patients underwent surgical or endoscopic resection. The most common reasons to not perform an immediate resection (n = 31) were; unresectable or metastasized GIST, performance status/comorbidity, patient refusal or ongoing neo-adjuvant therapy. The type of resections were enucleation (n = 11), segmental resection (n = 6) and oesophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction (n = 33), with median tumour size of 3.3 cm, 4.5 cm and 7.7 cm, respectively. In patients treated with enucleation 18.2% developed recurrent disease. The recurrence rate in patients treated with segmental resection was 16.7% and in patients undergoing oesophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction 36.4%. Larger tumours (>= 4.0 cm) and high (>5/5hpf) mitotic count were associated with worse disease free survival.Conclusion: Based on the current study, enucleation can be recommended for oesophageal GIST smaller than 4 cm, while oesophagectomy should be preserved for larger tumours. Patients with larger tumours (>4 cm) and/or high mitotic count should be treated with adjuvant therapy. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Mohammadi, M.; IJzerman, N.S.; Hohenberger, P.; Rutkowski, P.; Jones, R.L.; Martin-Broto, J.; ... ; Schrage, Y. 2021
Background: Oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) account for <= 1% of all GISTs. Consequently, evidence to guide clinical decision-making is limited.Methods: Clinicopathological... Show moreBackground: Oesophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) account for <= 1% of all GISTs. Consequently, evidence to guide clinical decision-making is limited.Methods: Clinicopathological features and outcomes in patients with primary oesophageal GIST from seven European countries were collected retrospectively.Results: Eighty-three patients were identified, and median follow up was 55.0 months. At diagnosis, 59.0% had localized disease, 25.3% locally advanced and 13.3% synchronous metastasis. A biopsy (Fine Needle aspiration n = 29, histological biopsy n = 31) was performed in 60 (72.3%) patients. The mitotic count was low (<5 mitoses/50 High Power Fields (HPF)) in 24 patients and high (>= 5 mitoses/50 HPF) in 27 patients. Fifty-one (61.4%) patients underwent surgical or endoscopic resection. The most common reasons to not perform an immediate resection (n = 31) were; unresectable or metastasized GIST, performance status/comorbidity, patient refusal or ongoing neo-adjuvant therapy. The type of resections were enucleation (n = 11), segmental resection (n = 6) and oesophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction (n = 33), with median tumour size of 3.3 cm, 4.5 cm and 7.7 cm, respectively. In patients treated with enucleation 18.2% developed recurrent disease. The recurrence rate in patients treated with segmental resection was 16.7% and in patients undergoing oesophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction 36.4%. Larger tumours (>= 4.0 cm) and high (>5/5hpf) mitotic count were associated with worse disease free survival.Conclusion: Based on the current study, enucleation can be recommended for oesophageal GIST smaller than 4 cm, while oesophagectomy should be preserved for larger tumours. Patients with larger tumours (>4 cm) and/or high mitotic count should be treated with adjuvant therapy. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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
Background: In 2004, we started an intergroup randomized trial of adjuvant imatinib versus no further therapy after R0-R1 surgery in localized, high/intermediate-risk gastrointestinal stromal... Show moreBackground: In 2004, we started an intergroup randomized trial of adjuvant imatinib versus no further therapy after R0-R1 surgery in localized, high/intermediate-risk gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) patients. Interim analysis results were published in 2015 upon recommendation from an independent data review committee. We report the final outcome of the study.Patients and methods: This was a randomized, open-label, multicenter phase III trial carried out at 112 hospitals in 12 countries. Patients were randomized to 2 years of imatinib, 400 mg daily, or no further therapy after surgery. The primary endpoint was imatinib failure-free survival (IFFS), while relapse-free survival (RFS), relapse-free interval (RFI), overall survival (OS) and toxicity were secondary endpoints. Adjusting for the interim analyses, results on IFFS were assessed on a 4.3% significance level; for the other endpoints, 5% was used.Results: Nine hundred and eight patients were randomized between January 2005 and October 2008: 454 to imatinib and 454 to observation; 835 patients were eligible. With a median follow-up of 9.1 years, 5 (10)-year IFFS was 87% (75%) in the imatinib arm versus 83% (74%) in the control arm [hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 95.7% confidence interval (CI) (0.65; 1.15), P = 0.31]; RFS was 70% versus 63% at 5 years and 63% versus 61% at 10 years, [HR = 0.71, 95% CI (0.57; 0.89), P = 0.002]; OS was 93% versus 92% at 5 years and 80% versus 78% at 10 years [HR 0.88, 95% CI (0.65; 1.21), P = 0.43]. Among 526 patients with high-risk GIST by local pathology, 10-year IFFS and RFS were 69% versus 61%, and 48% versus 43%, respectively.Conclusions: With 9.1 years of follow-up, a trend toward better long-term IFFS in imatinib-treated patients was observed in the high-risk subgroup. Although the difference was not statistically significant and the surrogacy value of such an endpoint is not validated, this may be seen as supporting the results reported by the Scandinavian/German trial, showing a sustained small but significant long-term OS benefit in high-risk GIST patients treated with 3 years of adjuvant imatinib. 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
IMPORTANCE The association between quality of surgery and overall survival in patients affected by localized gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) is not completely understood.OBJECTIVE To assess... Show moreIMPORTANCE The association between quality of surgery and overall survival in patients affected by localized gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) is not completely understood.OBJECTIVE To assess the risk of death with and without imatinib according to microscopic margins status (R0/R1) using data from a randomized study on adjuvant imatinib.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This is a post hoc observational study on patients included in the randomized, open-label, phase III trial, performed between December 2004 and October 2008. Median follow-up was 9.1 years (IQR, 8-10 years). The study was performed at 112 hospitals in 12 countries. Inclusion criteria were diagnosis of primary GIST, with intermediate or high risk of relapse; no evidence of residual disease after surgery; older than 18 years; and no prior malignancies or concurrent severe/uncontrolled medical conditions. Data were analyzed between July17, 2017, and March 1, 2020.INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized after surgery to either receive imatinib (400 mg/d) for 2 years or no adjuvant treatment. Randomization was stratified by center, risk category (high vs intermediate), tumor site (gastric vs other), and quality of surgery (R0 vs R1). Tumor rupture was included in the R1 category but also analyzed separately.MAN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary end point of this substudy was overall survival (OS), estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and compared between R0/R1 using Cox models adjusted for treatment and stratification factors.RESULTS A total of 908 patients were included; 51.4% were men (465) and 48.6% were women (440), and the median age was 59 years (range, 18-89 years). One hundred sixty-two (17.8%) had an R1 resection, and 97 of 162 (59.9%) had tumor rupture. There was a significant difference in OS for patients undergoing an R1 vs R0 resection, overall (hazard ratio [HR], 2.05; 95% CI, 1.45-2.89) and by treatment arm (HR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.37-3.75 with adjuvant imatinib and HR. 1.86; 95% CI, 1.16-2.99 without adjuvant imatinib). When tumor rupture was excluded, this difference in OS between R1 and R0 resections disappeared (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.54-2.01).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The difference in OS by quality of surgery with or without imatinib was associated with the presence of tumor rupture. When the latter was excluded, the presence of R1 margins was not associated with worse OS. Show less
Cesne, A. le; Bauer, S.; Demetri, G.D.; Han, G.Y.; Dezzani, L.; Ahmad, Q.; ... ; Gelderblom, H. 2019
Background PALETTE is a phase 3 trial that demonstrated single-agent activity of pazopanib in advanced soft tissue sarcomas (aSTS). We performed retrospective subgroup analyses to explore potential... Show moreBackground PALETTE is a phase 3 trial that demonstrated single-agent activity of pazopanib in advanced soft tissue sarcomas (aSTS). We performed retrospective subgroup analyses to explore potential relationships between patient characteristics, prior lines of therapy, dose intensity, and dose modifications on safety and efficacy of pazopanib in aSTS. Methods PALETTE compared pazopanib with placebo in patients with aSTS (age >= 18 years) whose disease had progressed during or following prior chemotherapy. In these subgroup analyses, median progression-free survival (mPFS) among patients receiving pazopanib was the efficacy outcome of interest. Adverse events (AEs) were also compared within subgroups. All analyses were descriptive and exploratory. Results A total of 246 patients received pazopanib in the PALETTE study. The mPFS was longer in patients who had only 1 prior line versus 2+ prior lines of therapy (24.7 vs 18.9 weeks, respectively); AE rates were similar regardless of number of prior lines of therapy. The mPFS was similar in patients aged < 65 and >= 65 y (20.0 and 20.1 weeks, respectively). Although AEs leading to study discontinuation were higher in older patients (>= 65 y, 30%; < 65 y, 17%), rates of dose reductions, dose interruptions, and serious AEs were similar between the 2 age groups. No reduction in mPFS was noted in patients requiring dose reductions or dose interruptions to manage toxicities. Conclusions Longer mPFS was observed in patients receiving pazopanib following only 1 line of therapy. Additionally, mPFS with pazopanib was maintained regardless of patient age or dose modifications used to manage toxicity. Show less
Background Pathological complete response to preoperative treatment in adults with soft-tissue sarcoma can be achieved in only a few patients receiving radiotherapy. This phase 2-3 trial evaluated... Show moreBackground Pathological complete response to preoperative treatment in adults with soft-tissue sarcoma can be achieved in only a few patients receiving radiotherapy. This phase 2-3 trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of the hafnium oxide (HfO2) nanoparticle NBTXR3 activated by radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone as a pre-operative treatment in patients with locally advanced soft-tissue sarcoma.Methods Act. In. Sarc is a phase 2-3 randomised, multicentre, international trial. Adults (aged = 18 years) with locally advanced soft-tissue sarcoma of the extremity or trunk wall, of any histological grade, and requiring preoperative radiotherapy were included. Patients had to have a WHO performance status of 0-2 and a life expectancy of at least 6 months. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web response system to receive either NBTXR3 (volume corresponding to 10% of baseline tumour volume at a fixed concentration of 53.3 g/L) as a single intratumoural administration before preoperative external-beam radiotherapy (50 Gy in 25 fractions) or radiotherapy alone, followed by surgery. Randomisation was stratified by histological subtype (myxoid liposarcoma vs others). This was an open-label study. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a pathological complete response, assessed by a central pathology review board following European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer guidelines in the intention-to-treat population full analysis set. Safety analyses were done in all patients who received at least one puncture and injection of NBTXR3 or at least one dose of radiotherapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02379845, and is ongoing for long-term follow-up, but recruitment is complete.Findings Between March 3, 2015, and Nov 21, 2017, 180 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned and 179 started treatment: 89 in the NBTXR3 plus radiotherapy group and 90 in the radiotherapy alone group. Two patients in the NBTXR3 group and one patient in the radiotherapy group were excluded from the efficacy analysis because they were subsequently discovered to be ineligible; thus, a total of 176 patients were analysed for the primary endpoint in the intention-to-treat full analysis set (87 in the NBTXR3 group and 89 in the radiotherapy alone group). A pathological complete response was noted in 14 (16%) of 87 patients in the NBTXR3 group and seven (8%) of 89 in the radiotherapy alone group (p=0.044). In both treatment groups, the most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse event was postoperative wound complication (eight [9%] of 89 patients in the NBTXR3 group and eight [9%] of 90 in the radiotherapy alone group). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events related to NBTXR3 administration were injection site pain (four [4%] of 89) and hypotension (four [4%]) and the most common grade 3-4 radiotherapy-related adverse event was radiation skin injury in both groups (five [6%] of 89 in the NBTXR3 group and four [4%] of 90 in the radiotherapy alone group). The most common treatment-emergent grade 3-4 adverse event related to NBTXR3 was hypotension (six [7%] of 89 patients). Serious adverse events were observed in 35 (39%) of 89 patients in the NBTXR3 group and 27 (30%) of 90 patients in the radiotherapy alone group. No treatment-related deaths occurred.Interpretation This trial validates the mode of action of this new class of radioenhancer, which potentially opens a large field of clinical applications in soft-tissue sarcoma and possibly other cancers. Copyright (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Show less
Background The current study investigated the role of radiotherapy (RT) in patients with primary nonmetastatic retroperitoneal liposarcomas. Methods A total of 607 patients with localized... Show moreBackground The current study investigated the role of radiotherapy (RT) in patients with primary nonmetastatic retroperitoneal liposarcomas. Methods A total of 607 patients with localized retroperitoneal well-differentiated liposarcomas (WDLPS) and dedifferentiated liposarcomas (DDLPS) underwent surgical resection with or without RT at 8 high-volume sarcoma centers (234 patients with WDLPS, 242 patients with grade 1 to 2 DDLPS, and 131 patients with grade 3 DDLPS; grading was performed according to the National Federation of Centers for the Fight Against Cancer [Federation Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer; FNCLCC]). RT was administered in 19.7%, 34.7%, and 35.1%, respectively, of these 3 cohorts. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the incidences of local recurrence and distant metastasis (DM) were estimated in a competing risk framework. To account for bias consistent with nonrandom RT assignment, propensity scores were estimated. Cox univariable analysis of the association between RT and oncological endpoints was performed by applying inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using propensity scores. Results Age, tumor size, and the administration of chemotherapy were found to be significantly imbalanced between patients who did and did not undergo RT in all cohorts. IPTW largely removed imbalances in key prognostic variables. Although the 8-year local recurrence incidences in patients treated with surgery plus RT versus surgery only were 11.8% and 39.2%, respectively, for patients with WDLPS (P = .011;); 29.0% and 56.7%, respectively, for patients with grade 1 to 2 DDLPS (P = .008); and 29.8% and 43.7%, respectively, for patients with grade 3 DDLPS (P = .025), this significant benefit was lost after IPTW analyses. There were no significant differences noted with regard to DM and OS between irradiated and unirradiated patients across all 3 cohorts. Conclusions Perioperative RT was found to be associated with better local control in univariable unadjusted analysis in all 3 cohorts, but not after accounting for imbalances in prognostic variables. RT did not impact on DM or OS. The appropriate selection of RT in this disease remains challenging. The results of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)-Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (STBSG) 62092-22092 prospective randomized trial are awaited. Show less
