Onset and resolution of ovarian toxicity with nirogacestat treatment in females with desmoid tumors: Updated safety analyses from the DeFi phase 3 study.

INTRODUCTION: Nirogacestat is a targeted gamma secretase inhibitor approved in the United States for adults with progressing desmoid tumors. In the phase 3 DeFi study (NCT03785964) of nirogacestat, ovarian toxicity (OT) was identified as a safety signal among females of reproductive potential (FORP). This analysis further describes the incidence, presentation, and resolution of OT. METHODS: Patients were randomized to twice-daily oral nirogacestat (150 mg) or placebo, taken in continuous 28-day cycles. Investigator-identified OT in FORP was based on abnormal reproductive hormone values or perimenopausal symptoms (or both). Adverse event follow-up was conducted to assess OT resolution. Post hoc analyses included return of menstruation and return of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) to within normal limits (WNL) (≤20.4 mIU/mL). RESULTS: Of 92 randomized females, 73 in the safety population were FORP (n = 36 nirogacestat, n = 37 placebo). OT was identified in 75% (27 of 36) receiving nirogacestat and 0% (0 of 37) receiving placebo. As of October 24, 2022, investigators reported OT resolution in 78% (21 of 27) of patients, with median OT duration of 19.1 weeks. Off-treatment resolution was reported in all 11 patients (100%) who stopped nirogacestat treatment; of these, all nine with available menstruation information experienced return of menstruation and eight had FSH WNL at last reported assessment. Resolution was reported in 10 of 14 (71%) while on nirogacestat; of these, all 10 experienced return of menstruation and seven had FSH WNL. Two patients were lost to follow-up. CONCLUSION: Most FORP treated with nirogacestat experienced OT, with the majority resolving, including all who stopped treatment, suggesting that OT is transient.

Phase II Trial of nab-Sirolimus in Patients With Advanced Malignant Perivascular Epithelioid Cell Tumors (AMPECT): Long-Term Efficacy and Safety Update.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.nab-Sirolimus is approved in the United States for the treatment of metastatic or locally advanced malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) on the basis of the primary analysis results of the phase II Advanced Malignant Perivascular Epithelioid Cell Tumors (AMPECT) trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02494570). Results from the primary analysis were previously published; however, the median duration of response (mDOR) had not been reached at that time. Here, 3 years after the primary analysis, we report final efficacy and safety data (data cutoff: April 29, 2022). At study completion, the confirmed overall response rate (by independent radiologist review using RECIST v1.1) was 38.7% (95% CI, 21.8 to 57.8), with an additional converted confirmed complete response (n = 2). Median progression-free survival remained the same at 10.6 months (95% CI, 5.5 to 41.2). The mDOR was reached at 39.7 months (95% CI, 6.5 to not reached [NR]), and the median overall survival at completion was 53.1 months (95% CI, 22.2 to NR). The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were stomatitis (82.4%) and fatigue and rash (each 61.8%). No new or unexpected adverse events occurred, and no grade ≥4 TRAEs were reported. These results highlight the long-term clinical benefit of nab-sirolimus in patients with advanced malignant PEComa, with a DOR of >3 years.

Differentiating gender-based reproductive concerns among adolescent and young adult cancer patients: A mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Few studies have examined the distinct reproductive concerns (RC) of men and women in the adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patient population. The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to explore and differentiate the RC of AYAs. METHODS: Participants completed the Reproductive Concerns After Cancer (RCAC) scale and participated in a semistructured interview. Interviews were deductively coded based on an analytic schema derived from the RCAC. RESULTS: After identifying participants through the electronic health record, 27 younger AYAs, ages 12-25, enrolled in the study. Four inductive themes emerged and differed by gender. These include differential temporality, acceptance, and openness to alternatives, partner influence, and parental/guardian influence. AYA men reported fewer RC (M = 49.4, SD = 9.6) compared to AYA women (M = 56.8, SD = 8.4). CONCLUSIONS: Oncofertility care providers are advised to account for short- and long-ranging concerns based on AYAs' gender. Future evaluations of patient-reported outcome measures specific to AYA RC are recommended.

Disparate Outcomes, Biologic and Therapeutic Differences in Pediatric versus Adult Patients with Ewing Sarcoma.

INTRODUCTION: Ewing sarcoma (ES) is a small blue round cell sarcoma affecting a wide age spectrum. Clinical advances predominately stem from pediatric research consortia clinical trials. In most series, adults have poorer outcomes when compared to children. The aim of this study was to perform a detailed evaluation of factors potentially accounting for this difference. METHODS: A single institution retrospective chart review was conducted on patients with ES diagnosed from 2005 to 2015, identified using a free-text search engine with the keywords "Ewing sarcoma" as well as a corresponding pathologic database. Data were analyzed based on age, pediatric (age <18) and adult (age >18 years), using a multivariate analysis model. RESULTS: Eighty-eight ES patients (34 pediatric, 54 adult) were identified with a median age of 13 (range 3-18) and 31 (range 19-70) in their respective cohorts. Five-year overall survival (OS) was higher in pediatric patients (73.5% vs. 48.1%, p = 0.0213). By stage, 5-year OS in pediatric versus adult patients was 65% versus 20% (p = 0.0530) in metastatic (n = 32) and 68.1% versus 58.8% (p = 0.278) in localized (n = 56) patients. Lung-only metastases were present in 83% of metastatic pediatric patients versus 35% of adult metastatic patients. Pediatric patients received more cycles of first-line chemotherapy (13.8 vs. 11.4, p = 0.001), independent of stage. More cycles of chemotherapy correlated with improved OS (HR: 0.864, CI: 0.773-0.967) and progression-free survival (HR: 0.897, CI: 0.808-0.996). CONCLUSIONS: Outcome differences were most notable in patients with metastatic disease, although not statistically significant. Our series found differences in presentation between pediatric and adult populations with adult patients receiving fewer cycles of chemotherapy. This may suggest that both variations in underlying disease biology and potentially differences in treatment may account for outcome disparities.

Body image disturbances in adolescent and young adult cancer patients confronting infertility risk and fertility preservation decisions.

PURPOSE: Body image is a major psychosocial concern for all cancer patients but can affect the adolescent and young adult (AYA) population in distinct ways. Similarly, the prospect of infertility and the fertility preservation process can create additional stress during cancer treatment. Discussions regarding infertility inherently implicate the body and its reproductive function, but downstream effects on self-perception have not been previously described. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of AYAs as they considered their risk of infertility and options for fertility preservation (FP), specifically the ways in which this impacted body image and FP decision-making. METHODS: AYA cancer patients (n = 27) aged 12-25 years whose cancer and treatment conferred risk of infertility were recruited through electronic health record query at an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Participants completed semi-structured interviews, which were recorded, transcribed, and deductively coded for themes related to information needs, knowledge of treatment effects on fertility, and reproductive concerns after cancer. Emergent, inductive themes related to body image were identified. RESULTS: Body image concerns, related to both physical appearance and body functioning emerged. Common concerns included anticipating change as it pertains to the body and its functions, physical discomfort, fear of judgment, and meeting expectations of the body. While these themes are broad in nature, they have been previously explored in relation to body image in general and their emergence in the oncofertility space provides guidance for further optimization of infertility and fertility preservation discussions. CONCLUSIONS: AYA cancer patients experience a multitude of body image related disturbances when faced with the possibility of infertility and fertility preservation. In identifying and exploring these themes, future opportunities for improving oncofertility practice and discussions among AYAs with a focus on body image positivity are called upon.

Universal Viral Screening of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Cancer in the United States: A Cost-efficiency Evaluation.

Recommendations for universal screening of patients with cancer for hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are inconsistent. A recent multisite screening study (S1204) from the SWOG Cancer Research Network found that a substantial number of patients with newly diagnosed cancer had previously unknown viral infections. The objective of this study was to determine the cost-efficiency of universal screening of patients with newly diagnosed cancer. We estimated the cost-efficiency of universal screening of new cancer cases for HBV, HCV, or HIV, expressed as cost per virus detected, from the health care payer perspective. The prevalence of each virus among this cohort was derived from S1204. Direct medical expenditures included costs associated with laboratory screening tests. Costs per case detected were estimated for each screening strategy. Secondary analysis examined the cost-efficiency of screening patients whose viral status at cancer diagnosis was unknown. Among the possible options for universal screening, screening for HBV alone ($581), HCV alone ($782), HBV and HCV ($631) and HBV, HCV, and HIV ($841) were most efficient in terms of cost per case detected. When screening was restricted to patients with unknown viral status, screening for HBV alone ($684), HBV and HCV ($872), HBV and HIV ($1,157), and all three viruses ($1,291) were most efficient in terms of cost per newly detected case. Efficient viral testing strategies represent a relatively modest addition to the overall cost of managing a patient with cancer. Screening for HBV, HCV, and HIV infections may be reasonable from both a budget and clinical standpoint. SIGNIFICANCE: Screening patients with cancer for HBV, HCV, and HIV is inconsistent in clinical practice despite national recommendations and known risks of complications from viral infection. Our study shows that while costs of viral screening strategies vary by choice of tests, they present a modest addition to the cost of managing a patient with cancer.

Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Oncology, Version 2.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Oncology focuses on considerations for the comprehensive care of AYA patients with cancer. Compared with older adults with cancer, AYA patients have unique needs regarding treatment, fertility counseling, psychosocial and behavioral issues, and supportive care services. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Oncology addresses additional aspects of caring for AYA patients, including risk factors, screening, diagnosis, and survivorship.

Consensus recommendations in the management of Ewing sarcoma from the National Ewing Sarcoma Tumor Board.

Ewing sarcoma (ES) is a malignant tumor of bone and soft tissue that most often occurs in adolescents and young adults. Despite an international coordinated approach, several nuances, discrepancies, and debates remain in defining the standard of care for treating ES. In this review, the authors leverage the expertise assembled by formation of the National Ewing Sarcoma Tumor Board, a multi-institution, multidisciplinary virtual tumor board that meets monthly to discuss complicated and challenging cases of ES. This report is focused on select topics that apply to the management of patients with newly diagnosed ES. The specific topics covered include indications for bone marrow aspirate and biopsy for initial evaluation compared with fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography, the role of interval compressed chemotherapy in patients aged 18 years and older, the role of adding ifosfamide/etoposide to vincristine/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide for patients with metastatic disease, the data on and role of high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation, maintenance therapy, and whole-lung irradiation. The data referenced are often limited to subgroup analyses and/or compiled from multiple sources. Although not intended to replace the clinical judgement of treating physicians, the guidelines are intended to provide clarity and recommendations for the upfront management of patients with ES. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Ewing sarcoma is a malignant tumor of bone and soft tissue that most often occurs in adolescents and young adults. For this review, the authors used the experience of the National Ewing Sarcoma Tumor Board, a multi-institution, multidisciplinary virtual tumor board that meets monthly to discuss complicated and challenging cases of Ewing sarcoma. Although not intended to replace the clinical judgement of treating physicians, the guidelines will focus on the development of consensus statements for the upfront management of patients with Ewing sarcoma.

Nirogacestat, a γ-Secretase Inhibitor for Desmoid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Desmoid tumors are rare, locally aggressive, highly recurrent soft-tissue tumors without approved treatments. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, international, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of nirogacestat in adults with progressing desmoid tumors according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive the oral γ-secretase inhibitor nirogacestat (150 mg) or placebo twice daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: From May 2019 through August 2020, a total of 70 patients were assigned to receive nirogacestat and 72 to receive placebo. Nirogacestat had a significant progression-free survival benefit over placebo (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.15 to 0.55; P<0.001); the likelihood of being event-free at 2 years was 76% with nirogacestat and 44% with placebo. Between-group differences in progression-free survival were consistent across prespecified subgroups. The percentage of patients who had an objective response was significantly higher with nirogacestat than with placebo (41% vs. 8%; P<0.001), with a median time to response of 5.6 months and 11.1 months, respectively; the percentage of patients with a complete response was 7% and 0%, respectively. Significant between-group differences in secondary patient-reported outcomes, including pain, symptom burden, physical or role functioning, and health-related quality of life, were observed (P≤0.01). Frequent adverse events with nirogacestat included diarrhea (in 84% of the patients), nausea (in 54%), fatigue (in 51%), hypophosphatemia (in 42%), and maculopapular rash (in 32%); 95% of adverse events were of grade 1 or 2. Among women of childbearing potential receiving nirogacestat, 27 of 36 (75%) had adverse events consistent with ovarian dysfunction, which resolved in 20 women (74%). CONCLUSIONS: Nirogacestat was associated with significant benefits with respect to progression-free survival, objective response, pain, symptom burden, physical functioning, role functioning, and health-related quality of life in adults with progressing desmoid tumors. Adverse events with nirogacestat were frequent but mostly low grade. (Funded by SpringWorks Therapeutics; DeFi ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03785964.).

Outcome of Patients With Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumors Enrolled on Sarcoma Alliance for Research Through Collaboration (SARC) Phase II Trials.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of prior phase II trials for malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST) may help develop more suitable trial endpoints in future studies. METHODS: We analyzed outcomes of patients with recurrent or unresectable/metastatic MPNST enrolled on prior Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration (SARC) phase II trials and estimated the progression-free survival (PFS). PFS from SARC006 (NCT00304083), the phase II trial of upfront chemotherapy in chemotherapy naïve patients, was analyzed separately. Impact of baseline enrollment characteristics on PFS was evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients (29 male, 35 female, median age 39 years (range 15-81)) with MPNST were enrolled on 1 of 5 trials of single agent or combination therapy that were determined to be inactive. Patients had received a median of 1 (range 0-5) prior systemic therapy, and most had undergone prior surgery (77%) and radiation (61%). Seventy-three percent had metastatic disease at enrollment. Median PFS was 1.77 months (95% CI, 1.61-3.45), and the PFS rate at 4 months was 15%. Greater number of prior systemic therapies and worse performance status were associated with inferior PFS. There was no significant difference in PFS based on age at enrollment, treatment trial, response criteria, presence of metastatic disease, disease site at enrollment, and prior surgery or radiation. In comparison, on the SARC006 trial the PFS rate at 4 months was 94% in 40 patients. CONCLUSION: These data provide a historical baseline PFS that may be used as a comparator in future clinical trials for patients with MPNST.

Banking on Fertility Preservation: Financial Concern for Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Patients Considering Oncofertility Services.

Purpose: Financial concern is a major issue for adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients. Furthermore, unaddressed oncofertility challenges (e.g., infertility) are linked to psychological distress and decreased overall quality of life. Little is known about how financial concern in terms of oncofertility (i.e., concern regarding affording fertility preservation [FP] services) impacts AYAs' decision making and experiences. Methods: AYA cancer patients (n = 27) aged 12-25 years whose cancer treatment conferred risk of infertility were recruited through electronic health record query. Participants completed semi-structured interviews, which were recorded, transcribed, and deductively coded for themes related to information needs, knowledge of treatment effects on fertility, and reproductive concerns after cancer. Emergent, inductive themes related to financial concern were identified. The Institutional Review Board at the University of Michigan approved this study (HUM#00157267). Results: Financial concern was a dominant theme across the qualitative data. Emergent themes included (1) varied access to health insurance, (2) presence of parental/guardian support, (3) reliance upon financial aid, (4) negotiating infertility risk, and (5) lack of preparation for long-term costs. AYAs relied heavily upon parents for out-of-pocket and insurance coverage support. Some participants sought financial aid when guided by providers. Several participants indicated that no financial support existed for their circumstance. Conclusions: Financial consequences in terms of oncofertility are a major issue affecting AYA cancer patients. The incidence and gravity of financial concern surrounding affording oncofertility services merits attention in future research (measuring financial resources of AYAs' parental/support networks), clinical practice (strategically addressing short- and long-term costs; tailored psychosocial support), and health care policy (promoting legislation to mandate pre- and post-treatment FP coverage).

Antiviral therapy use and related outcomes in patients with cancer and viral infections: results from SWOG S1204.

PURPOSE: Information is limited about adherence to practice guidelines in patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), or HIV infection receiving anticancer treatment. METHODS: Newly diagnosed adult cancer patients were enrolled in a multicenter, prospective cohort study (SWOG S1204) during 2013-2017 to evaluate the prevalence of HBV, HCV, or HIV in patients initiating anticancer treatment. At 6 months, records of virus-positive patients were reviewed for antiviral therapy use; anticancer treatment dose reduction; and HBV reactivation (elevated viral load). Categorical variables were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Of 3055 enrolled patients with viral testing, 230 had chronic or past HBV, HCV, or HIV with 6-month follow-up data (chronic HBV, 15 patients; past HBV, 158; HCV, 49; HIV, 30). Twenty percent (3/15) of chronic HBV and 11% (17/158) of past HBV patients were co-infected with HCV and/or HIV. Rates of antiviral therapy use by 6 months were as follows: chronic HBV, 85% (11/13); past HBV receiving anti-B cell therapy, 60% (3/5); past HBV receiving systemic anticancer therapy without anti-B cell therapy, 8% (8/105); HCV, 6% (2/35); and HIV, 90% (19/21). Among patients with available data, anticancer treatment dose was reduced in 1 of 145 patients with past HBV and 1 of 42 with HCV. HBV reactivation occurred in 1 of 15 patients with chronic HBV; this patient was not receiving antiviral therapy. CONCLUSION: Many patients with cancer and viral infections either do not receive guideline-recommended antiviral treatment or receive antiviral treatment that is not recommended in guidelines. Further education is needed to improve adherence to guidelines.

A randomised phase II trial of a trivalent ganglioside vaccine targeting GM2, GD2 and GD3 combined with immunological adjuvant OPT-821 versus OPT-821 alone in metastatic sarcoma patients rendered disease-free by surgery.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence after resection of metastatic sarcoma is common. The gangliosides GM2, GD2 and GD3 are strongly expressed across sarcoma subtypes. We hypothesised that generation of anti-ganglioside antibodies would control micrometastases and improve outcomes in sarcoma patients who were disease-free after metastasectomy. METHODS: We conducted a randomised phase II trial of the immunological adjuvant OPT-821 with a KLH-conjugated ganglioside vaccine targeting GM2, GD2 and GD3, versus OPT-821 alone in patients with metastatic sarcoma following complete metastasectomy. Patients received 10 subcutaneous injections at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 8, 16, 28, 40, 52, 68 and 84 and were followed for evidence of recurrent disease. The primary end-point was relapse-free survival. Secondary end-points included overall survival and serologic response. RESULTS: A total of 136 patients were randomised, 68 to each arm. The mean age was 51.2, 52.2% were male, 90.4% had relapsed disease, 86.8% had high-grade tumours and 14% had ≥4 metastases resected. Histologies included leiomyosarcoma (33%), spindle cell sarcoma (14%), undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (13%), osteosarcoma (10%), synovial sarcoma (9%), liposarcoma (9%) and others (12%). Most adverse events were Grade ≤2 (83.8% and 70.6% in the vaccine and adjuvant arms, respectively). The most common (≥20% of patients) were injection site reaction (89.7%), fatigue (44.1%) and pyrexia (27.9%) on the vaccine arm, and injection site reaction (69.1%) on the adjuvant only arm. The 1-year relapse-free survival rate (34.5% and 34.8% in the vaccine and OPT-821 monotherapy arm, respectively) did not differ between arms (P = 0.725). One-year overall survival rates were 93.1% and 91.5% in the vaccine and OPT-821 monotherapy arm, respectively (P = 0.578). Serologic responses at week 9 were more frequent on the vaccine arm (96.5% of patients) than in the adjuvant arm (32.8%), and the difference between groups was durable. CONCLUSIONS: A sustained serologic response to vaccination was induced with the vaccine, but no difference in recurrence-free or overall survival was observed between treatment arms. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT01141491.

Demographics, Outcomes, and Risk Factors for Patients with Sarcoma and COVID-19: A CCC19-Registry Based Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with sarcoma often require individualized treatment strategies and are likely to receive aggressive immunosuppressive therapies, which may place them at higher risk for severe COVID-19. We aimed to describe demographics, risk factors, and outcomes for patients with sarcoma and COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with sarcoma and COVID-19 reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry (NCT04354701) from 17 March 2020 to 30 September 2021. Demographics, sarcoma histologic type, treatments, and COVID-19 outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: of 281 patients, 49% (n = 139) were hospitalized, 33% (n = 93) received supplemental oxygen, 11% (n = 31) were admitted to the ICU, and 6% (n = 16) received mechanical ventilation. A total of 23 (8%) died within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis and 44 (16%) died overall at the time of analysis. When evaluated by sarcoma subtype, patients with bone sarcoma and COVID-19 had a higher mortality rate than patients from a matched SEER cohort (13.5% vs 4.4%). Older age, poor performance status, recent systemic anti-cancer therapy, and lung metastases all contributed to higher COVID-19 severity. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sarcoma have high rates of severe COVID-19 and those with bone sarcoma may have the greatest risk of death.

Surgical Management of Rhabdomyosarcoma of the Nasal Cavity and Paranasal Sinuses: Analysis of Operative Indications, Settings, and Outcomes.

Objectives The role of surgery in management of sinonasal rhabdomyosarcoma (SNRMS) has traditionally been limited, owing to anatomic and technological challenges and the established role of systemic therapy. Herein, we report our institutional experience with surgical management of SNRMS, with a particular focus on operative approaches, extent and outcomes. Design This study is a retrospective cohort study. Setting This study was conducted at a single-institution, academic center. Participants Patients of any age with histologically confirmed RMS of the nasal cavity, maxillary, ethmoid, frontal, or sphenoid sinus, nasolacrimal duct, or nasopharynx presenting between 1994 and 2020 were included in this study. Main Outcome Measures Demographics, tumor characteristics, operative settings, complications and recurrence, and survival outcomes were the primary outcomes of this study. Results Our study cohort comprised of 29 patients (mean [range] age: 27.0 [3.1-65.7], n = 12 [41%] female). Tumors of the nasal cavity ( n = 10, 35%) and ethmoid sinuses ( n = 10, 35%) and those with alveolar histology ( n = 21, 72%) predominated. Patients who had surgery as part of their treatment ( n = 13, 45%) had improved distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) overall (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.98, p = 0 .05 ) as compared with those who did not have surgery. Surgical approaches included open ( n = 7), endoscopic ( n = 4), and combined ( n = 2). Eight of these 13 patients (62%) had an R0 resection. Additionally, surgical salvage of recurrent disease was employed in five patients (17%). Conclusion SNRMS is an aggressive malignancy with a high rate of recurrence and spread requiring a multidisciplinary approach for optimal outcomes. Our data supports an expanding role for surgery for SNRMS given its feasibility, tolerability, and potential to improve outcomes.

Clinical genomic profiling in the management of patients with soft tissue and bone sarcoma.

There are more than 70 distinct sarcomas, and this diversity complicates the development of precision-based therapeutics for these cancers. Prospective comprehensive genomic profiling could overcome this challenge by providing insight into sarcomas' molecular drivers. Through targeted panel sequencing of 7494 sarcomas representing 44 histologies, we identify highly recurrent and type-specific alterations that aid in diagnosis and treatment decisions. Sequencing could lead to refinement or reassignment of 10.5% of diagnoses. Nearly one-third of patients (31.7%) harbor potentially actionable alterations, including a significant proportion (2.6%) with kinase gene rearrangements; 3.9% have a tumor mutational burden ≥10 mut/Mb. We describe low frequencies of microsatellite instability (<0.3%) and a high degree of genome-wide loss of heterozygosity (15%) across sarcomas, which are not readily explained by homologous recombination deficiency (observed in 2.5% of cases). In a clinically annotated subset of 118 patients, we validate actionable genetic events as therapeutic targets. Collectively, our findings reveal the genetic landscape of human sarcomas, which may inform future development of therapeutics and improve clinical outcomes for patients with these rare cancers.

Giant Cell Tumor of Bone: Effect of Longer Dosing Intervals of Denosumab on Tumor Control and Bone-related Complications.

BACKGROUND: Denosumab is an effective treatment for giant cell tumor of the bone (GCTB) but can cause clinically significant adverse effects. Current approved dosing is every 4 weeks after 3 weekly loading doses. We assessed whether alternative, longer dosing intervals are associated with differences in efficacy or bone toxicity. METHODS: Single institution retrospective chart review was conducted on patients with GCTB over 18 years old who received at least 1 year of standard denosumab dosing. Patients identified using a free-text search engine with keywords "giant cell tumor" and "denosumab" from January 1998 to August 2020. RESULTS: Approximately 37 patients with GCTB (19F, 18M) were identified with median age of 37 years (range 22-73). Dosing interval was increased in 38% (n = 14), with the most common final dosing interval 12 weeks (n = 8). Six patients (16%) had bone complications: osteonecrosis of the jaw (n =5), atypical fracture (n = 1), and nonhealing dental wounds (n = 2). All patients with bone complications were on the monthly dosing schedule, but there was no statistically significant difference compared to longer dosing intervals (P = .22). No statistically significant difference in median PFS was noted (P = .97). However, 5-year PFS was superior in patients treated with less frequent versus standard dosing of denosumab (P = .036). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the interval of denosumab dosing for GCTB provided similar tumor control compared to standard dosing and lower absolute number of bone toxicity events. Larger studies are needed to better define the optimal interval of denosumab administration and the effect on efficacy, toxicity, and associated healthcare expense.

Factors associated with disease-free and abdominal recurrence-free survival in abdominopelvic and retroperitoneal sarcomas.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Retroperitoneal and abdominopelvic sarcomas are rare heterogeneous malignancies. The only therapy proven to improve disease-free survival (DFS) is R0/R1 surgical resection. We sought to analyze whether additional factors such as radiation and systemic therapy were associated with DFS and abdominal recurrence-free survival (RFS). METHODS: Retrospective review of adults (≥18) with resectable abdominopelvic and retroperitoneal sarcomas who underwent intent-to-cure surgery at a high-volume tertiary referral center between 1998 and 2015. The main outcome measures were DFS and abdominal RFS. RESULTS: Overall, 159 patients met the criteria for inclusion. Median follow-up was 4.8 years (range 0.1-18.9 years). The most common histology was liposarcoma (49%). Systemic therapy was administered to 48% of patients and was not associated with improved outcomes. The neoadjuvant radiotherapy group (11%) had improved adjusted DFS (5.46 years, 95% CI [3.68, 7.24] vs. 3.1 years, 95% CI [2.48, 3.73]) and abdominal RFS (6.14 years, 95% CI [4.38, 7.89] vs. 3.22 years, 95% CI [2.61, 3.84]). The adjuvant radiotherapy group (19%) had no improvement. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of patients undergoing resection for retroperitoneal or abdominopelvic sarcoma, neoadjuvant radiation improved DFS and abdominal RFS. A follow-up of over three years was needed to appreciate a difference in outcomes.

A Multicenter Phase II Trial of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab in Unresectable or Metastatic Metaplastic Breast Cancer: Cohort 36 of Dual Anti-CTLA-4 and Anti-PD-1 Blockade in Rare Tumors (DART, SWOG S1609).

PURPOSE: Metaplastic breast cancer (MpBC) is a rare aggressive subtype that responds poorly to cytotoxics. Median survival is approximately 8 months for metastatic disease. We report results for advanced MpBC treated with ipilimumab + nivolumab, a cohort of S1609 for rare cancers (DART: NCT02834013). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective, open-label, multicenter phase II (two-stage) trial of ipilimumab (1 mg/kg i.v. every 6 weeks) plus nivolumab (240 mg i.v. every 2 weeks) for advanced MpBC. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. RESULTS: Overall, 17 evaluable patients enrolled. Median age was 60 years (26-85); median number of prior therapy lines was 2 (0-5). ORR was 18%; 3 of 17 patients achieved objective responses (1 complete, 2 partial responses; 2 spindle cell, 1 chondromyxoid histology), which are ongoing at 28+, 33+, and 34+ months, respectively. Median PFS and OS were 2 and 12 months, respectively. Altogether, 11 patients (65%) experienced adverse events (AE), including one grade 5 AE. Eight patients (47%) developed an immune-related AE (irAE), with adrenal insufficiency observed in all 3 responders. Responses occurred in tumors with low tumor mutational burden, low PD-L1, and absent tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. CONCLUSIONS: The ipilimumab and nivolumab combination showed no new safety signals and met its primary endpoint with 18% ORR in advanced, chemotherapy-refractory MpBC. All responses are ongoing at >2 to almost 3 years later. The effect of ipilimumab and nivolumab was associated with exceptional responses in a subset of patients versus no activity. This combination warrants further investigation in MpBC, with special attention to understanding mechanism of action, and carefully designed to weigh against the significant risks of irAEs.