Systemic therapies in advanced epithelioid haemangioendothelioma: A retrospective international case series from the World Sarcoma Network and a review of literature.

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 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-α 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.

Management of complicated tumor response to tyrosine-kinase inhibitors in gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to describe complicated tumor response (CTR) to tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI) in gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) patients. METHODS: From 2001 to 2017, data from patients with metastatic (group A) or locally advanced (group B) GIST who received TKI at our institution were collected. We defined CTR as bleeding, abscess, or perforation as surgical complications of TKI. Patients who had progressive disease were excluded. Clinical characteristics were assessed, and time of occurrence and mortality rate recorded. RESULTS: Among 470 patients, 30 developed CTR (6.4%), 26 in group A (6.8%) and four in group B (4.5%) (P = 0.43). Bleeding, abscess, and perforation, respectively, were observed in 17 (56.7%), 8 (26.7%), and 5 (16.7%) patients. A conservative approach was possible in 17 (56.7%) cases; four (13.3%) patients received percutaneous drainage, while nine (30%) underwent emergency surgery. The overall rate of mortality was 13.3%. CTR occurred after 1.6 months (median time) from the imatinib mesylate onset in group B and 14 months in group A. CONCLUSIONS: While the risk of CTR in early metastatic patients is virtually nil, patients with locally advanced disease should be monitored carefully. CTR as a consequence of TKI therapy do not prevent patients receiving a potentially curative surgery.

Prolonged activity and toxicity of sirolimus in a patient with metastatic renal perivascular epithelioid cell tumor: a case report and literature review.

Perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) is a family of mesenchymal tumors. Conventional chemotherapy has little activity in this disease, but case reports are available on the activity of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (e.g. sirolimus and temsirolimus). Pharmacokinetic assays of sirolimus are available as this drug has a precise therapeutic window and blood levels might be influenced by CYP3A4 polymorphisms and drug interactions. We report on a case of a patient with metastatic, progressive PEComa who started sirolimus at a dose of 5 mg/day with evidence of grade (G) 3 mucositis, G2 thrombocytopenia, and G1 leucopenia 10 days after the treatment started, in absence of concomitant medications or prohibited food assumption. Elevated sirolimus blood levels were detected (156.8 ng/ml). Sirolimus was stopped, and toxicity resolved in 5 weeks. Computed tomography scan 2 months after the treatment started showed a partial response (RECIST). After toxicity resolution, the patient restarted sirolimus at a dose of 1 mg/day, with blood levels in the range of 10-20 ng/ml. Tumor response was confirmed and maintained, and the patient is still under treatment 18 months later, with no additional adverse effects. Genetic analysis of five selected polymorphisms (rs2740574, rs776746, rs1128503, rs2032582, and rs1045642) in drug metabolism enzymes and transporters did not provide a clear explanation of the observed unusual pharmacokinetic. This case confirms the activity of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors in PEComa and strengthens the importance of pharmacokinetic drug blood levels monitoring in patients treated with sirolimus. In our patient, after dose adjustment, sirolimus could be restarted with a prolonged clinical benefit and no additional toxicity.

Fibroblastic growth factor receptor 1 amplification in osteosarcoma is associated with poor response to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.

Osteosarcoma, the most common primary bone sarcoma, is a genetically complex disease with no widely accepted biomarker to allow stratification of patients for treatment. After a recent report of one osteosarcoma cell line and one tumor exhibiting fibroblastic growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1) gene amplification, the aim of this work was to assess the frequency of FGFR1 amplification in a larger cohort of osteosarcoma and to determine if this biomarker could be used for stratification of patients for treatment. About 352 osteosarcoma samples from 288 patients were analyzed for FGFR1 amplification by interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization. FGFR1 amplification was detected in 18.5% of patients whose tumors revealed a poor response to chemotherapy, and no patients whose tumors responded well to therapy harbored this genetic alteration. FGFR1 amplification is present disproportionately in the rarer histological variants of osteosarcoma. This study provides a rationale for inclusion of patients with osteosarcoma in clinical trials using FGFR kinase inhibitors.

Aprepitant for management of severe pruritus related to biological cancer treatments: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Itch is a common side-effect of treatment with anti-EGFR antibodies and tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. We designed a pilot single-centre study to assess the effects of aprepitant-a neurokinin receptor inhibitor-for management of severe pruritus induced by biological drugs. METHODS: In this single-group, prospective study, we consecutively enrolled 45 outpatients with metastatic solid tumours treated with biological drugs at the Campus Bio-Medico Hospital of Rome, Rome, Italy, between September, 2010, and November, 2011. We classified patients into two groups: a refactory group, for patients with pruritis refractory to standard treatment, or a naive group, for patients who had not been previously treated for pruritis. Aprepitant (125 mg on day 1; 80 mg on day 3; 80 mg on day 5) was given to patients in the refractory group after at least 1 week of standard systemic treatment. In the naive group, aprepitant was given in the same schedule as the refractory group, after first onset of severe pruritus. Intensity of itch was evaluated by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score. The primary endpoint was change in median VAS score. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01683552. FINDINGS: Median VAS in the refractory group was 8·00 (95% CI 7·93-8·57) at baseline and 1·00 (0·00-2·00) after 1 week of treatment with aprepitant (p<0·0001). In the naive group, VAS score was 8·00 (7·43-8·37) at baseline and 0·00 (0·06-1·08) after 1 week of treatment (p<0·0001). 41 (91%) patients responded to aprepitant (ie, had a >50% reduction in intensity of pruritis) and pruritus recurred in only six (13%) patients. No adverse events related to aprepitant occurred. INTERPRETATION: Aprepitant decreases severe pruritus induced by biological treatments; it is an old drug, widely available, and therefore easy to add to the armamentarium of supportive treatment. Although to our knowledge no other studies of the anti-itch activity of aprepitant are planned, the results of our trial warrant confirmation in phase 2 and 3 trials. FUNDING: None.