A single-arm multicentre phase II trial of doxorubicin in combination with trabectedin in the first-line treatment for leiomyosarcoma with long-term follow-up and impact of cytoreductive surgery.

BACKGROUND: Uterine leiomyosarcomas (U-LMSs) and soft tissue leiomyosarcomas (ST-LMSs) are rare tumours with poor prognosis when locally advanced or metastatic, and with moderate chemosensitivity. In 2015 we reported very encouraging results of the LMS-02 study (NCT02131480) with manageable toxicity. Herein, we report the updated and long-term results of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received 60 mg/m2 intravenous doxorubicin followed by trabectedin 1.1 mg/m2 as a 3-h infusion on day 1 and pegfilgrastim on day 2, every 3 weeks, up to six cycles. Surgery for residual disease was permitted. Patients were stratified into U-LMS and ST-LMS groups. RESULTS: One-hundred and eight patients were enrolled, mainly with metastatic disease (85%), and 20 patients (18.5%) had surgical resection of metastases after chemotherapy. With a median follow-up of 7.2 years [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.9-8.2 years], the median PFS was 10.1 months (95% CI 8.5-12.6 months) in the whole population, and 8.3 months (95% CI 7.4-10.3 months) and 12.9 months (95% CI 9.2-14.1 months) for U-LMSs and ST-LMSs, respectively. The median OS was 34.4 months (95% CI 26.9-42.7 months), 27.5 months (95% CI 17.9-38.2 months), and 38.7 months (95% CI 31.0-52.9 months) for the whole population, U-LMSs, and ST-LMSs, respectively. The median OS of the patients with resected metastases was not reached versus 31.6 months in the overall population without surgery (95% CI 23.9-35.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: These updated results confirm the impressive efficiency of the doxorubicin plus trabectedin combination given in first-line therapy for patients with locally advanced/metastatic LMS in terms of PFS and OS. Results of the LMS04 trial (NCT02997358), a randomized phase III study comparing the doxorubicin plus trabectedin combination versus doxorubicin alone in first-line therapy in metastatic LMSs, are pending.

A randomized phase III trial comparing trabectedin to best supportive care in patients with pre-treated soft tissue sarcoma: T-SAR, a French Sarcoma Group trial.

BACKGROUND: The French Sarcoma Group assessed the efficacy, safety, and quality of life (QoL) of trabectedin versus best supportive care (BSC) in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III study included adults with STS who progressed after 1-3 prior treatment lines. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to receive trabectedin 1.5 mg/m2 every 3 weeks or BSC, stratified into L-STS (liposarcoma/leiomyosarcoma) and non-L-STS groups (other histotypes). Patients from the BSC arm were allowed to cross over to trabectedin at progression. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) confirmed by blinded central review and analyzed in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between 26 January 2015 and 5 November 2015, 103 heavily pre-treated patients (60.2% with L-STS) from 16 French centers were allocated to receive trabectedin (n = 52) or BSC (n = 51). Median PFS was 3.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-5.9 months] in the trabectedin arm versus 1.5 months (0.9-2.6 months) in the BSC arm (hazard ratio = 0.39, 95% CI 0.24-0.64, P < 0.001) with benefits observed across almost all analyzed subgroups, but particularly in patients with L-STS (5.1 versus 1.4 months, P = 0.0001). Seven patients (13.7%) in the trabectedin arm (all with L-STS) achieved a partial response, while no objective responses were observed in the BSC arm (P = 0.004). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (44.2% of patients), leukopenia (34.6%), and transaminase increase (32.7%). Health-related 30-item core European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire evidenced no statistical differences between the arms for any domain and at any time point. After progression, 91.8% of patients crossed over from BSC to trabectedin. CONCLUSION: Trabectedin demonstrates superior disease control to BSC without impairing QoL in patients with recurrent STS of multiple histologies, with greater impact in patients with L-STS.

A phase II of gemcitabine combined with pazopanib followed by pazopanib maintenance, as second-line treatment in patients with advanced leiomyosarcomas: A unicancer French Sarcoma Group study (LMS03 study).

BACKGROUND: Options in second-line therapy after doxorubicin-based chemotherapy for metastatic/advanced leiomyosarcoma include gemcitabine (G), trabectedin and pazopanib (P) monotherapy. Currently, no combination therapy is better than monotherapy. LMS03 is an open-label multicentre single-group phase II study designed to assess the efficacy and tolerance of G + P in the second-line setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (pts), ECOG ≤2, with metastatic leiomyosarcomas (LMS) after first-line doxorubicin chemotherapy failure were eligible. Pts were treated with G 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of each 21 days (maximum eight cycles), in combination with oral daily P (800 mg), until disease progression/toxicity. 9-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate was the primary endpoint. Inacceptable and promising 9-month PFS rates were defined, in the intent-to-treat population, as 32% and 44%. RESULTS: 106 pts were included with a mean age of 59.8 years and an ECOG 0 in 63.5%; the primary tumour site was uterus in 61%. Pts were treated with P + G for a median of 3.8 mo, and P for a median of 4.2 mo. The 9-month PFS rate was 32.1% (95% CI 23.1-41.1). After a median follow-up of 14.2 months, the PFS was 6.5 months (95% CI 5.6-8.2), and the overall survival was 22.4 months (95% CI 16.9-26.5). The best response was 23.8%. The most frequent reported grade 3-4 adverse events were haematological. CONCLUSIONS: LMS03 failed to show that second-line therapy, with gemcitabine combined with pazopanib, followed by pazopanib alone, was beneficial for advanced LMS patients. Eudract N°2011-001308-36 and NCT01442662.

[What is the best management for a spermatic cord sarcoma in 2018?] / Quelle prise en charge optimale pour un sarcome du cordon spermatique en 2018 ?

Spermatic cord sarcomas are rare tumors for which the most important is the initial diagnostic procedure. They are frequently misdiagnosed after surgery for inguinal hernia, inguinal lymphadenectomy or testicular malignancy. Any clinical suspicion has to lead to perform imaging with MRI and a core needle biopsy in order to obtain an accurate preoperative diagnosis. Liposarcoma and leiomyosarcoma are the most common histological subtypes in elderly adults, rhabdomyosarcoma in children or in young adults. A CT scan will precede the treatment in order to look for distant metastasis and abdominal involvement. The therapeutic strategy as well as the surgical planning are then adapted to the histological, morphological and prognostic factors. Surgery is the cornerstone for the treatment of spermatic cord sarcoma. The minimum requirements for the surgical procedure are a wide excision of the tumor en bloc with radical orchidectomy, excision of the ipsilateral scrotum and high spermatic cord ligation. It could be enlarged to the anterior abdominal wall and adjacent organs some required a soft tissue flap. Spermatic cord sarcoma and trunk wall sarcoma have the same prognosis for which local recurrence could significantly decrease survival. Consequently, surgeon in charge with these tumors has to be familiar with soft tissue sarcoma and the management of these patients must be carried out under the supervision of a multidisciplinary team within the Netsarc network.

Improved survival using specialized multidisciplinary board in sarcoma patients.

BACKGROUND: Sarcomas are rare but aggressive diseases. Specialized multidisciplinary management is not implemented for all patients in most countries. We investigated the impact of a multidisciplinary tumor board (MDTB) presentation before treatment in a nationwide study over 5 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: NETSARC (netsarc.org) is a network of 26 reference sarcoma centers with specialized MDTB, funded by the French National Cancer Institute to improve the outcome of sarcoma patients. Since 2010, presentation to an MDTB and second pathological review are mandatory for sarcoma patients in France. Patients' characteristics and follow-up are collected in a database regularly monitored and updated. The management and survival of patients presented to these MDTB before versus after initial treatment were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of the 12 528 patients aged ≥15 years, with a first diagnosis of soft tissue and visceral sarcoma obtained between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014, 5281 (42.2%) and 7247 (57.8%) were presented to the MDTB before and after the initiation of treatment, respectively. The former group had generally worse prognostic characteristics. Presentation to a MDTB before treatment was associated with a better compliance to clinical practice guidelines, for example, biopsy before surgery, imaging, quality of initial surgery, and less reoperations (all P < 0.001). Local relapse-free survival and relapse-free survival were significantly better in patients presented to a MDTB before initiation of treatment, both in univariate and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: The compliance to clinical practice guidelines and relapse-free survival of sarcoma patients are significantly better when the initial treatment is guided by a pre-therapeutic specialized MDTB.

Prediction of local and metastatic recurrence in solitary fibrous tumor: construction of a risk calculator in a multicenter cohort from the French Sarcoma Group (FSG) database.

BACKGROUND: Solitary fibrous tumors (SFT) are rare unusual ubiquitous soft tissue tumors that are presumed to be of fibroblastic differentiation. At present, the challenge is to establish accurate prognostic factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 214 consecutive patients with SFT diagnosed in 24 participating cancer centers were entered into the European database (www.conticabase.org) to perform univariate and multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS), local recurrence incidence (LRI) and metastatic recurrence incidence (MRI) by taking competing risks into account. A prognostic model was constructed for LRI and MRI. Internal and external validations of the prognostic models were carried out. An individual risk calculator was carried out to quantify the risk of both local and metastatic recurrence. RESULTS: We restricted our analysis to 162 patients with local disease. Twenty patients (12.3%) were deceased at the time of analysis and the median OS was not reached. The LRI rates at 10 and 20 years were 19.2% and 38.6%, respectively. The MRI rates at 10 and 20 years were 31.4% and 49.8%, respectively. Multivariate analysis retained age and mitotic count tended to significance for predicting OS. The factors influencing LRI were viscera localization, radiotherapy and age. Mitotic count, tumor localization other than limb and age had independent values for MRI. Three prognostic groups for OS were defined based on the number of unfavorable prognostic factors and calculations were carried out to predict the risk of local and metastatic recurrence for individual patients. CONCLUSION: LRI and MRI rates increased between 10 and 20 years so relapses were delayed, suggesting that long-term monitoring is useful. This study also shows that different prognostic SFT sub-groups could benefit from different therapeutic strategies and that use of a survival calculator could become standard practice in SFTs to individualize treatment based on the clinical situation.

Patients with primary localized high-grade sarcomas of the digestive tract excluding GIST : a retrospective study from the French sarcoma group.

INTRODUCTION: The natural history of localized high-grade sarcomas of the digestive tract (SDT) excluding GIST has been rarely considered owing to their low incidence and heterogeneity. We describe the histoclinical characteristics of SDT and correlate them with patients' outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively collected medical files from a European database covering connective tissue tumors listed in Europe for about twenty years. Only untreated localized primary high-grade SDT were included. A central histological review was performed for each case. Patients' characteristics were compared and correlated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 45 patients were identified. Leiomyosarcomas (LMS) and undifferentiated sarcomas (UDS) were predominant, the former having better overall survival (OS) and progressionfree survival (PFS) while the latter having a worse outcome than the other histological types. Complete remission was obtained in 34 patients (75%) and was associated with male sex, age over 40 years and monofocal tumor. Complete surgery and LMS histology were associated with a better prognosis without any significant difference in baseline characteristics or in treatment modalities. CONCLUSION: Complete surgery and histological type seem to be prognostic indicators of SDT. These results suggest the importance of treating these patients in a reference center.

Extensive limb-sparing surgery with reconstruction for sarcoma of the hand and wrist.

BACKGROUND: Sarcoma rarely involves the hand or wrist. Extensive surgical excision is the current standard of care. At the extremities, such as the hand and wrist, limb-sparing surgery with reconstruction to provide optimal function is increasingly performed. A descriptive case-series study of 16 patients with sarcoma of the hand and wrist managed using limb-sparing surgery is reported here. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Of 19 patients with sarcoma of the hand or wrist treated between 1999 and 2012, 16 were managed using limb-sparing surgery. These were consecutive patients managed at a single-centre and studied retrospectively. The tumour involved the hand in 7 patients and the wrist in 9 patients. The procedure was primary in 6 patients, whereas 10 patients underwent secondary revision surgery. In 12 patients, reconstruction was performed for one or more of the following structures: nerves (n=2), tendons (n=3), bone (n=3), and/or skin (n=8). After surgical excision, the margins were R0 in 15 patients and R1 in 1 patient. At last follow-up, survival, pain, and function as reflected by the DASH and MSTS scores were assessed. RESULTS: After the median follow-up of 4.5years [1-13], 15 patients were alive with no local recurrence and 1 patient had lung metastases. Mean values were 18 [0-49] for the DASH score and 88.8% [53-100] for the MSTS score. DISCUSSION: Limb-sparing surgery reconciles the need to achieve complete tumour excision with the need to restore function. No limits should be placed on tumour excision, given the availability of effective reconstructive methods. The functional outcome depends on the tolerance of adjuvant treatments, most notably radiotherapy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective study.

Afatinib versus methotrexate in older patients with second-line recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: subgroup analysis of the LUX-Head & Neck 1 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III LUX-Head & Neck 1 (LHN1) trial, afatinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus methotrexate in recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients progressing on/after platinum-based therapy. This report evaluates afatinib efficacy and safety in prespecified subgroups of patients aged ≥65 and <65 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to 40 mg/day oral afatinib or 40 mg/m(2)/week intravenous methotrexate. PFS was the primary end point; overall survival (OS) was the key secondary end point. Other end points included: objective response rate (ORR), patient-reported outcomes, tumor shrinkage, and safety. Disease control rate (DCR) was also assessed. RESULTS: Of 483 randomized patients, 27% (83 afatinib; 45 methotrexate) were aged ≥65 years (older) and 73% (239 afatinib; 116 methotrexate) <65 years (younger) at study entry. Similar PFS benefit with afatinib versus methotrexate was observed in older {median 2.8 versus 2.3 months, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-1.03], P = 0.061} and younger patients [2.6 versus 1.6 months, HR = 0.79 (0.62-1.01), P = 0.052]. In older and younger patients, the median OS with afatinib versus methotrexate was 7.3 versus 6.4 months [HR = 0.84 (0.54-1.31)] and 6.7 versus 6.2 months [HR = 0.98 (0.76-1.28)]. ORRs with afatinib versus methotrexate were 10.8% versus 6.7% and 10.0% versus 5.2%; DCRs were 53.0% versus 37.8% and 47.7% versus 38.8% in older and younger patients, respectively. In both subgroups, the most frequent treatment-related adverse events were rash/acne (73%-77%) and diarrhea (70%-80%) with afatinib, and stomatitis (43%) and fatigue (31%-34%) with methotrexate. Fewer treatment-related discontinuations were observed with afatinib (each subgroup 7% versus 16%). A trend toward improved time to deterioration of global health status, pain, and swallowing with afatinib was observed in both subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Advancing age (≥65 years) did not adversely affect clinical outcomes or safety with afatinib versus methotrexate in second-line R/M HNSCC patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01345682 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

[Locoregional treatments of brain metastases for patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma: French national guidelines]. / Traitements locorégionaux de métastase(s) cérébrale(s) chez des patients atteints d'un mélanome cutané métastatique : recommandations nationales françaises.

INTRODUCTION: The management of metastatic cutaneous melanoma is changing, marked by innovative therapies. However, their respective use and place in the therapeutic strategy continue to be debated by healthcare professionals. OBJECTIVE: The French national cancer institute has led a national clinical practice guideline project since 2008. It has carried out a review of these modalities of treatment and established recommendations. METHODS: The clinical practice guidelines development process is based on systematic literature review and critical appraisal by experts. The recommendations are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines are reviewed by independent practitioners in cancer care delivery. RESULTS: This article presents the results of bibliographic search, the conclusions of the literature and the recommendations concerning locoregional treatments of brain metastases for patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma.

A randomized, phase II study of afatinib versus cetuximab in metastatic or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

BACKGROUND: Afatinib is an oral, irreversible ErbB family blocker that has shown activity in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated lung cancer. We hypothesized that the agent would have greater antitumor activity compared with cetuximab in recurrent or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients, whose disease has progressed after platinum-containing therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An open-label, randomized, phase II trial was conducted in 43 centers; 124 patients were randomized (1 : 1) to either afatinib (50 mg/day) or cetuximab (250 mg/m(2)/week) until disease progression or intolerable adverse events (AEs) (stage I), with optional crossover (stage II). The primary end point was tumor shrinkage before crossover assessed by investigator (IR) and independent central review (ICR). RESULTS: A total of 121 patients were treated (61 afatinib, 60 cetuximab) and 68 crossed over to stage II (32 and 36 respectively). In stage I, mean tumor shrinkage by IR/ICR was 10.4%/16.6% with afatinib and 5.4%/10.1% with cetuximab (P = 0.46/0.30). Objective response rate was 16.1%/8.1% with afatinib and 6.5%/9.7% with cetuximab (IR/ICR). Comparable disease control rates were observed with afatinib (50%) and cetuximab (56.5%) by IR; similar results were seen by ICR. Most common grade ≥3 drug-related AEs (DRAEs) were rash/acne (18% versus 8.3%), diarrhea (14.8% versus 0%), and stomatitis/mucositis (11.5% versus 0%) with afatinib and cetuximab, respectively. Patients with DRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation were 23% with afatinib and 5% with cetuximab. In stage II, disease control rate (IR/ICR) was 38.9%/33.3% with afatinib and 18.8%/18.8% with cetuximab. CONCLUSION: Afatinib showed antitumor activity comparable to cetuximab in R/M HNSCC in this exploratory phase II trial, although more patients on afatinib discontinued treatment due to AEs. Sequential EGFR/ErbB treatment with afatinib and cetuximab provided sustained clinical benefit in patients after crossover, suggesting a lack of cross-resistance.

[Management of patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma: French national guidelines. French National Cancer Institute]. / Prise en charge thérapeutique des patients atteints d'un mélanome cutané métastatique : recommandations nationales françaises. L'Institut national du cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recent years have seen the emergence of new molecules for the treatment of patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma, with significant benefits in terms of survival and the opening of new therapeutic perspectives. In addition, many techniques are currently being developed for locoregional treatment of metastatic sites. Management of metastatic melanoma is thus fast-changing and is marked by innovative therapeutic approaches. However, the availability of these new treatments has prompted debate among healthcare professionals concerning their use and their place in therapeutic strategy. AIMS: Since 2008, the French National Cancer Institute (INCa) has been leading a project to define and diffuse national clinical practice guidelines. It has performed a review of these treatment methods, which it aims to circulate, and it is seeking to develop recommendations in order to allow nationwide implementation of innovative approaches while promoting good use thereof. METHODS: The clinical practice guidelines development process is based on systematic literature review and critical appraisal by experts within a multidisciplinary working group, with feedback from specialists in cancer care delivery. The recommendations are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines are reviewed by independent practitioners in cancer care delivery. RESULTS: This article presents the national recommendations for first- and second-line systemic treatment and for locoregional treatment of metastatic sites in patients presenting metastatic cutaneous melanoma.

Influence of imatinib interruption and rechallenge on the residual disease in patients with advanced GIST: results of the BFR14 prospective French Sarcoma Group randomised, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: We previously demonstrated that interruption of imatinib mesylate (IM) in responding patients (pts) with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) results in rapid reprogression. The impact of interruption on residual tumour, quality of response and secondary resistance has not been fully investigated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Within the BRF14 study, 71 non-progressing patients were randomly assigned in the interruption arms after 1, 3 or 5 years. IM was resumed in the case of progressive disease (PD). Tumour status at randomisation, relapse and after IM rechallenge, progression-free survival (PFS) and time to secondary resistance were analysed. RESULTS: At data cut-off, 51 of 71 patients had restarted IM following documented PD. Eighteen patients (35%) progressed on known lesions only, while 33 patients (65%) had new lesions, with concomitant progression of known lesions in 17 patients. Only 8 (42%) of complete remission (CR) patients and 12 (52%) of partial response (PR) patients at randomisation achieved a new CR and PR. Patients progressing rapidly after interruption had a poorer prognosis. Tumour status at randomisation influenced time to progression after rechallenge. CONCLUSION: In advanced GIST patients interrupting IM, quality of response upon reintroduction did not reach the tumour status observed at randomisation. Rapid progression after imatinib interruption is associated with poor PFS after reintroduction.

Metastatic angiosarcomas: doxorubicin-based regimens, weekly paclitaxel and metastasectomy significantly improve the outcome.

BACKGROUND: Angiosarcomas are a rare but aggressive form of soft tissue sarcoma. At metastatic stage, the clinical benefit of therapeutic intervention remains debatable. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We have carried a retrospective analysis of 149 cases treated between 1996 and 2009 in the French Sarcoma Group. RESULTS: The median age was 60; the sex ratio was 0.80. Sixty-two percentage of cases presented with metastasis at the diagnosis. About 20% arose in irradiated fields. The median overall survival was 11 months. Treatment consisted in metastasectomy (5.4%), doxorubicin-based regimen (46.9%), weekly paclitaxel (Taxol) (31.5%), other chemotherapy regimens (10.7%) or exclusive palliative care (10.9%). Clinical prognostic factors identified by univariate analysis were presence of bone metastasis (P = 0.0107), presence of other metastasis (P = 0.0327) and performance status (P < 0.0001). The Cox model retained a performance status of two or more as the sole independent prognostic factor (HR [hazard ratio] = 2.49, P < 0.0001). After adjustment to the performance status and compared with exclusive palliative care, the following treatments significantly improve the outcome: doxorubicin-based regimen as first-line chemotherapy (HR = 0.38, P = 0.0165), weekly paclitaxel as first-line regimen (HR = 0.36, P = 0.0146) and metastasectomy (HR = 0.09, P = 0.0221). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis indicates that some therapeutic interventions may significantly improve the outcome of this aggressive disease. Doxorubicin-based regimens and weekly paclitaxel seem to provide the same range of efficacy.

High-dose chemotherapy consolidation for chemosensitive advanced soft tissue sarcoma patients: an open-label, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS) prognosis remains poor and few cytotoxic agents offer proven efficacy. This randomized open phase III study examines whether high-dose (HD) chemotherapy with peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) could improve overall survival (OS) of chemosensitive patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Advanced STS patients aged 18-65 years received four courses of standard mesna, adryamycin, ifosfamide and dacarbazine (MAID) treatment. Chemotherapy-responding patients and patients with at least stable disease amenable to complete surgical resection were randomized to receive standard dose (SD) with two successive MAID cycles or HD treatments of one MAID then MICE intensification: mesna (3.6 g/m(2), day 1-5), ifosfamide (2.5 g/m(2), day 1-4), carboplatin [area under the curve (AUC) 5/day 2-4] and etoposide (300 mg/m(2), day 1-4) with PBSC reinjection at day 7. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2008, 207 patients received four cycles of MAID and 87 assessable patients were randomly assigned to receive the following: 46 SD, 41 HD, with 45 and 38 maintained for analyses after secondary centralized histological review. Futility analyses led to study closure in November 2008. Three-year OS was 49.4% for the SD group versus 32.7% for HD arm, hazard ratio= 1.26, 95% confidence interval 0.70-2.29; progression-free survival was 32.4% and 14.0%, respectively. HD treatment led to higher grades 3-4 toxicity. CONCLUSION: This study failed to show an OS advantage for advanced STS patients treated with dose-intensified chemotherapy with PBSC.

Effects of lapatinib monotherapy: results of a randomised phase II study in therapy-naive patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

BACKGROUND: Lapatinib is a dual inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human EGFR-2 (HER-2) tyrosine kinases. This study investigated the pharmacodynamic and clinical effects of lapatinib in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). METHODS: In total, 107 therapy-naive patients with locally advanced SCCHN were randomised (2 : 1) to receive lapatinib or placebo for 2-6 weeks before chemoradiation therapy (CRT). Endpoints included apoptosis and proliferation rates, clinical response, and toxicity. RESULTS: Versus placebo, lapatinib monotherapy did not significantly increase apoptosis detected by terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated deoxyuridine triphosphate-biotin nick-end labelling or caspase-3 assays. A statistically significant decrease in proliferation using Ki67 assay was observed (P=0.030). In a subset of 40 patients that received 4 weeks of lapatinib or placebo, objective response rate (ORR) was 17% (n=4/24) vs 0% (n=0/16). In the lapatinib single-agent responders, all had EGFR overexpression, 50% had EGFR amplification, and 50% had HER2 expression by immunohistochemistry (including one patient with HER2 amplification). However, these patients showed variable modulation of apoptosis, proliferation, and phosphorylated EGFR on drug treatment. Following CRT, there was a statistically non-significant difference in ORR between lapatinib (70%) and placebo (53%). There was no clear correlation between changes in apoptosis or proliferation and response to chemoradiation. Mucosal inflammation, asthenia, odynophagia, and dysphagia were the most commonly reported adverse events with lapatinib. CONCLUSION: Short-term lapatinib monotherapy did not demonstrate apoptotic changes, but provided evidence of clinical activity in locally advanced SCCHN, and warrants further investigation in this disease.

Imatinib for progressive and recurrent aggressive fibromatosis (desmoid tumors): an FNCLCC/French Sarcoma Group phase II trial with a long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Imatinib evaluated as a new treatment option in patients with recurrent or established progressive aggressive fibromatosis/desmoid tumor (AF/DT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients with unresectable and progressive symptomatic AF/DT were treated with imatinib (400 mg/day for 1 year) in a Simon's optimal two-stage phase II study (P(0) = 10%, P(1) = 30%, α = 5%, ß = 10%). The primary end point was non-progressive at 3 months (RECIST). RESULTS: The study population consisted of 28 women and 12 men, with a mean age of 41 (range 20-72 years). Most of the primary sites were extra-abdominal (24, 54.5%). Familial adenomatous polyposis was observed in six (15%) cases. The median follow-up was 34 months. Imatinib toxicity was similar to that previously reported in literature. Tumor assessment was validated by a central independent radiology committee for 35 patients At 3 months, one (3%) complete and three (9%) partial confirmed responses were observed. The non-progression rates at 3, 6 and 12 months were, respectively, 91%, 80% and 67%. The 2-year progression-free and overall survival rates were 55% and 95%, respectively. Two patients with mesenteric AF/DT died from progressive disease. CONCLUSION: Imatinib is active in the treatment of recurrent and progressive AF/DT, providing objective response and long-term stable disease in a large proportion of patients.