Rajkumar Venkatramani1, Wei Xue2, R Lor Randall3, Suzanne Wolden4, James Anderson5, Dolores Lopez-Terrada6, Jennifer Black7, Simon C Kao8, Barry Shulkin9,10, Andrew Ostrenga11, Alberto Pappo12, Sheri L Spunt13. 1. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Texas Children's Cancer Center, Texas Children's Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX. 2. Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health and Health Professions College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. 3. UC Davis Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Sacramento, CA. 4. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 5. Merck and Co, North Wales, PA. 6. Department of Pathology, Texas Children's Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX. 7. Children's Hospital Colorado, Denver, CO. 8. Division of Pediatric Radiology, Department of Radiology, Carver College of Medicine and University of Iowa Stead Family Children's Hospital, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA. 9. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN. 10. Department of Radiology, University of TN Health Science Center, Memphis, TN. 11. University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS. 12. Department of Oncology, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN. 13. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Synovial sarcoma (SS) is the second most common malignant soft tissue tumor in children. ARST0332 evaluated a risk-based treatment strategy for young patients with soft tissue sarcoma designed to limit therapy for low-risk (LR) disease and to test neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for unresected higher-risk disease. METHODS: Newly diagnosed patients with SS age < 30 years were assigned to four treatment arms based on disease features: A (surgery only), B (55.8 Gy radiotherapy [RT]), C (ifosfamide and doxorubicin [ID] chemotherapy plus 55.8 Gy RT), and D (neoadjuvant ID and 45 Gy RT, then surgery and RT boost based on margins followed by adjuvant ID). Patients treated in Arms A and B were considered LR, arms C and D without metastases as intermediate-risk (IR), and those with metastases as high-risk (HR). RESULTS: Of the 146 patients with SS enrolled, 138 were eligible and evaluable: LR (46), IR (71), and HR (21). Tumors were 80% extremity, 70% > 5 cm, 70% high-grade, 62% invasive, 95% deep, and 15% metastatic. Treatment was on arm A (29.7%), B (3.6%), C (16.7%), and D (50%). There were no toxic deaths and four unexpected grade 4 adverse events. By risk group, at a median follow-up of 6.8 years, estimated 5-year event-free survival was LR 82%, IR 70%, and HR 8%, and overall survival was LR 98%, IR 89%, and HR 13%. After accounting for the features that defined risk category, none of the other patient or disease characteristics (age, sex, tumor site, tumor invasiveness, and depth) improved the risk stratification model. CONCLUSION: The risk-based treatment strategy used in ARST0332 produced favorable outcomes in patients with nonmetastatic SS relative to historical controls despite using RT less frequently and at lower doses. The outcome for metastatic SS remains unsatisfactory and new therapies are urgently needed.
PURPOSE: Synovial sarcoma (SS) is the second most common malignant soft tissue tumor in children. ARST0332 evaluated a risk-based treatment strategy for young patients with soft tissue sarcoma designed to limit therapy for low-risk (LR) disease and to test neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for unresected higher-risk disease. METHODS: Newly diagnosed patients with SS age < 30 years were assigned to four treatment arms based on disease features: A (surgery only), B (55.8 Gy radiotherapy [RT]), C (ifosfamide and doxorubicin [ID] chemotherapy plus 55.8 Gy RT), and D (neoadjuvant ID and 45 Gy RT, then surgery and RT boost based on margins followed by adjuvant ID). Patients treated in Arms A and B were considered LR, arms C and D without metastases as intermediate-risk (IR), and those with metastases as high-risk (HR). RESULTS: Of the 146 patients with SS enrolled, 138 were eligible and evaluable: LR (46), IR (71), and HR (21). Tumors were 80% extremity, 70% > 5 cm, 70% high-grade, 62% invasive, 95% deep, and 15% metastatic. Treatment was on arm A (29.7%), B (3.6%), C (16.7%), and D (50%). There were no toxic deaths and four unexpected grade 4 adverse events. By risk group, at a median follow-up of 6.8 years, estimated 5-year event-free survival was LR 82%, IR 70%, and HR 8%, and overall survival was LR 98%, IR 89%, and HR 13%. After accounting for the features that defined risk category, none of the other patient or disease characteristics (age, sex, tumor site, tumor invasiveness, and depth) improved the risk stratification model. CONCLUSION: The risk-based treatment strategy used in ARST0332 produced favorable outcomes in patients with nonmetastatic SS relative to historical controls despite using RT less frequently and at lower doses. The outcome for metastatic SS remains unsatisfactory and new therapies are urgently needed.
Authors: F C Eilber; G Rosen; J Eckardt; C Forscher; S D Nelson; M Selch; F Dorey; F R Eilber Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: C B Pratt; H M Maurer; P Gieser; A Salzberg; B N Rao; D Parham; P R Thomas; R B Marcus; A Cantor; T Pick; D Green; J Neff; J J Jenkins Journal: Med Pediatr Oncol Date: 1998-04
Authors: Myrella Vlenterie; Saskia Litière; Elisa Rizzo; Sandrine Marréaud; Ian Judson; Hans Gelderblom; Axel Le Cesne; Eva Wardelmann; Christina Messiou; Alessandro Gronchi; Winette Ta van der Graaf Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2016-03-08 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: C B Pratt; A S Pappo; P Gieser; J J Jenkins; A Salzbergdagger; J Neff; B Rao; D Green; P Thomas; R Marcus; D Parham; H Maurer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: R Ladenstein; J Treuner; E Koscielniak; F d'Oleire; M Keim; H Gadner; H Jürgens; D Niethammer; J Ritter; D Schmidt Journal: Cancer Date: 1993-06-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Monika Scheer; Tobias Dantonello; Erika Hallmen; Christian Vokuhl; Ivo Leuschner; Monika Sparber-Sauer; Bernarda Kazanowska; Felix Niggli; Ruth Ladenstein; Stefan S Bielack; Thomas Klingebiel; Ewa Koscielniak Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2016-03-22 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Daniel Orbach; Véronique Mosseri; Daniel Pissaloux; Gaelle Pierron; Bernadette Brennan; Andrea Ferrari; Frederic Chibon; Gianni Bisogno; Gian Luca De Salvo; Camille Chakiba; Nadège Corradini; Véronique Minard-Colin; Anna Kelsey; Dominique Ranchère-Vince Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Simone de Campos Vieira Abib; Chan Hon Chui; Sharon Cox; Abdelhafeez H Abdelhafeez; Israel Fernandez-Pineda; Ahmed Elgendy; Jonathan Karpelowsky; Pablo Lobos; Marc Wijnen; Jörg Fuchs; Andrea Hayes; Justin T Gerstle Journal: Ecancermedicalscience Date: 2022-02-17
Authors: Anja E Eisenhardt; Zacharias Brugger; Ute Lausch; Jurij Kiefer; Johannes Zeller; Alexander Runkel; Adrian Schmid; Peter Bronsert; Julius Wehrle; Andreas Leithner; Bernadette Liegl-Atzwanger; Riccardo E Giunta; Steffen U Eisenhardt; David Braig Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Andrea Ferrari; Bernadette Brennan; Michela Casanova; Nadege Corradini; Pablo Berlanga; Reineke A Schoot; Gema L Ramirez-Villar; Akmal Safwat; Gabriela Guillen Burrieza; Patrizia Dall'Igna; Rita Alaggio; Lisa Lyngsie Hjalgrim; Susanne Andrea Gatz; Daniel Orbach; Max M van Noesel Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2022-09-23 Impact factor: 3.602