Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high‐risk soft tissue sarcomas: A Sarculator‐based risk stratification analysis of the ISG‐STS 1001 randomized trial

Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandro Pasquali ◽  
Emanuela Palmerini ◽  
Vittorio Quagliuolo ◽  
Javier Martin‐Broto ◽  
Antonio Lopez‐Pousa ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11000-11000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Gronchi ◽  
Emanuela Palmerini ◽  
Vittorio Quagliuolo ◽  
Javier Martin Broto ◽  
Antonio Lopez Pousa ◽  
...  

11000 Background: A ISG randomized trial on 5 cycles of adjuvant epirubicin+ifosfamide (EI) versus no chemotherapy suggested an OS benefit in localized high-risk STS (JCO 2001;19:1238). A subsequent trial showed no difference between 3 vs 5 cycles of the same neoadjuvant regimen (JCO 2012;30:850). The aim of this trial was to compare 3 cycles of EI versus a histology-tailored (HT) neoadjuvant regimen in selected localized high-risk STS. Methods: This is a multicenter European randomized trial comparing EI versus a HT regimen: gemcitabine+docetaxel in undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS); trabectedin in high-grade myxoid liposarcoma; high-dose prolonged-infusion ifosfamide in synovial sarcoma (SS); etoposide+ifosfamide in malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST); gemcitabine+dacarbazine in leiomyosarcoma (LMS). Patients had localized high-risk (grade = 3; size ≥5 cm) STS of extremities or trunk wall. Primary end-point was Disease Free Survival (DFS). The final analysis was planned after the observation of 130 events. This allows an 80% power to detect a significant difference at the 5% 2-sided level, if the true HR is 0.6 in favor of EI, as shown by the interim analysis (Lancet Oncol 2017;18:812-822). Results: From May 2011 to May 2016, 287 patients were randomized (97 = UPS; 65 = myxoid liposarcoma; 70 = SS; 27 = MPNST; 28 = LMS). The median follow-up was 51.75 months for the alive patients (IQ 28.03) The DFS and OS probability at 60 months were 0.48 and 0.55 (HR:1.232; 95%CI: 0.875-1.733; log rank p=0.323) and 0.66 and 0.76 (HR:1.766; 95%CI:1.101-2.831; log rank p=0.018), in the HT and EI arm, respectively. Conclusions: The final analysis shows a non-statistically significant DFS difference in favor of EI over HT chemotherapy with a larger and statistically significant OS difference. The outcome of patients on EI overlapped previous ISG trials. EI should remain the regimen of choice when neoadjuvant chemotherapy is used in high-risk localized STS. However this trial cannot be used as a formal proof of efficacy of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy per se. EUDRACT 2010 – 023484 – 17. Funding source: Eurosarc FP7 278472. Clinical trial information: NCT01710176.


2014 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. v75
Author(s):  
Kohichi Takada ◽  
Shogo Miura ◽  
Rishu Takimoto ◽  
Yusuke Kamihara ◽  
Satoshi Iyama ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (11) ◽  
pp. 3542-3549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Y. Zaidi ◽  
Cecilia G. Ethun ◽  
Thuy B. Tran ◽  
George Poultsides ◽  
Valerie P. Grignol ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (19) ◽  
pp. 2178-2186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Gronchi ◽  
Emanuela Palmerini ◽  
Vittorio Quagliuolo ◽  
Javier Martin Broto ◽  
Antonio Lopez Pousa ◽  
...  

PURPOSE To determine whether the administration of histology-tailored neoadjuvant chemotherapy (HT) was superior to the administration of standard anthracycline plus ifosfamide neoadjuvant chemotherapy (A+I) in high-risk soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of an extremity or the trunk wall. PATIENTS AND METHODS This was a randomized, open-label, phase III trial. Patients had localized high-risk STS (grade 3; size, ≥ 5 cm) of an extremity or trunk wall, belonging to one of the following five histologic subtypes: high-grade myxoid liposarcoma (HG-MLPS); leiomyosarcoma (LMS), synovial sarcoma (SS), malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST), and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive three cycles of A+I or HT. The HT regimens were as follows: trabectedin in HG-MLPS; gemcitabine plus dacarbazine in LMS; high-dose prolonged-infusion ifosfamide in SS; etoposide plus ifosfamide in MPNST; and gemcitabine plus docetaxel in UPS. Primary and secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using Cox models adjusted for treatment and stratification factors. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT01710176 ). RESULTS Between May 2011 and May 2016, 287 patients (UPS: n = 97 [33.8%]; HG-MLPS: n = 65 [22.6%]; SS: n = 70 [24.4%]; MPNST: n = 27 [9.4%]; and LMS: n = 28 [9.8%]) were randomly assigned to either A+I or HT. At the final analysis, with a median follow-up of 52 months, the projected DFS and OS probabilities were 0.55 and 0.47 (log-rank P = .323) and 0.76 and 0.66 (log-rank P = .018) at 60 months in the A+I arm and HT arm, respectively. No treatment-related deaths were observed. CONCLUSION In a population of patients with localized high-risk STS, HT was not associated with a better DFS or OS, suggesting that A+I should remain the regimen to choose whenever neoadjuvant chemotherapy is used in patients with high-risk STS.


Cancer ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (19) ◽  
pp. 4613-4621 ◽  
Author(s):  
William G. Kraybill ◽  
Jonathan Harris ◽  
Ira J. Spiro ◽  
David S. Ettinger ◽  
Thomas F. DeLaney ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document