scholarly journals Nationwide incidence of sarcomas and connective tissue tumors of intermediate malignancy over four years using an expert pathology review network

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0246958
Author(s):  
Gonzague de Pinieux ◽  
Marie Karanian ◽  
Francois Le Loarer ◽  
Sophie Le Guellec ◽  
Sylvie Chabaud ◽  
...  

Background Since 2010, nationwide networks of reference centers for sarcomas (RREPS/NETSARC/RESOS) collected and prospectively reviewed all cases of sarcomas and connective tumors of intermediate malignancy (TIM) in France. Methods The nationwide incidence of sarcoma or TIM (2013–2016) was measured using the 2013 WHO classification and confirmed by a second independent review by expert pathologists. Simple clinical characteristics, yearly variations and correlation of incidence with published clinical trials are presented and analyzed. Results Over 150 different histological subtypes are reported from the 25172 patients with sarcomas (n = 18712, 74,3%) or TIM (n = 6460, 25.7%), with n = 5838, n = 6153, n = 6654, and n = 6527 yearly cases from 2013 to 2016. Over these 4 years, the yearly incidence of sarcomas and TIM was therefore 70.7 and 24.4 respectively, with a combined incidence of 95.1/106/year, higher than previously reported. GIST, liposarcoma, leiomyosarcomas, undifferentiated sarcomas represented 13%, 13%, 11% and 11% of tumors. Only GIST, as a single entity had a yearly incidence above 10/106/year. There were respectively 30, 64 and 66 different histological subtypes of sarcomas or TIM with an incidence ranging from 10 to 1/106, 1–0.1/106, or < 0.1/106/year respectively. The 2 latter incidence groups represented 21% of the patients with 130 histotypes. Published phase III and phase II clinical trials (p<10−6) are significantly higher with sarcomas subtypes with an incidence above 1/106 per. Conclusions This nationwide registry of sarcoma patients, with exhaustive histology review by sarcoma experts, shows that the incidence of sarcoma and TIM is higher than reported, and that tumors with a very low incidence (1<106/year) are less likely to be included in clinical trials.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gonzague de Pinieux ◽  
Marie Karanian-Philippe ◽  
Francois Le Loarer ◽  
Sophie Le Guellec ◽  
Sylvie Chabaud ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundSince 2010, NETSARC and RREPS collected and reviewed prospectively all cases of sarcomas and tumors of intermediate malignancy (TIM) nationwide.MethodsThe nationwide incidence of sarcoma or TIM (2013-2016), confirmed by expert pathologists using WHO classification are presented. Yearly variations and correlation with published clinical trials was analyzed.Results139 histological subtypes are reported among the 25172 patients with sarcomas (n=18710, 64%) or TIM (n=6460, 36%), respectively n=5838, n=6153, n=6654, and n=6527 yearly from 2013 to 2016. Over these 4 years, the yearly incidence of sarcomas and TIM was therefore 79.7, 24.9 and 95.1/106/year, above that previously reported. GIST, liposarcoma, leiomyosarcomas, undifferentiated sarcomas represented 13%, 13%, 11% and 11% of tumors. Only GIST, as a single entity had a yearly incidence above 10/million/year. There were respectively 30, 63 and 66 different histological subtypes of sarcomas or TIM with an incidence ranging from 10 to 1/106, 1-0.1/106, or < 0.1/106/year respectively. The 2 later “incidence groups” included 21% of the patients. The incidence of 8 histotypes varied significantly over this 4 years. Patients with tumors with an incidence above 1/106per year have significantly higher numbers of dedicated published phase III and phase II clinical trials (p<10−6).ConclusionsThis nationwide registry of sarcoma patients with histology reviewed by sarcoma experts shows that the incidence of sarcoma and TIM is higher than reported, and that tumors with an incidence<106/year have a much lower access to clinical trials.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11560-11560
Author(s):  
Gonzague De Pinieux ◽  
Marie Karanian ◽  
Francois Le Loarer ◽  
Sophie Le Guellec ◽  
Philippe Terrier ◽  
...  

11560 Background: Since 2010, presentation to a designated sarcoma tumor board and pathological review by an expert network are mandatory for sarcoma patients in France. NETSARC+ (merging the 3 initial RREPS, RESOS & NETSARC) collected prospectively all cases of reviewed sarcomas and tumors of intermediate malignancy (TIM) nationwide. We report on the incidence of subtypes according to WHO classification from 2013 to 2016. Methods: Sarcoma expert pathologists reviewed samples were all prospectively integrated in the database; the results using the latest WHO classification are presented for the years 2013 to 2016, including yearly variations. Correlation of the incidence of each histotype with dedicated published clinical trials was conducted. Results: 139 different histological subtypes are reported among the 25172 patients with sarcomas (n = 18710, 64%) or TIM (n = 6460, 36%), respectively n = 5838, n = 6153, n = 6654, and n = 6527 yearly from 2013 to 2016. Over these 4 years, the observed yearly incidence of sarcomas, TIM, and all was therefore 79.7, 24.9 and 95.1/10e6/year, above that previously reported. GIST, liposarcoma, leiomyosarcomas, undifferentiated sarcomas represented 13%, 13%, 11% and 11% of all sarcomas. Only GIST, as a single entity exceeded a yearly incidence above 10/million per year. There were respectively 30, 63 and 66 different histological subtypes of sarcomas or TIM (single entities or lumped together, e.g. MPNST, or vascular sarcomas...) with an incidence ranging from 10 to 1/10e6/year, 1-0.1/10e6 per year, or < 0.1/10e6/year respectively. The 2 later “incidence groups” included 21% of the patients. The incidence of 8 histotypes varied significantly over this 4 years. Patients with tumors with an incidence above 1/10e6 per year have significantly higher numbers of dedicated published phase III and phase II clinical trials (p < 10e-6). Conclusions: This nationwide registry of sarcoma patients with an histology reviewed by sarcoma experts shows that the incidence of sarcoma and TIM is higher than previously reported, may vary over years for some histotypes, and that tumors with an incidence < 10e6 have a much lower access to clinical trials.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Aringer ◽  
Christopher P Denton

While significant progress has been made in treating systemic sclerosis, many patients still have an outcome that is far from satisfactory. For the first time in history, several drugs are now in phase III randomized controlled trials. Approaches tested include the anti-B cell antibody rituximab, the anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab, the antifibrotic drugs nintedanib and pirfenidone, and the cannabinoid receptor mimetic lenabasum. That all these drugs are in advanced clinical trials despite the relatively low incidence of the disease therefore is good news. Not only is there realistic hope that at least some of the approaches will work, this also indicates growing industry interest, for most of the trials are company-sponsored. This review attempts to delineate the ongoing trials and to summarize the underlying evidence of these candidate systemic sclerosis drugs.


2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob J Mandel ◽  
Shlomit Yust-Katz ◽  
Akash J Patel ◽  
David Cachia ◽  
Diane Liu ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Snajdauf ◽  
Klara Havlova ◽  
Jiri Vachtenheim ◽  
Andrej Ozaniak ◽  
Robert Lischke ◽  
...  

TRAIL (tumor-necrosis factor related apoptosis-inducing ligand, CD253) and its death receptors TRAIL-R1 and TRAIL-R2 selectively trigger the apoptotic cell death in tumor cells. For that reason, TRAIL has been extensively studied as a target of cancer therapy. In spite of the promising preclinical observations, the TRAIL–based therapies in humans have certain limitations. The two main therapeutic approaches are based on either an administration of TRAIL-receptor (TRAIL-R) agonists or a recombinant TRAIL. These approaches, however, seem to elicit a limited therapeutic efficacy, and only a few drugs have entered the phase II clinical trials. To deliver TRAIL-based therapies with higher anti-tumor potential several novel TRAIL-derivates and modifications have been designed. These novel drugs are, however, mostly preclinical, and many problems continue to be unraveled. We have reviewed the current status of all TRAIL-based monotherapies and combination therapies that have reached phase II and phase III clinical trials in humans. We have also aimed to introduce all novel approaches of TRAIL utilization in cancer treatment and discussed the most promising drugs which are likely to enter clinical trials in humans. To date, different strategies were introduced in order to activate anti-tumor immune responses with the aim of achieving the highest efficacy and minimal toxicity.In this review, we discuss the most promising TRAIL-based clinical trials and their therapeutic strategies.


2013 ◽  
Vol 137 (4) ◽  
pp. 492-495 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pawel Mroz ◽  
Anil V. Parwani ◽  
Piotr Kulesza

Context.—Central pathology review (CPR) was initially designed as a quality control measure. The potential of CPR in clinical trials was recognized as early as in the 1960s and quickly became embedded as an integral part of many clinical trials since. Objective.—To review the current experience with CPR in clinical trials, to summarize current developments in virtual microscopy, and to discuss the potential advantages and disadvantages of this technology in the context of CPR. Data Sources.—A PubMed (US National Library of Medicine) search for published studies was conducted, and the relevant articles were reviewed, accompanied by the authors' experience at their practicing institution. Conclusions.—The review of the available literature strongly suggests the growing importance of CPR both in the clinical trial setting as well as in second opinion cases. However, the currently applied approach significantly impedes efficient transfer of slides and patient data. Recent advances in imaging, digital microscopy, and Internet technologies suggest that the CPR process may be dramatically streamlined in the foreseeable future to allow for better diagnosis and quality assurance than ever before. In particular, whole slide imaging may play an important role in this process and result in a substantial reduction of the overall turnaround time required for slide review at the central location. Above all, this new approach may benefit the large clinical trials organized by oncology cooperative groups, since most of those trials involve complicated logistics owing to enrollment of large number of patients at several remotely located participating institutions.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3034-3034 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J Maurer ◽  
Brian K Link ◽  
Thomas M. Habermann ◽  
Carrie A. Thompson ◽  
Cristine Allmer ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: There are a number of ongoing clinical trials assessing next-generation immunochemotherapy (IC) regimens (i.e. RX-CHOP) in DLBCL. In addition to standard clinical trial workup, some trials require central pathology review and/or molecular phenotyping before treatment assignment and/or initiation of therapy. There is concern that these studies may be biasing patient selection due to missing patients with aggressive disease who require immediate therapy and cannot delay their treatment to enroll on a study. Here we examine clinical characteristics and outcome stratified by the time from diagnosis to initiation of therapy from a large observational cohort of patients with DLBCL from the R-CHOP era. Methods: Patients were prospectively enrolled in the University of Iowa / Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) within 9 months of diagnosis and followed for relapse, retreatment, and death. Clinical management at diagnosis and subsequent therapies were per treating physician. This analysis includes patients with stage II-IV DLBCL or primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) who underwent front-line anthracycline based IC; patients with primary CNS lymphoma, PTLD, or a component of low-grade lymphoma were excluded. Time from diagnosis to treatment was defined as the time from date of first lymphoma-containing biopsy to the initiation of IC therapy; delayed therapy was defined as initiating therapy more than 14 days after diagnosis. Event-free survival was defined as time from diagnosis until progression, retreatment, or death due to any cause. EFS24 was defined as progression free status 24 months from diagnosis. Results: 720 patients with stage II-IV newly diagnosed DLBCL or PMBCL and treated with IC were enrolled in the MER from 2002-2012. Median age at diagnosis was 62 years (range 18-92) and 399 patients (55%) were male. 541 patients (75%) had stage III/IV disease and IPI at diagnosis was 0-1 in 166 patients (23%), 2 in 221 patients (31%), 3 in 222 patients (31%) and 4-5 in 111 patients (15%). 233 of 395 patients (59%) were GCB per Hans. At a median follow-up of 73 months, (range 0-163), 349 (49%) patients had an event and 267 patients died (37%); 37% of patients failed to achieve EFS24. Median time from initial lymphoma diagnosis to initiation of IC was 14 days (range 0-79, IQR=8-23). Patients with delay in therapy (>14 days from diagnosis) were more frequently female (50%, p=0.0051) and older than patients who initiated therapy within 14 days from diagnosis (median age at diagnosis of 63 years vs. 60 years, p=0.0008). Patients with delay in treatment initiation had universally less aggressive disease characteristics, including earlier stage, non-elevated LDH, 0-1 extranodal sites, absence of B-symptoms, lower ECOG PS, and lower IPI (see table). In addition, patients with delayed therapy were enriched for GCB subtype per Hans algorithm (p=0.056). Patients with initiation of therapy within 14 day of diagnosis had significantly worse outcome (EFS24 failure=44%) compared to patients with delayed time to initiation of therapy (EFS24 failure=28%, p<0.0001, figure), which remained significant after adjusting for either IPI or aaIPI (both p<0.005). The association between delayed time to initiation of therapy and EFS24 was observed in both GCB (EFS24 failure = 42% vs. 27%, p=0.019) and non-GCB (EFS24 failure = 46% vs. 27%, p=0.014) subsets by Hans. The lower event rate in delayed therapy patients results in an approximately 10% loss of power if the study was powered based on all patients regardless of timing from diagnosis to therapy. Conclusions: Patients with delayed therapy from diagnosis have less aggressive clinical characteristics compared to patients who initiate treatment within 14 days from diagnosis. Studies with a lengthy trial work-up including central pathology review period may be selecting patients with less aggressive disease based on the patient's ability to delay treatment to complete study enrollment requirements. Furthermore, selection of patients with less aggressive disease may result in underpowered studies due to a lower event rate (fewer events) than expected. This retrospective analysis would suggest that trials in DLBCL should consider streamlined enrollment and therapy initiation to avoid potential selection bias and loss of power. Further assessment of implications on trial design and outcomes by cell of origin in this setting is ongoing. Table Table. Figure Figure. Disclosures Maurer: Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ansell:BMS, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Celldex and Affimed: Research Funding. Nowakowski:Morphosys: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document