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.Peer reviewe

Systemic treatments in MDM2 positive intimal sarcoma: A multicentre experience with anthracycline, gemcitabine, and pazopanib within the World Sarcoma Network

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/152621/1/cncr32508_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/152621/2/cncr32508.pd

Efficacy of the combination of long-acting release octreotide and tamoxifen in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised multicentre phase III study

To assess the efficacy of the combination of long-acting release (LAR) octreotide and tamoxifen (TMX) for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A total of 109 patients with advanced HCC were randomised to receive octreotide LAR combined with TMX (n=56) (experimental treatment group) or TMX alone (n=53; control group). The clinical, biological and tumoural parameters were recorded every 3 months until death. Primary end point was patient survival; secondary end points were the impact of therapy on tumour response, quality of life and variceal bleeding episodes. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for assessment of specific prognostic factors. The median survival was 3 months (95% CI 1.4–4.6) for the experimental treatment group and 6 months (CI 95% 2–10) for the control group (P=0.609). There was no difference in terms of α-foetoprotein (α-FP) decrease, tumour regression, improvement of quality of life and prevention of variceal bleeding between the two groups. Variables associated with a better survival in the multivariate analysis were: presence of cirrhosis, α-FP level <400 ng ml−1 and Okuda stage I. The combination of octreotide LAR and TMX does not influence survival, tumour progression or quality of life in patients with advanced HCC

Flanking signal and mature peptide residues influence signal peptide cleavage

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Signal peptides (SPs) mediate the targeting of secretory precursor proteins to the correct subcellular compartments in prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Identifying these transient peptides is crucial to the medical, food and beverage and biotechnology industries yet our understanding of these peptides remains limited. This paper examines the most common type of signal peptides cleavable by the endoprotease signal peptidase I (SPase I), and the residues flanking the cleavage sites of three groups of signal peptide sequences, namely (i) eukaryotes (Euk) (ii) Gram-positive (Gram+) bacteria, and (iii) Gram-negative (Gram-) bacteria.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In this study, 2352 secretory peptide sequences from a variety of organisms with amino-terminal SPs are extracted from the manually curated SPdb database for analysis based on physicochemical properties such as p<it>I</it>, aliphatic index, GRAVY score, hydrophobicity, net charge and position-specific residue preferences. Our findings show that the three groups share several similarities in general, but they display distinctive features upon examination in terms of their amino acid compositions and frequencies, and various physico-chemical properties. Thus, analysis or prediction of their sequences should be separated and treated as distinct groups.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We conclude that the peptide segment recognized by SPase I extends to the start of the mature protein to a limited extent, upon our survey of the amino acid residues surrounding the cleavage processing site. These flanking residues possibly influence the cleavage processing and contribute to non-canonical cleavage sites. Our findings are applicable in defining more accurate prediction tools for recognition and identification of cleavage site of SPs.</p

Pazopanib in advanced vascular sarcomas: an EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (STBSG) retrospective analysis.

Background Pazopanib is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of patients with selective subtypes of advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) who have previously received standard chemotherapy including anthracyclines. Data on the efficacy in vascular sarcomas are limited. The main objective of this study was to investigate the activity of pazopanib in vascular sarcomas.Patients and methods A retrospective study of patients with advanced vascular sarcomas, including angiosarcoma (AS), epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (HE) and intimal sarcoma (IS) treated with pazopanib in real life practice at EORTC centers as well as patients treated within the EORTC phase II and III clinical trials (62043/62072) was performed. Patient and tumor characteristics were collected. Response was assessed according to RECIST 1.1. and survival analysis was performed.Results Fifty-two patients were identified, 40 (76.9%), 10 (19.2%) and two (3.8%) with AS, HE and IS, respectively. The response rate was eight (20%), two (20%) and two (100%) in the AS, HE and IS subtypes, respectively. There was no significant difference in response rate between cutaneous and non-cutaneous AS and similarly between radiation-associated and non-radiation-associated AS. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS; from commencing pazopanib) were three months (95% CI 2.1-4.4) and 9.9 months (95% CI 6.5-11.3) in AS, respectively.Conclusion The activity of pazopanib in AS is comparable to its reported activity in other STS subtypes. In this study, the activity of pazopanib was similar in cutaneous/non-cutaneous and in radiation/non-radiation-associated AS. In addition, pazopanib showed promising activity in HE and IS, worthy of further evaluation

Prognostic factors in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: metastasectomy as independent prognostic variable

Prognostic and predictive factors in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (MRCC) have been evaluated from untreated patients or patients on several different treatment approaches. The aim of this analysis was to define prognostic and predictive factors in patients treated uniformly with a low-dose outpatient cytokine combination. The relationship between patient-, tumour-, and treatment-related factors was analysed in 99 patients with MRCC. These features were first examined in univariate analyses, then a stepwise modelling approach based on Cox regression was used to form a multivariate model. Nuclear grade, metastasectomy – even incomplete – C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase were identified as independent prognostic factors for survival. Patients assigned to three different risk groups had statistically significant survival differences (30, 22 and 6 months, respectively). A total of 43.4% had undergone metastasectomy, mostly incomplete. Risk group affiliation was correlated with response to treatment. Our findings strongly suggest the consideration of metastasectomy in the management of patients with metastatic renal cell cancer undergoing either immunotherapy or targeted treatment

Selinexor in Advanced, Metastatic Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma: A Multinational, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

PURPOSE Antitumor activity in preclinical models and a phase I study of patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DD-LPS) was observed with selinexor. We evaluated the clinical benefit of selinexor in patients with previously treated DD-LPS whose sarcoma progressed on approved agents. METHODS SEAL was a phase II-III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients age 12 years or older with advanced DD-LPS who had received two-five lines of therapy were randomly assigned (2:1) to selinexor (60 mg) or placebo twice weekly in 6-week cycles (crossover permitted). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included for safety analysis (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: ). RESULTS Two hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled (selinexor, n = 188; placebo, n = 97). PFS was significantly longer with selinexor versus placebo: hazard ratio (HR) 0.70 (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.95; one-sided P = .011; medians 2.8 v 2.1 months), as was time to next treatment: HR 0.50 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.66; one-sided P < .0001; medians 5.8 v 3.2 months). With crossover, no difference was observed in overall survival. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade versus grade 3 or 4 with selinexor were nausea (151 [80.7%] v 11 [5.9]), decreased appetite (113 [60.4%] v 14 [7.5%]), and fatigue (96 [51.3%] v 12 [6.4%]). Four (2.1%) and three (3.1%) patients died in the selinexor and placebo arms, respectively. Exploratory RNA sequencing analysis identified that the absence of CALB1 expression was associated with longer PFS with selinexor compared with placebo (median 6.9 v 2.2 months; HR, 0.19; P = .001). CONCLUSION Patients with advanced, refractory DD-LPS showed improved PFS and time to next treatment with selinexor compared with placebo. Supportive care and dose reductions mitigated side effects of selinexor. Prospective validation of CALB1 expression as a predictive biomarker for selinexor in DD-LPS is warranted. (C) 2022 by American Society of Clinical Oncolog

Doxorubicin plus dacarbazine, doxorubicin plus ifosfamide, or doxorubicin alone as a first‐line treatment for advanced leiomyosarcoma: A propensity score matching analysis from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group

Background The optimal treatment for advanced leiomyosarcoma is still debated. Given histotype‐specific prospective controlled data lacking, this study retrospectively evaluated doxorubicin plus dacarbazine, doxorubicin plus ifosfamide, and doxorubicin alone as first‐line treatments for advanced/metastatic leiomyosarcoma treated at European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (EORTC‐STBSG) sites. Methods The inclusion criteria were a confirmed histological diagnosis, treatment between January 2010 and December 2015, measurable disease (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2, and an age ≥ 18 years. The endpoints were progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and overall response rate (ORR). PFS was analyzed with methods for interval‐censored data. Patients were matched according to their propensity scores, which were estimated with a logistic regression model accounting for histology, grade, age, sex, performance status, tumor site, and tumor extent. Results Three hundred three patients from 18 EORTC‐STBSG sites were identified. One hundred seventeen (39%) received doxorubicin plus dacarbazine, 71 (23%) received doxorubicin plus ifosfamide, and 115 (38%) received doxorubicin. In the 2:1:2 propensity score–matched population (205 patients), the estimated median PFS was 9.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.2‐9.7 months), 8.2 months (95% CI, 5.2‐10.1 months), and 4.8 months (95% CI, 2.3‐6.0 months) with ORRs of 30.9%, 19.5%, and 25.6% for doxorubicin plus dacarbazine, doxorubicin plus ifosfamide, and doxorubicin alone, respectively. PFS was significantly longer with doxorubicin plus dacarbazine versus doxorubicin (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52‐0.99). Doxorubicin plus dacarbazine was associated with longer OS (median, 36.8 months; 95% CI, 27.9‐47.2 months) in comparison with both doxorubicin plus ifosfamide (median, 21.9 months; 95% CI, 16.7‐33.4 months; HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.40‐1.06) and doxorubicin (median, 30.3 months; 95% CI, 21.0‐36.3 months; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.43‐0.99). Adjusted analyses retained an effect for PFS but not for OS. None of the factors selected for multivariate analysis had a significant interaction with the received treatment for both PFS and OS. Conclusions This is the largest retrospective study of first‐line treatment for advanced leiomyosarcoma. In the propensity score–matched population, doxorubicin and dacarbazine showed favorable activity in terms of both ORR and PFS and warrants further evaluation in prospective trials