Complete radiological response to first-line regorafenib in a patient with abdominal relapse of BRAF V600E mutated GIST

Up to 13% of KIT and PDGFRA wild-type (WT) gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) harbour a BRAF mutation, mostly involving the exon 15 V600E hot spot. Even if BRAF mutation is recognized as druggable target in other solid tumours, currently advanced BRAF-mutant GIST share the same therapeutical algorithm of KIT/PDGFRA mutants. We report a complete radiological response in a 51-year-old woman with V600E BRAF-mutated metastatic GIST who was treated with regorafenib (REG) as first-line therapy. REG represents the standard third-line therapy for advanced GIST patients progressing on or failing to respond to imatinib and sunitinib. However, according to its wide spectrum of action, with MAPK signalling pathway blockade at different levels, metastatic KIT/PDGFRA WT, including BRAF mutants, may benefit from REG upfront in first line

Successful radiotherapy for local control of progressively increasing metastasis of gastrointestinal stromal tumor

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are known to be poorly responsive to conventional chemotherapy and historically considered resistant to radiotherapy. In the past the mainstay of GIST treatment was surgery, but the introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) imatinib and sunitinib marked the beginning of a new era in the treatment of GIST patients. To date, radiotherapy for GIST has not been administered in clinical practice except for limited palliative settings and there are no clear data on the administration of radiotherapy, alone or in combination with TKIs, with a purely cytoreductive intent. We describe the clinical case of a 48-year-old woman with metastatic GIST treated with external radiotherapy in a critical supraclavicular tumor localization progressively increasing in size with several symptoms and not responsive to systemic TKI therapies. We obtained an initial shrinkage of the mass and subsequent stabilization with an immediate and clear clinical benefit. Although the historical medical literature considered GISTs resistant to radiation therapy, our clinical case suggests this treatment may be appropriate in selected patients

Whole exome sequencing (WES) on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor tissue in gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST)

Next generation sequencing (NGS) technology has been rapidly introduced into basic and translational research in oncology, but the reduced availability of fresh frozen (FF) tumor tissues and the poor quality of DNA extracted from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) has significantly impaired this process in the field of solid tumors. To evaluate if data generated from FFPE material can be reliably produced and potentially used in routine clinical settings, we performed whole exome sequencing (WES) from tumor samples of Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), either extracted FF or FFPE, and from matched normal DNA

Personalization of regorafenib treatment in metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumours in real-life clinical practice

Background: Regorafenib (REG) has now been approved as the standard third-line therapy in metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) patients at the recommended dose and schedule of 160 mg once daily for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle. However, it has a relevant toxicity profile that mainly occurs within the first cycles of therapy, and dose and schedule adjustments are often required to reduce the frequency or severity of adverse events and to avoid early treatment discontinuation. To date, large amounts of data on the use of REG in metastatic GIST patients in daily clinical practice are not available, and we lack information about how this treatment personalization really affects the quality of life (QoL) of patients. The aim of the present retrospective study is to build a comprehensive picture of all alternative REG strategies adopted in daily clinical practice for use in metastatic GIST patients. Methods: Metastatic GIST patients treated with dose adjustment or alternative schedules of REG at seven reference Italian centres were retrospectively included. Results: For a total of 62 metastatic GIST patients, we confirmed that REG treatment adjustment is common in clinical practice and that it is very heterogeneous, with approximately 20 different strategies being adopted. Independent of which strategy is chosen, treatment personalization has led to a clinical benefit defined as complete or partial resolution of side effects in almost all patients, affecting the duration of REG treatment. Conclusions: The personalization of REG, even if it is heterogeneous, seems to be crucial to maximize the overall treatment duration

Good survival outcome of metastatic SDH-deficient gastrointestinal stromal tumors harboring SDHA mutations

Purpose:A subset of patients with KIT/PDGFRA wild-type gastrointestinal stromal tumors show loss of function of succinate dehydrogenase, mostly due to germ-line mutations of succinate dehydrogenase subunits, with a predominance of succinate dehydrogenase subunit A. The clinical outcome of these patients seems favorable, as reported in small series in which patients were individually described. This work evaluates a retrospective survival analysis of a series of patients with metastatic KIT/PDGFRA wild-type succinate dehydrogenase-deficient gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Methods:Sixty-nine patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors were included in the study (11 KIT/PDGFRA wild-type, of whom 6 were succinate dehydrogenase deficient, 5 were non-succinate dehydrogenase deficient, and 58 were KIT/PDGFRA mutant). All six succinate dehydrogenase-deficient patients harbored SDHA mutations. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were used to compare the survival of patients with succinate dehydrogenase subunit A-mutant gastrointestinal stromal tumors with that of KIT/PDGFRA wild-type patients without succinate dehydrogenase deficiency and patients with KIT/PDGFRA-mutant gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Results:Follow-up ranged from 8.5 to 200.7 months. The difference between succinate dehydrogenase subunit A-mutant gastrointestinal stromal tumors and KIT/PDGFRA-mutant or KIT/PDGFRA wild-type non-succinate dehydrogenase deficient gastrointestinal stromal tumors was significant considering different analyses (P = 0.007 and P = 0.033, respectively, from diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumor for the whole study population; P = 0.005 and P = 0.018, respectively, from diagnosis of metastatic disease for the whole study population; P = 0.007 for only patients who were metastatic at diagnosis).Conclusion:Patients with metastatic KIT/PDGFRA wild-type succinate dehydrogenase-deficient gastrointestinal stromal tumors harboring succinate dehydrogenase subunit A mutations present an impressively long survival. These patients should be identified in clinical practice to better tailor treatments and follow-up over time A subset of patients with KIT/PDGFRA wild-type gastrointestinal stromal tumors show loss of function of succinate dehydrogenase, mostly due to germ-line mutations of succinate dehydrogenase subunits, with a predominance of succinate dehydrogenase subunit A. The clinical outcome of these patients seems favorable, as reported in small series in which patients were individually described. This work evaluates a retrospective survival analysis of a series of patients with metastatic KIT/PDGFRA wild-type succinate dehydrogenase-deficient gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Methods:Sixty-nine patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors were included in the study (11 KIT/PDGFRA wild-type, of whom 6 were succinate dehydrogenase deficient, 5 were non-succinate dehydrogenase deficient, and 58 were KIT/PDGFRA mutant). All six succinate dehydrogenase-deficient patients harbored SDHA mutations. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were used to compare the survival of patients with succinate dehydrogenase subunit A-mutant gastrointestinal stromal tumors with that of KIT/PDGFRA wild-type patients without succinate dehydrogenase deficiency and patients with KIT/PDGFRA-mutant gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Results:Follow-up ranged from 8.5 to 200.7 months. The difference between succinate dehydrogenase subunit A-mutant gastrointestinal stromal tumors and KIT/PDGFRA-mutant or KIT/PDGFRA wild-type non-succinate dehydrogenase deficient gastrointestinal stromal tumors was significant considering different analyses (P = 0.007 and P = 0.033, respectively, from diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumor for the whole study population; P = 0.005 and P = 0.018, respectively, from diagnosis of metastatic disease for the whole study population; P = 0.007 for only patients who were metastatic at diagnosis).Conclusion:Patients with metastatic KIT/PDGFRA wild-type succinate dehydrogenase-deficient gastrointestinal stromal tumors harboring succinate dehydrogenase subunit A mutations present an impressively long survival. These patients should be identified in clinical practice to better tailor treatments and follow-up over time

Three cases of bone metastases in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are rare, but represent the most common mesenchymal neoplasms of the gastrointestinal tract. Tumor resection is the treatment of choice for localized disease. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (imatinib, sunitinib) are the standard therapy for metastatic or unresectable GISTs. GISTs usually metastasize to the liver and peritoneum. Bone metastases are uncommon. We describe three cases of bone metastases in patients with advanced GISTs: two women (82 and 54 years of age), and one man (62 years of age). Bones metastases involved the spine, pelvis and ribs in one patient, multiple vertebral bodies and pelvis in one, and the spine and iliac wings in the third case. The lesions presented a lytic pattern in all cases. Two patients presented with multiple bone metastases at the time of initial diagnosis and one patient after seven years during the follow-up period. This report describes the diagnosis and treatment of the lesions and may help clinicians to manage bones metastases in GIST patients

Integrated genomic study of quadruple-WT GIST (KIT/PDGFRA/SDH/RAS pathway wild-type GIST)

BACKGROUND: About 10-15% of adult gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) and the vast majority of pediatric GIST do not harbour KIT or platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRA) mutations (J Clin Oncol 22:3813-3825, 2004; Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 23:15-34, 2009). The molecular biology of these GIST, originally defined as KIT/PDGFRA wild-type (WT), is complex due to the existence of different subgroups with distinct molecular hallmarks, including defects in the succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) complex and mutations of neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), BRAF, or KRAS genes (RAS-pathway or RAS-P).In this extremely heterogeneous landscape, the clinical profile and molecular abnormalities of the small subgroup of WT GIST suitably referred to as quadruple wild-type GIST (quadrupleWT or KITWT/PDGFRAWT/SDHWT/RAS-PWT) remains undefined. The aim of this study is to investigate the genomic profile of KITWT/PDGFRAWT/SDHWT/RAS-PWT GIST, by using a massively parallel sequencing and microarray approach, and compare it with the genomic profile of other GIST subtypes. METHODS: We performed a whole genome analysis using a massively parallel sequencing approach on a total of 16 GIST cases (2 KITWT/PDGFRAWT/SDHWT and SDHBIHC+/SDHAIHC+, 2 KITWT/PDGFRAWT/SDHAmut and SDHBIHC-/SDHAIHC- and 12 cases of KITmut or PDGFRAmut GIST). To confirm and extend the results, whole-genome gene expression analysis by microarray was performed on 9 out 16 patients analyzed by RNAseq and an additional 20 GIST patients (1 KITWT/PDGFRAWTSDHAmut GIST and 19 KITmut or PDGFRAmut GIST). The most impressive data were validated by quantitave PCR and Western Blot analysis. RESULTS: We found that both cases of quadrupleWT GIST had a genomic profile profoundly different from both either KIT/PDGFRA mutated or SDHA-mutated GIST. In particular, the quadrupleWT GIST tumors are characterized by the overexpression of molecular markers (CALCRL and COL22A1) and of specific oncogenes including tyrosine and cyclin- dependent kinases (NTRK2 and CDK6) and one member of the ETS-transcription factor family (ERG). CONCLUSION: We report for the first time an integrated genomic picture of KITWT/PDGFRAWT/SDHWT/RAS-PWT GIST, using massively parallel sequencing and gene expression analyses, and found that quadrupleWT GIST have an expression signature that is distinct from SDH-mutant GIST as well as GIST harbouring mutations in KIT or PDGFRA. Our findings suggest that quadrupleWT GIST represent another unique group within the family of gastrointestintal stromal tumors

SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529)-related COVID-19 sequelae in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with cancer: results from the OnCovid registry

Background COVID-19 sequelae can affect about 15% of patients with cancer who survive the acute phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection and can substantially impair their survival and continuity of oncological care. We aimed to investigate whether previous immunisation affects long-term sequelae in the context of evolving variants of concern of SARS-CoV-2. Methods OnCovid is an active registry that includes patients aged 18 years or older from 37 institutions across Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and a history of solid or haematological malignancy, either active or in remission, followed up from COVID-19 diagnosis until death. We evaluated the prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae in patients who survived COVID-19 and underwent a formal clinical reassessment, categorising infection according to the date of diagnosis as the omicron (B.1.1.529) phase from Dec 15, 2021, to Jan 31, 2022; the alpha (B.1.1.7)-delta (B.1.617.2) phase from Dec 1, 2020, to Dec 14, 2021; and the pre-vaccination phase from Feb 27 to Nov 30, 2020. The prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae was compared according to SARS-CoV-2 immunisation status and in relation to post-COVID-19 survival and resumption of systemic anticancer therapy. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04393974. Findings At the follow-up update on June 20, 2022, 1909 eligible patients, evaluated after a median of 39 days (IQR 24-68) from COVID-19 diagnosis, were included (964 [ 50 center dot 7%] of 1902 patients with sex data were female and 938 [49 center dot 3%] were male). Overall, 317 (16 center dot 6%; 95% CI 14 center dot 8-18 center dot 5) of 1909 patients had at least one sequela from COVID-19 at the first oncological reassessment. The prevalence of COVID-19 sequelae was highest in the prevaccination phase (191 [19 center dot 1%; 95% CI 16 center dot 4-22 center dot 0] of 1000 patients). The prevalence was similar in the alpha-delta phase (110 [16 center dot 8%; 13 center dot 8- 20 center dot 3] of 653 patients, p=0 center dot 24), but significantly lower in the omicron phase (16 [6 center dot 2%; 3 center dot 5-10 center dot 2] of 256 patients, p<0 center dot 0001). In the alpha- delta phase, 84 (18 center dot 3%; 95% CI 14 center dot 6-22 center dot 7) of 458 unvaccinated patients and three (9 center dot 4%; 1 center dot 9- 27 center dot 3) of 32 unvaccinated patients in the omicron phase had sequelae. Patients who received a booster and those who received two vaccine doses had a significantly lower prevalence of overall COVID-19 sequelae than unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients (ten [7 center dot 4%; 95% CI 3 center dot 5-13 center dot 5] of 136 boosted patients, 18 [9 center dot 8%; 5 center dot 8-15 center dot 5] of 183 patients who had two vaccine doses vs 277 [ 18 center dot 5%; 16 center dot 5-20 center dot 9] of 1489 unvaccinated patients, p=0 center dot 0001), respiratory sequelae (six [4 center dot 4%; 1 center dot 6-9 center dot 6], 11 [6 center dot 0%; 3 center dot 0-10 center dot 7] vs 148 [9 center dot 9%; 8 center dot 4- 11 center dot 6], p= 0 center dot 030), and prolonged fatigue (three [2 center dot 2%; 0 center dot 1-6 center dot 4], ten [5 center dot 4%; 2 center dot 6-10 center dot 0] vs 115 [7 center dot 7%; 6 center dot 3-9 center dot 3], p=0 center dot 037)