50 research outputs found

    Outcome of uterine sarcoma patients treated with pazopanib: A retrospective analysis based on two European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (STBSG) clinical trials 62043 and 62072.

    Get PDF
    Background Uterine sarcomas are a group of mesenchymal tumours comprising several histologies. They have a high recurrence rate following surgery, modest outcome to systemic therapy, and poor overall survival. Pazopanib is a multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for non-adipocytic advanced soft tissue sarcomas (STS). Here we investigated whether response to pazopanib in patients with uterine sarcomas differs from that of patients with non-uterine sarcomas.Patients and methods Uterine sarcoma patients were retrieved from all soft tissue sarcoma patients treated with pazopanib in EORTC Phase II (n=10) and Phase III (PALETTE) (n=34) studies. Patient and tumour characteristics, response, progression free and overall survival data were compared.Results Forty-four patients with uterine sarcoma were treated with pazopanib. The majority of patients had uterine leiomyosarcoma (LMS) (n=39, 88.6%) with high grade tumours (n=37, 84.1%) compared to 54.8% (n=164) in the non-uterine population. The median age was 55years (range 33-79) and median follow up was 2.3years. Uterine patients were heavily pre-treated, 61.3% having ≥2 lines of chemotherapy prior to pazopanib compared to 40.8% in the non-uterine population. Five patients (11%), all LMS, had a partial response (95% CI 3.8-24.6). Median progression free survival (PFS) 3.0months (95% CI 2.5-4.7) in uterine versus 4.5 (95% CI 3.7-5.1) in non-uterine STS. Median overall survival (OS) was 17.5months (95% CI 11.1-19.6), longer than the non-uterine population, 11.1months (95% CI 10.2-12.0) (p=0.352).Conclusions Despite heavy pre-treatment, pazopanib shows signs of activity in patients with uterine sarcoma with the similar outcomes to patients with non-uterine STS

    Comparison of MAPIE versus MAP in patients with a poor response to preoperative chemotherapy for newly diagnosed high-grade osteosarcoma (EURAMOS-1): an open-label, international, randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background We designed the EURAMOS-1 trial to investigate whether intensified postoperative chemotherapy for patients whose tumour showed a poor response to preoperative chemotherapy (≥10% viable tumour) improved event-free survival in patients with high-grade osteosarcoma. Methods EURAMOS-1 was an open-label, international, phase 3 randomised, controlled trial. Consenting patients with newly diagnosed, resectable, high-grade osteosarcoma aged 40 years or younger were eligible for randomisation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either postoperative cisplatin, doxorubicin, and methotrexate (MAP) or MAP plus ifosfamide and etoposide (MAPIE) using concealed permuted blocks with three stratification factors: trial group; location of tumour (proximal femur or proximal humerus vs other limb vs axial skeleton); and presence of metastases (no vs yes or possible). The MAP regimen consisted of cisplatin 120 mg/m2, doxorubicin 37·5 mg/m2 per day on days 1 and 2 (on weeks 1 and 6) followed 3 weeks later by high-dose methotrexate 12 g/m2 over 4 h. The MAPIE regimen consisted of MAP as a base regimen, with the addition of high-dose ifosfamide (14 g/m2) at 2·8 g/m2 per day with equidose mesna uroprotection, followed by etoposide 100 mg/m2 per day over 1 h on days 1–5. The primary outcome measure was event-free survival measured in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00134030. Findings Between April 14, 2005, and June 30, 2011, 2260 patients were registered from 325 sites in 17 countries. 618 patients with poor response were randomly assigned; 310 to receive MAP and 308 to receive MAPIE. Median follow-up was 62·1 months (IQR 46·6–76·6); 62·3 months (IQR 46·9–77·1) for the MAP group and 61·1 months (IQR 46·5–75·3) for the MAPIE group. 307 event-free survival events were reported (153 in the MAP group vs 154 in the MAPIE group). 193 deaths were reported (101 in the MAP group vs 92 in the MAPIE group). Event-free survival did not differ between treatment groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0·98 [95% CI 0·78–1·23]); hazards were non-proportional (p=0·0003). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (268 [89%] patients in MAP vs 268 [90%] in MAPIE), thrombocytopenia (231 [78% in MAP vs 248 [83%] in MAPIE), and febrile neutropenia without documented infection (149 [50%] in MAP vs 217 [73%] in MAPIE). MAPIE was associated with more frequent grade 4 non-haematological toxicity than MAP (35 [12%] of 301 in the MAP group vs 71 [24%] of 298 in the MAPIE group). Two patients died during postoperative therapy, one from infection (although their absolute neutrophil count was normal), which was definitely related to their MAP treatment (specifically doxorubicin and cisplatin), and one from left ventricular systolic dysfunction, which was probably related to MAPIE treatment (specifically doxorubicin). One suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction was reported in the MAP group: bone marrow infarction due to methotrexate. Interpretation EURAMOS-1 results do not support the addition of ifosfamide and etoposide to postoperative chemotherapy in patients with poorly responding osteosarcoma because its administration was associated with increased toxicity without improving event-free survival. The results define standard of care for this population. New strategies are required to improve outcomes in this setting. Funding UK Medical Research Council, National Cancer Institute, European Science Foundation, St Anna Kinderkrebsforschung, Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek-Vlaanderen, Parents Organization, Danish Medical Research Council, Academy of Finland, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Semmelweis Foundation, ZonMw (Council for Medical Research), Research Council of Norway, Scandinavian Sarcoma Group, Swiss Paediatric Oncology Group, Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health Research, University College London Hospitals, and Biomedical Research Centre

    Sebészi radikalitás és rekonstrukciós lehetőségek végtagi lágyrészsarcomáknál

    No full text
    Soft tissue sarcomas are rare, reaching some 1.5% of all malignant tumors. While formerly the surgical management of sarcomas almost exclusively consisted of amputation, in the recent years limb saving surgery has become the first choice of therapy. Negative factors affecting the survival rate are: histologically high-grade tumor, size and localization of the tumor, vascular invasion, extensive tumor necrosis, certain subgroups, local recurrence and oncologically positive surgical margin at the resection. Many modern reconstruction possibilities are essential for the safe limb saving surgery with wide surgical margins, such as bone allograft implantation, tumor endoprostheses reconstruction, vascular grafting and plastic surgery. There should always be an attempt to perform limb saving surgery, however life quality, life expectancy and survival are more important considerations influencing essentially the surgical method of choice. In our follow-up study no significant difference in recurrence rate was found between the group of patients with sarcomas requiring a complex reconstruction procedure and the group of those treated by only resection methods (32% versus 47%)
    corecore