A global collaboRAtive study of CIC-rearranged, BCOR::CCNB3-rearranged and other ultra-rare unclassified undifferentiated small round cell sarcomas (GRACefUl)

[Background] Undifferentiated small round cell sarcomas (URCSs) represent a diagnostic challenge, and their optimal treatment is unknown. We aimed to define the clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcome of URCS patients.[Methods] URCS patients treated from 1983 to 2019 at 21 worldwide sarcoma reference centres were retrospectively identified. Based on molecular assessment, cases were classified as follows: (1) CIC-rearranged round cell sarcomas, (2) BCOR::CCNB3-rearranged round cell sarcomas, (3) unclassified URCSs. Treatment, prognostic factors and outcome were reviewed.[Results] In total, 148 patients were identified [88/148 (60%) CIC-rearranged sarcoma (median age 32 years, range 7–78), 33/148 (22%) BCOR::CCNB3-rearranged (median age 17 years, range 5–91), and 27/148 (18%) unclassified URCSs (median age 37 years, range 4–70)]. One hundred-one (68.2%) cases presented with localised disease; 47 (31.8%) had metastases at diagnosis. Male prevalence, younger age, bone primary site, and a low rate of synchronous metastases were observed in BCOR::CCNB3-rearranged cases. Local treatment was surgery in 67/148 (45%) patients, and surgery + radiotherapy in 52/148 (35%). Chemotherapy was given to 122/148 (82%) patients. At a 42.7-month median follow-up, the 3-year overall survival (OS) was 92.2% (95% CI 71.5–98.0) in BCOR::CCNB3 patients, 39.6% (95% CI 27.7–51.3) in CIC-rearranged sarcomas, and 78.7% in unclassified URCSs (95% CI 56.1–90.6; p < 0.0001).[Conclusions] This study is the largest conducted in URCS and confirms major differences in outcomes between URCS subtypes. A full molecular assessment should be undertaken when a diagnosis of URCS is suspected. Prospective studies are needed to better define the optimal treatment strategy in each URCS subtype.This work was supported by the Carisbo Foundation Call for Translational and Clinical Medical Research.Peer reviewe

Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy for Unresectable or Metastatic Sarcoma Lesions Provides Durable Tumor Control and Effective Palliation

https://openworks.mdanderson.org/sumexp21/1002/thumbnail.jp

Antitumor Activity of Lurbinectedin, a Selective Inhibitor of Oncogene Transcription, in Patients with Relapsed Ewing Sarcoma: Results of a Basket Phase II Study

Purpose: Lurbinectedin suppresses the oncogenic transcription factor EWS-FLI1 through relocalization to the nucleolus, and delays tumor growth in mice bearing Ewing sarcoma xenografts. On the basis of this rationale, lurbinectedin was evaluated in patients with relapsed Ewing sarcoma. Patients and Methods: This open-label, single-arm, Basket phase II trial included a cohort of 28 treated adult patients with confirmed Ewing sarcoma, measurable disease as per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) v.1.1, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2, adequate organ function, no central nervous system metastasis, and pretreated with ≤2 chemotherapy lines for metastatic/recurrent disease. Patients received lurbinectedin 3.2mg/m2 as a 1-hour infusion every 3 weeks. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) as per RECIST v.1.1. Secondary endpoints included time-to-event parameters and safety profile. Results: ORR was 14.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.0%-32.7%], with median duration of response of 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.9-5.5 months). Median progression-free survival was 2.7 months (95% CI, 1.4-4.3 months), clinical benefit rate was 39.3%, and disease control rate was 57.1%. With 39% censoring, median overall survival was 12.0 months (95% CI, 8.5- 18.5 months). Most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (57%), anemia, thrombocytopenia, and treatmentrelated febrile neutropenia (14% each). No deaths or discontinuations were due to toxicity. Conclusions: Lurbinectedin was active in the treatment of relapsed Ewing sarcoma and had a manageable safety profile. Lurbinectedin could represent a valuable addition to therapies for Ewing sarcoma, and is currently being evaluated in combination with irinotecan in advanced Ewing sarcoma in a phase Ib/II trial.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

PET/CT Imaging as a Diagnostic Tool in Distinguishing Well-Differentiated versus Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma

Distinguishing well-differentiated liposarcoma (WDLPS) from dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS) is essential given distinct treatment paradigms and chemosensitivity. Percutaneous biopsy has a low sensitivity for detecting DDLPS. We sought to identify the diagnostic utility of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in identifying WDLPS versus DDLPS. An independent radiologist reviewed PET/CT images to identify target lesions and determine the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax). An independent pathologist review confirmed WDLPS or DDLPS histology. A binary cutoff point of SUVmax was identified using a classification and regression trees (CART) algorithm. We identified 20 patients with WDLPS or DDLPS with 26 PET/CTs performed for separate recurrences that were followed by surgical sampling. Of the 26 records, 12 were DDLPS (46%) and 14 were WDLPS (54%). Patients with DDLPS had significantly higher SUVmax than those with WDLPS (p value = 0.0035). A SUVmax of 4 was identified as the cutoff point. Using this cutoff, the sensitivity of SUVmax identifying a case as DDLPS was 83.3% (95% CI: 51.6%, 97.9%) and the specificity was 85.7% (95% CI: 57.2%, 98.2%). PET/CT is a sensitive and specific diagnostic tool to identify the presence of dedifferentiation within the tumor

Outcomes of Late-Line Systemic Treatment in GIST: Does Sequence Matter?

Ripretinib and avapritinib have demonstrated activity in the late-line treatment of gastrointestinal stomal tumors (GISTs). We investigated whether patients previously treated with ripretinib benefit from avapritinib, and vice versa. Patients diagnosed with metastatic/unresectable GIST and treated with both drugs at two institutions in 2000–2021 were included. Patients were grouped by drug sequence: ripretinib–avapritinib (RA) or avapritinib–ripretinib (AR). Radiographic response was evaluated using RECIST 1.1. Kaplan–Meier and log-rank tests were used to compare time-to-progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS). Thirty-four patients (17 per group) were identified, with a median age of 48 years. The most common primary site was the small bowel (17/34, 50%), followed by the stomach (10/34, 29.4%). Baseline characteristics and tumor mutations were not significantly different between groups. Response rates (RRs) for ripretinib were 18% for RA and 12% for AR; RRs for avapritinib were 12% for AR and 18% for RA. Median TTPs for ripretinib were 3.65 months (95%CI 2–5.95) for RA and 4.73 months (1.87–15.84) for AR. Median TTPs for avapritinib were 5.39 months (2.86–18.99) for AR and 4.11 months (1.91–11.4) for RA. Median OS rates following RA or AR initiation were 29.63 (95%CI 13.8–50.53) and 33.7 (20.03–50.57) months, respectively. Both ripretinib and avapritinib were efficacious in the late-line treatment of GIST, with no evidence that efficacy depended on sequencing