Variations of Surveillance Practice for Patients with Bone Sarcoma: A Survey of Australian Sarcoma Clinicians

Introduction. After treatment, bone sarcoma patients carry a high chance of relapse and late effects from multimodal therapy. We hypothesize that significant variation in surveillance practice exists between pediatric medical oncology (PO) and nonpediatric medical oncology (NP) sarcoma disciplines. Methods. Australian sarcoma clinicians were approached to do a web based survey that assessed radiologic surveillance (RS) strategies, late toxicity assessment, and posttreatment psychosocial interventions. Results. In total, 51 clinicians responded. No differences were identified in local disease RS. In metastatic disease response assessment, 100% of POs (23/23) and 93% of NPs (24/26) conducted CT chest. However, this was more likely to occur for NPs in the context of a CT chest/abdomen/pelvis (NP: 10/26; PO: 1/23; p=0.006). POs were more likely to use CXR for RS (p=0.006). POs showed more prescriptive intensity in assessment of heart function (p=0.001), hearing (p<0.001), and fertility (p=0.02). POs were more likely to deliver written information for health maintenance/treatment summary (p=0.04). The majority of respondents described enquiring about psychosocial aspects of health (n=33/37, 89%), but a routine formal psychosocial screen was only used by 23% (n=6/26). Conclusion. There is high variability in bone sarcoma surveillance between PO and NP clinicians. Efforts to harmonize approaches would allow early and late effects recognition/intervention and facilitate improved patient care/transition and research

Clinical Impact of Comprehensive Molecular Profiling in Adolescents and Young Adults with Sarcoma

Sarcomas are a heterogenous group of tumours that commonly carry poor prognosis with limited therapeutic options. Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with sarcoma are a unique and understudied patient population that have only achieved modest survival gains compared to other groups. We present our institutional experience of AYAs with sarcoma who underwent comprehensive molecular profiling (CMP) via either large-panel targeted DNA sequencing or whole genome and transcriptome sequencing and evaluated the feasibility and clinical impact of this approach. Genomic variants detected were determined to be clinically relevant and actionable following evaluation by the Molecular Tumour Board. Clinicians provided feedback regarding the utility of testing three months after reporting. Twenty-five patients who were recruited for CMP are included in this analysis. The median time from consent to final molecular report was 45 days (interquartile range: 37–57). Potentially actionable variants were detected for 14 patients (56%), and new treatment recommendations were identified for 12 patients (48%). Pathogenic germline variants were identified in three patients (12%), and one patient had a change in diagnosis. The implementation of CMP for AYAs with sarcoma is clinically valuable, feasible, and should be increasingly integrated into routine clinical practice as technologies and turnaround times continue to improve