Explore the vast range of titles available.

Key Points Soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) is a rare disease that encompasses over 50 separate histological subtypes with varying sensitivity to systemic treatment Chemotherapy has been based on historical experience but there is now increasing evidence for treatment with chemotherapy in large phase II and III trials While ifosfamide and doxorubicin remain important treatment options in STS, therapy is increasingly tailored towards different histological subtypes Clinical trials remain a challenge due to the rarity and heterogeneity of STS and international collaboration is critical to achieve high quality clinical trials stratified by histological subtype Targeted therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immunotherapy will become increasingly important as we further define the molecular basis of sarcomagenesis Soft-tissue sarcomas (STS) are a rare and heterogeneous group of tumours, with a wide range of differing behaviours and underlying molecular pathologies. Recent advances in molecular pathogenesis, novel targeted therapies, changes in clinical trial design and increased international collaboration have led to the development of histology-driven therapy. The authors of this Review describe the current gold standard treatment for specific STS subtypes and outline the future promising therapies in the pipeline. Soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) is a rare and heterogeneous group of tumours that comprise approximately 1% of all adult cancers, and encompass over 50 different subtypes. These tumours exhibit a wide range of differing behaviours and underlying molecular pathologies, and can arise anywhere in the body. Surgical resection is critical to the management of locoregional disease. In the locally advanced or metastatic disease settings, systemic therapy has an important role in the multidisciplinary management of sarcoma. Cytotoxic therapy that usually consists of doxorubicin and ifosfamide has been the mainstay of treatment for many years. However recent advances in molecular pathogenesis, the development of novel targeted therapies, changes in clinical trial design and increased international collaboration have led to the development of histology-driven therapy. Furthermore, genomic profiling has highlighted that some STS are driven by translocation, mutation or amplification and others have more complex and chaotic karyotypes. In this Review, we aim to describe the current gold standard treatment for specific STS subtypes as well as outline future promising therapies in the pipeline.

Survival outcomes for adolescent and young adult patients with soft tissue sarcomas lag behind those of children diagnosed with histologically similar tumours. To help understand these differences in outcomes, we discuss the following issues with regard to the management of these patients with soft tissue sarcomas: delays in diagnosis, trial availability and participation, aspects of the organisation of care (with an emphasis on age-specific needs), national centralisation of sarcoma care, international consortia, and factors related to tumour biology. Improved understanding of the causes of the survival gap between adolescents and young adults with sarcomas will help drive new initiatives to improve final health outcomes in these populations. In this Review, we specifically focus on embryonal and alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma, synovial sarcoma, and adult soft tissue sarcomas diagnosed in adolescents and young adults, and discuss the age-specific needs of these patients.

Previous studies have suggested that trabectedin (ecteinascidin-743) could have antitumour activity in soft-tissue sarcoma. We aimed to study the usefulness of trabectedin in the treatment of patients with myxoid liposarcomas, a subtype of liposarcoma that is associated with specific chromosomal translocations t(12;16)(q13;p11) or t(12;22)(q13;q12) that result in the formation of DDIT3-FUS or DDIT3-EWSR1 fusion proteins. 51 patients with advanced pretreated myxoid liposarcoma who started treatment with trabectedin between April 4, 2001, and Sept 18, 2006 at five institutions in a compassionate-use programme were analysed retrospectively. Centralised radiological and pathological reviews were done for most patients. Trabectedin was given either as a 24-h continuous infusion or as a 3-h infusion, every 21 days, at 1·1–1·5 mg 2. 558 courses of trabectedin were given in total, with a median of ten courses for each patient (range 1–23). The primary endpoints were response rate and progression-free survival, and the secondary endpoint was overall survival. According to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), after a median follow-up of 14·0 months (IQR 8·7–20·0), two patients had complete responses (CR) and 24 patients had partial responses (PR); the overall response was 51% (95% CI 36–65). Five patients had early progressive disease. In 17 of the 23 patients who achieved PR or CR as defined by RECIST and who had centralised radiological review, tissue-density changes, consisting of a decrease in tumour density on CT scan or a decrease in contrast enhancement on MRI (or both), preceded tumour shrinkage. Median progression-free survival was 14·0 months (13·1–21·0), and progression-free survival at 6 months was 88% (79–95). Trabectedin was associated with antitumour activity in this series of patients with myxoid liposarcoma. The noted patterns of tumour response were such that tissue density changes occurred before tumour shrinkage in several patients. In some patients, tissue-density changes only were seen. Long-lasting tumour control was noted in responsive patients. The compassionate-use programme is still ongoing. This analysis has resulted in the initiation of two prospective studies to assess the role of trabectedin in the treatment of patients with myxoid liposarcoma in preoperative and metastatic settings. Furthermore, the selective mechanism of action for trabectedin in this translocation-related sarcoma is being studied.

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare tumours arising in mesenchymal tissues and can occur almost anywhere in the body. Their rarity, and the heterogeneity of subtype and location, means that developing evidence-based guidelines is complicated by the limitations of the data available. This makes it more important that STS are managed by expert multidisciplinary teams, to ensure consistent and optimal treatment, recruitment to clinical trials, and the ongoing accumulation of further data and knowledge. The development of appropriate guidance, by an experienced panel referring to the evidence available, is therefore a useful foundation on which to build progress in the field. These guidelines are an update of the previous versions published in 2010 and 2016 [1, 2]. The original guidelines were drawn up by a panel of UK sarcoma specialists convened under the auspices of the British Sarcoma Group (BSG) and were intended to provide a framework for the multidisciplinary care of patients with soft tissue sarcomas. This iteration of the guidance, as well as updating the general multidisciplinary management of soft tissue sarcoma, includes specific sections relating to the management of sarcomas at defined anatomical sites: gynaecological sarcomas, retroperitoneal sarcomas, breast sarcomas, and skin sarcomas. These are generally managed collaboratively by site specific multidisciplinary teams linked to the regional sarcoma specialist team, as stipulated in the recently published sarcoma service specification [3]. In the UK, any patient with a suspected soft tissue sarcoma should be referred to a specialist regional soft tissues sarcoma service, to be managed by a specialist sarcoma multidisciplinary team. Once the diagnosis has been confirmed using appropriate imaging and a tissue biopsy, the main modality of management is usually surgical excision performed by a specialist surgeon, combined with pre- or post-operative radiotherapy for tumours at higher risk for local recurrence. Systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) may be utilised in cases where the histological subtype is considered more sensitive to systemic treatment. Regular follow-up is recommended to assess local control, development of metastatic disease, and any late effects of treatment.

Pazopanib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has single-agent activity in patients with advanced non-adipocytic soft-tissue sarcoma. We investigated the effect of pazopanib on progression-free survival in patients with metastatic non-adipocytic soft-tissue sarcoma after failure of standard chemotherapy. This phase 3 study was done in 72 institutions, across 13 countries. Patients with angiogenesis inhibitor-naive, metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, progressing despite previous standard chemotherapy, were randomly assigned by an interactive voice randomisation system in a 2:1 ratio in permuted blocks (with block sizes of six) to receive either pazopanib 800 mg once daily or placebo, with no subsequent cross-over. Patients, investigators who gave the treatment, those assessing outcomes, and those who did the analysis were masked to the allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Efficacy analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00753688. 372 patients were registered and 369 were randomly assigned to receive pazopanib (n=246) or placebo (n=123). Median progression-free survival was 4·6 months (95% CI 3·7–4·8) for pazopanib compared with 1·6 months (0·9–1·8) for placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·31, 95% CI 0·24–0·40; p<0·0001). Overall survival was 12·5 months (10·6–14·8) with pazopanib versus 10·7 months (8·7–12·8) with placebo (HR 0·86, 0·67–1·11; p=0·25). The most common adverse events were fatigue (60 in the placebo group [49%] vs 155 in the pazopanib group [65%]), diarrhoea (20 [16%] vs 138 [58%]), nausea (34 [28%] vs 129 [54%]), weight loss (25 [20%] vs 115 [48%]), and hypertension (8 [7%] vs 99 [41%]). The median relative dose intensity was 100% for placebo and 96% for pazopanib. Pazopanib is a new treatment option for patients with metastatic non-adipocytic soft-tissue sarcoma after previous chemotherapy. GlaxoSmithKline.

No effective therapeutic options for patients with unresectable imatinib-resistant gastrointestinal stromal tumour are available. We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, international trial to assess tolerability and anticancer efficacy of sunitinib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour who were resistant to or intolerant of previous treatment with imatinib. Blinded sunitinib or placebo was given orally once daily at a 50-mg starting dose in 6-week cycles with 4 weeks on and 2 weeks off treatment. The primary endpoint was time to tumour progression. Intention-to-treat, modified intention-to-treat, and per-protocol analyses were done. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00075218. 312 patients were randomised in a 2:1 ratio to receive sunitinib (n=207) or placebo (n=105); the trial was unblinded early when a planned interim analysis showed significantly longer time to tumour progression with sunitinib. Median time to tumour progression was 27·3 weeks (95% CI 16·0–32·1) in patients receiving sunitinib and 6·4 weeks (4·4–10·0) in those on placebo (hazard ratio 0·33; p<0·0001). Therapy was reasonably well tolerated; the most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue, diarrhoea, skin discolouration, and nausea. We noted significant clinical benefit, including disease control and superior survival, with sunitinib compared with placebo in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour after failure and discontinuation of imatinab. Tolerability was acceptable.

BackgroundAxitinib is an oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor with anti-tumour activity in renal, thyroid, and pancreatic cancer.MethodsAxi-STS was a pathologically-stratified, non-randomised, open-label, multi-centre, phase II trial of continuous axitinib treatment in patients ≥16 years, performance status ≤2, with pathologically-confirmed advanced/metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Patients were recruited within four tumour strata, each analysed separately: angiosarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, synovial sarcoma, or other eligible STSs. The primary outcome was progression-free survival at 12 weeks (PFS12). A Simon’s two-stage design with activity defined as PFS12 rate of 40% determined a sample size of 33 patients per strata.ResultsBetween 31-August-2010 and 29-January-2016, 145 patients were recruited: 38 angiosarcoma, 37 leiomyosarcoma, 36 synovial sarcoma, and 34 other subtypes. PFS12 rate for each stratum analysed was 42% (95% lower confidence interval (LCI); 29), 45% (95% LCI; 32), 57% (95% LCI; 42), and 33% (95% LCI; 21), respectively. There were 74 serious adverse events including two treatment-related deaths of pulmonary haemorrhage and gastrointestinal bleeding. Fatigue and hypertension were the most common grade 3 adverse events.ConclusionsAxitinib showed clinical activity in all STS strata investigated. The adverse event profile was acceptable, supporting further investigation in phase III trials.Clinical Trial RegistrationISRCTN 60791336

Since the inception of phase I clinical trials in cancer, patients with symptomatic brain metastases have commonly been excluded from participation because of a poor outlook. However, patients with asymptomatic brain metastases pose an increasingly frequent challenge for clinicians: more sensitive brain imaging can identify clinically silent brain metastases; frequency of detection might have increased because of changes in the natural history of many tumour types as a result of more effective systemic treatment; and routine brain imaging as a screening procedure before entry into a clinical trial can show lesions which are of questionable clinical importance, but which frequently preclude trial enrolment. Evidence suggests that delaying whole-brain radiotherapy until symptomatic progression has no adverse effect on prognosis. Safety and efficacy data are accumulating for targeted agents to treat brain metastases. We think that a subset of patients with asymptomatic brain metastases might be appropriately entered into phase I trials, and we present our approach for their stratification. As a consequence, patients might have increased access to experimental treatments and thus effective interventions for brain metastases might be developed more promptly.

Background/Aim: Distinguishing true oligometastatic disease from early polymetastatic disease is vital in patients with soft tissue sarcoma as contemporary treatment strategies differ significantly. Clinical factors such as tumour biology, organ involved, number of lesions, and patient fitness influence clinical decisions. Patients and Methods: A retrospective search of a prospective database identified patients with new distant relapse, treated between 2009 and 2012. Results: A total of 223 patients were included, and oligometastases were diagnosed in 81 (36%) patients, which were pulmonary in just over half of cases. These were treated with local therapy in 66 of 89 cases, and 7 patients received subsequent treatment for additional oligometastases. Metastasectomy was the most common treatment modality. A total of 16/66 patients (24%) underwent active surveillance for >6 months prior to local therapy. Conclusion: Patients with oligometastatic disease can experience durable disease control with timely multimodality treatment approaches for evolving metastatic disease, where disease biology allows.

Clear cell sarcoma is a rare translocation-related sarcoma. There have been few studies documenting the response rate and progression-free survival in clear cell sarcoma patients treated with palliative chemotherapy. The prospectively maintained databases of two referral centres were searched to identify clear cell sarcoma patients treated with chemotherapy. Twenty-four patients were treated with palliative first-line chemotherapy with a median age of 30 years at diagnosis. There were 18 men and 6 women. One (4%) achieved a partial response and 9 (38%) had stable disease. Fourteen patients (58%) progressed on therapy. The median progression-free survival was 11 weeks (95% CI, 3–20 weeks). The median overall survival from commencing first-line chemotherapy was 39 weeks (95% CI, 34–45 weeks). Second-line chemotherapy was administered to 12 patients, 11 (92%) of these progressed and one (8%) had stable disease. Of the 5 patients treated with third-line chemotherapy, 4 (80%) progressed and one (20%) had stable disease. One patient received fourth-line chemotherapy and maintained stable disease for 4 months. Conventional chemotherapy has minimal activity in clear cell sarcoma as documented by the response rate of 4% and median progression-free survival of 11 weeks in this retrospective series. These data provide a reference for response and outcome in the assessment of novel agents in this histological subtype.