Explore the vast range of titles available.

BRCA1 deficiencies cause breast, ovarian, prostate and other cancers, and render tumours hypersensitive to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. To understand the resistance mechanisms, we conducted whole-genome CRISPR–Cas9 synthetic-viability/resistance screens in BRCA1-deficient breast cancer cells treated with PARP inhibitors. We identified two previously uncharacterized proteins, C20orf196 and FAM35A, whose inactivation confers strong PARP-inhibitor resistance. Mechanistically, we show that C20orf196 and FAM35A form a complex, ‘Shieldin’ (SHLD1/2), with FAM35A interacting with single-stranded DNA through its C-terminal oligonucleotide/oligosaccharide-binding fold region. We establish that Shieldin acts as the downstream effector of 53BP1/RIF1/MAD2L2 to promote DNA double-strand break (DSB) end-joining by restricting DSB resection and to counteract homologous recombination by antagonizing BRCA2/RAD51 loading in BRCA1-deficient cells. Notably, Shieldin inactivation further sensitizes BRCA1-deficient cells to cisplatin, suggesting how defining the SHLD1/2 status of BRCA1-deficient tumours might aid patient stratification and yield new treatment opportunities. Highlighting this potential, we document reduced SHLD1/2 expression in human breast cancers displaying intrinsic or acquired PARP-inhibitor resistance. Through CRISPR–Cas9 screen, Dev et al. identified that SHLD1/2 inhibition contributes to PARP-inhibitor resistance. Mechanistically, SHLDs promote non-homologous end-joining and antagonize homologous recombination.

Regorafenib has proven activity in patients with pretreated gastrointestinal stromal tumours and colorectal and hepatocellular carcinoma. We designed REGOBONE to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib for patients with progressive metastatic osteosarcoma and other bone sarcomas. This trial comprised four parallel independent cohorts: osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, chondrosarcoma, and chordoma. In this Article, we report the results of the osteosarcoma cohort. In this non-comparative, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial, patients aged 10 years or older with histologically confirmed osteosarcoma whose disease had progressed after treatment with one to two previous lines of chemotherapy for metastatic disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either oral regorafenib (160 mg/day, for 21 of 28 days) or matching placebo. Patients in both groups also received best supportive care. Randomisation was done using a web-based system and was stratified (permuted block) by age at inclusion (<18 vs ≥18 years old). Investigators and patients were masked to treatment allocation. Patients in the placebo group, after centrally confirmed progressive disease, could cross over to receive regorafenib. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients without disease progression at 8 weeks. Analyses were done by modified intention to treat (ie, patients without any major entry criteria violation who initiated masked study drug treatment were included). All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02389244, and the results presented here are the final analysis of the osteosarcoma cohort (others cohorts are ongoing). Between Oct 10, 2014, and April 4, 2017, 43 adult patients were enrolled from 13 French comprehensive cancer centres. All patients received at least one dose of assigned treatment and were evaluable for safety; five patients were excluded for major protocol violations (two in the placebo group and three in the regorafenib group), leaving 38 patients who were evaluable for efficacy (12 in the placebo group and 26 in the regorafenib group). 17 of 26 patients (65%; one-sided 95% CI 47%) in the regorafenib group were non-progressive at 8 weeks compared with no patients in the placebo group. Ten patients in the placebo group crossed over to receive open-label regorafenib after centrally confirmed disease progression. 13 treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in seven (24%) of 29 patients in the regorafenib group versus none of 14 patients in the placebo group. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events during the double-blind period of treatment included hypertension (in seven [24%] of 29 patients in the regorafenib group vs none in the placebo group), hand–foot skin reaction (three [10%] vs none), fatigue (three [10%] vs one [3%]), hypophosphataemia (three [10%] vs none), and chest pain (three [10%] vs none). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Regorafenib demonstrated clinically meaningful antitumour activity in adult patients with recurrent, progressive, metastatic osteosarcoma after failure of conventional chemotherapy, with a positive effect on delaying disease progression. Regorafenib should be further evaluated in the setting of advanced disease as well as potentially earlier in the disease course for patients at high risk of relapse. Regorafenib might have an important therapeutic role as an agent complementary to standard cytotoxic chemotherapy in the therapeutic armamentarium against osteosarcoma. Bayer HealthCare.

Based on preclinical data for the antitumour effect of zoledronate in osteosarcoma, we assessed whether zoledronate combined with chemotherapy and surgery improved event-free survival in children and adults with osteosarcoma. In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial (OS2006), patients aged between 5 years and 50 years with newly diagnosed high-grade osteosarcoma were randomly assigned to receive standard chemotherapy with or without ten zoledronate intravenous infusions (four preoperative and six postoperative). Adults older than 25 years received 4 mg zoledronate per infusion, patients aged 18–25 years received 0·05 mg/kg for the first two infusions and 4 mg for the remaining eight infusions, and younger patients received 0·05 mg/kg per infusion. Chemotherapy comprised high-dose methotrexate based chemotherapy in patients younger than 18 years, and doxorubicin, ifosfamide, and cisplatin in adults older than 25 years; patients aged 18–25 years were treated with either regime at the discretion of the treating centre. Balanced randomisation between the two groups was done centrally with online randomisation software, based on a minimisation algorithm taking into account centre, age, combined with chemotherapy regimen, and risk group (resectable primary and no metastasis vs other). Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment, but the endpoint adjudication committee members who reviewed suspected early progressions were masked to group allocation. The primary endpoint was event-free survival, estimated from the randomisation to the time of first failure (local or distant relapse, progression, death) or to the last follow-up visit for the patients in first complete remission, analysed on a modified intention-to-treat population, which excluded patients found not to have a malignant tumour after central review. Three interim analyses were planned. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00470223. Between April 23, 2007, and March 11, 2014, 318 patients, median age 15·5 years (range 5·8–50·9), were enrolled from 40 French centres; of whom 158 were assigned to the control group (chemotherapy alone) and 160 to the zoledronate group, including 55 (17%) patients with definite metastases. The trial was stopped for futility after the second interim analysis. With a median follow-up of 3·9 years (IQR 2·7–5·1), 125 events occurred (55 in the control group and 70 in the with zoledronate group). Event-free survival at 3 years for all 315 randomly assigned patients was 60·3% (95% CI 64·5–65·9); 3-year event-free survival was 63·4% (55·2–70·9) for the control group and 57·1% (48·8–65·0) for the zoledronate group. The risk of failure was not reduced and was even marginally higher in the zoledronate group than in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·36 [95% CI 0·95–1·96]; p=0·094). No major increase in severe toxic effects of grade 3 or higher associated with zoledronate, barring expected hypocalcaemia (45 [29%] of 153 participants in the zoledronate group vs ten [6%] of 155 participants in the control group; p<0·0001) and hypophosphataemia (61 [40%] of 151 in the zoledronate group vs 26 [17%] of 156 in the control group; p<0·0001). No significant difference in orthopaedic complications was noted between the two groups (27 in the control group and 29 in the zoledronate group). Two treatment-related deaths were reported (one from cardiomyopathy in the control group and one from multiorgan failure in the zoledronate group before the first zoledronate infusion). From the results observed in this study, we do not recommend zoledronate in osteosarcoma patients. Further biological studies are required to understand the discordance between the results of OS2006 trial and preclinical data. French National Cancer Institute (INCa), Novartis, Chugai, Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer, Fédération Enfants et Santé, Société Française des Cancers et Leucémies de l'Enfant.

Osteosarcoma is the most common primary malignant bone tumour in children and adolescents. Due to micrometastatic spread, radical surgery alone rarely results in cure. Introduction of combination chemotherapy in the 1970s, however, dramatically increased overall survival rates from 20% to approximately 70%. Unfortunately, large clinical trials aiming to intensify treatment in the past decades have failed to achieve higher cure rates. In this review, we revisit how the heterogenous nature of osteosarcoma as well as acquired and intrinsic resistance to chemotherapy can account for stagnation in therapy improvement. We summarise current osteosarcoma treatment strategies focusing on molecular determinants of treatment susceptibility and resistance. Understanding therapy susceptibility and resistance provides a basis for rational therapy betterment for both identifying patients that might be cured with less toxic interventions and targeting resistance mechanisms to sensitise resistant osteosarcoma to conventional therapies.

Osteosarcomas are the most frequent primary bone sarcomas, affecting mainly children, adolescents, and young adults, and with a second peak of incidence in elderly individuals. The current therapeutic management, a combined regimen of poly-chemotherapy and surgery, still remains largely insufficient, as patient survival has not improved in recent decades. Osteosarcomas are very heterogeneous tumors, both at the intra- and inter-tumor level, with no identified driver mutation. Consequently, efforts to improve treatments using targeted therapies have faced this lack of specific osteosarcoma targets. Nevertheless, these tumors are inextricably linked to their local microenvironment, composed of bone, stromal, vascular and immune cells and the osteosarcoma microenvironment is now considered to be essential and supportive for growth and dissemination. This review describes the different actors of the osteosarcoma microenvironment and gives an overview of the past, current, and future strategies of therapy targeting this complex ecosystem, with a focus on the role of extracellular vesicles and on the emergence of multi-kinase inhibitors.

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. 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. 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. 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. 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.

Background Whether current postoperative surveillance regimes result in improved overall survival (OS) of patients with extremity sarcomas is unknown. Questions/purposes We hypothesized that a less intensive followup protocol would not be inferior to the conventional followup protocol in terms of OS. We (1) assessed OS of patients to determine if less intensive followup regimens led to worsened survival and asked (2) whether chest radiograph followup group was inferior to CT scan followup group in detecting pulmonary metastasis; and (3) whether less frequent (6-monthly) followup interval was inferior to more frequent (3-monthly) followup in detecting pulmonary metastasis and local recurrence. Methods A prospective randomized single-center noninferiority trial was conducted between January 2006 and June 2010. On the basis of 3-year survival of 60% with intensive, more frequent followup, 500 nonmetastatic patients were randomized to demonstrate noninferiority by a margin (delta) of 10% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.36). The primary end point was OS at 3 years. The secondary objective was to compare disease-free survival (DFS) (time to recurrence) at 3 years. At minimum followup of 30 months (median, 42 months; range, 30–81 months), 178 deaths were documented. Results Three-year OS and DFS for all patients was 67% and 52%, respectively. Three-year OS was 67% and 66% in chest radiography and CT groups, respectively (HR, 0.9; upper 90% confidence interval [CI], 1.13). DFS rate was 54% and 49% in chest radiography and CT groups, respectively (HR, 0.82; upper 90% CI, 0.97). Three-year OS was 64% and 69% in 6-monthly and 3-monthly groups, respectively (HR, 1.2; upper 90% CI, 1.47). DFS was 51% and 52% in 6-monthly and 3-monthly groups, respectively (HR, 1.01; upper 90% CI, 1.2). Almost 90% of local recurrences were identified by patients themselves. Conclusions Inexpensive imaging detects the vast majority of recurrent disease in patients with sarcoma without deleterious effects on eventual outcomes. Patient education regarding self-examination will detect most instances of local recurrence although this was not directly assessed in this study. Although less frequent visits adequately detected metastasis and local recurrence, this trial could not conclusively demonstrate noninferiority in OS for a 6-monthly interval of followup visits against 3-monthly visits. Level of Evidence Level I, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Osteosarcomas (OSs) are bone tumors most commonly found in pediatric and adolescent patients characterized by high risk of metastatic progression and recurrence after therapy. Effective therapeutic management of this disease still remains elusive as evidenced by poor patient survival rates. To achieve a more effective therapeutic management regimen, and hence patient survival, there is a need to identify more focused targeted therapies for OSs treatment in the clinical setting. The role of the OS tumor stroma microenvironment plays a significant part in the development and dissemination of this disease. Important components, and hence potential targets for treatment, are the tumor-infiltrating macrophages that are known to orchestrate many aspects of OS stromal signaling and disease progression. In particular, increased infiltration of M2-like tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) has been associated with OS metastasis and poor patient prognosis despite currently used aggressive therapies regimens. This review aims to provide a summary update of current macrophage-centered knowledge and to discuss the possible roles that macrophages play in the process of OS metastasis development focusing on the potential influence of stromal cross-talk signaling between TAMs, cancer-stem cells and additional OSs tumoral microenvironment factors.

Osteosarcoma (OS) is a primary malignant bone tumour that usually occurs in children and adolescents. OS is a highly aggressive tumour type with a propensity for local invasion and systemic early metastasis to the lungs or other bones. According to the World Health Organization, there are different subtypes of OS, including conventional OS (osteoblastic, chondroblastic, fibroblastic), telangiectatic OS, low-grade OS, small-cell OS, parosteal OS, periosteal OS, and high-grade surface OS. In this mini review, we will discuss the background of OS and histopathological patterns and clinical behaviour of the disease. Understanding the subtypes of OS and their pathogenesis is crucial for developing more precise and effective therapies for OS patients.

Appendicular central osteosarcoma (OSA) is a common and highly aggressive tumour in dogs. Metastatic disease to the lungs is common and even with chemotherapy the prognosis is generally poor. However, few cases survive well beyond reported median survival times. Current methods, including histologic grading schemes, have fallen short in their ability to predict clinical outcome. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small molecules present in all tissues and bodily fluids and are dysregulated in cancer. Previous studies have demonstrated the diagnostic and prognostic potential of miRNAs in canine OSA. We sought to investigate multiple miRNA and multiple variable models for diagnosis and prognosis of canine OSA using plasma samples across three populations of dogs from two veterinary biobanks. Fifty-six miRNAs were analyzed by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction. MiR-214-3p was the only miRNA with increased expression across all OSA populations compared to controls. Using a decision tree model for diagnosis, miR-214-3p was the first step in this multi-miRNA model. High expression of miR-214-3p alone was also a predictor of shorter overall survival and disease-free interval across all populations. In both multiple miRNA and multiple variable models, miR-214-3p was always the first decision point with high expression consistently predicting a worse prognosis. Additional miRNAs in combination with low expression of miR-214-3p similarly had a worse prognosis demonstrating better outcome prediction using multiple miRNAs compared to using miR-214-3p alone. Multiple variable models only need to use miRNAs to be predictive although clinical parameters such as age, sex, and tumour location were considered. MiR-214-3p is clearly an important prognostic predictor of canine OSA in plasma as supported by previous studies and across our multiple sample populations. Multiple miRNA models provided superior categorization of patients in predicting clinical outcome parameters compared to the single miRNAs.