Shifting Paradigm in the Management of Anal Canal Carcinoma

Preclinical Models of Anal Cancer Combined-Modality Therapy

INTRODUCTION

There have been no significant changes in anal cancer treatment options in 4 decades. In this study, we highlight two preclinical models designed to assess anal cancer treatments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Transgenic K14E6/E7 mice were treated with 7, 12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene until anal tumors developed. Mice were treated with localized radiation in addition to chemotherapy (combined-modality therapy [CMT]) and compared to no treatment control (NTC). K14E6/E7 mouse anal spheroids with and without Pik3ca mutations were isolated and treated with vehicle, LY3023414 (LY3) (a drug previously shown to be effective in cancer prevention), CMT, or CMT + LY3.

RESULTS

In the in vivo model, there was a significant increase in survival in the CMT group compared to the NTC group (P = 0.0392). In the ex vivo model, there was a significant decrease in the mean diameter of CMT and CMT + LY3-treated spheroids compared to vehicle (P ≤ 0.0001). For LY3 alone compared to vehicle, there was a statistically significant decrease in spheroid size in the K14E6/E7 group without mutation (P = 0.0004).

CONCLUSIONS

We have provided proof of concept for two preclinical anal cancer treatment models that allow for the future testing of novel therapies for anal cancer.

Intraoperative Electron Radiation Therapy Combined with External Beam Radiation Therapy after Gross Total Resection in Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A European Pooled Analysis

INTRODUCTION

We report a pooled analysis evaluating the combination of gross complete limb-sparing surgery, intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT), and external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in patients with extremity soft tissue sarcoma (STS).

METHODS

Individual data of 259 patients (median follow-up 63 months) with extremity STS from three European expert centers were pooled. Median age was 55 years and median tumor size was 8 cm. Eighty percent of patients presented with primary disease, mainly located in the lower limb (81%). Union for International Cancer Control 7th edition stage at presentation was as follows: stage I: 9%; stage II: 47%; stage III: 39%; stage IV: 5%. Most patients showed high-grade lesions (91%), predominantly liposarcoma (31%). Median IOERT dose was 12 Gy, preceeded (17%) or followed (83%) by EBRT, with a median dose of 45 Gy.

RESULTS

Surgery resulted in R0 resections in 71% of patients and R1 resections in 29% of patients. The 5-year local control (LC) rate was 86%, and significant factors in univariate analysis were disease status and resection margin. Only margin remained significant in multivariate analysis. The 5-year distant control rate was 69%, and significant factors in univariate analysis were histology, grading, resection margin, and metastases prior to/at IOERT. Only grading and metastases remained significant in multivariate analysis. Actuarial 5-year rates of freedom from treatment failure and OS were 61% and 78%, respectively. Significant factors for OS were grading and metastases prior to/at IOERT (univariate, multivariate). Limb preservation and good functional outcome were achieved in 95% and 81% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our pooled analysis confirmed prior reports of encouraging LC and survival, with excellent rates of preserved limb function with this treatment approach. Resection margin remained the most important factor for LC, while grading and metastases prior to/at IOERT mainly predicted survival.