Neoadjuvant irradiation of retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma with ions (Retro-Ion): study protocol for a randomized phase II pilot trial

Incidental intra-abdominal synovial sarcoma

Intra-abdominal synovial sarcomas are a rare type of soft tissue sarcomas that arise in the soft tissues of the abdominal cavity. They account for less than 1% of all primary synovial sarcoma cases. We report a case of a male patient in his early 30s who presented to the hospital with abdominal pain of 2 weeks duration. On examination, a mass was felt in the left mid-abdomen. MRI revealed a 12.7 cm×8.2 cm×8.6 cm soft tissue mass on the mesentery of the jejunum. The patient underwent surgical resection of the tumour, and the final pathology was synovial sarcoma, pT2b, grade 3.

Long-term quality of life after resection of retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma

INTRODUCTION

Retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma (RPS) is characterized by high recurrence rates. Since complete tumor resection, often necessitating multivisceral resection, enables long-term survival in both primary and recurrent disease, health related quality of life (QoL) after RPS resection has attracted increasing interest. However, data regarding this topic is limited. Here, we multidimensionally assessed long-term QoL after RPS resection.

METHODS

Five previously validated (1. EORTC QLQ-C30, 2. WEMWBS, 3. FoP-Q-SF, 4. PC-PTSD, 5. Pro-CTCAE) were sent to patients having undergone resection of primary, recurrent and metastasized RPS at Heidelberg University Hospital between 10/2001 and 12/2020. Multivariable linear regression models were used to test associations between clinical/demographic variables and patient reported outcomes (PROs).

RESULTS

Questionnaires were answered by 127 patients (71% response rate). The median interval between RPS diagnosis and assessment of PROs was 80 months. The overall Global Health score was 64.1 and comparable to the general German population. RPS patients reported deficits regarding emotional and social functioning, whereas physical limitations were less pronounced. Besides diarrhea, abdominal symptoms were comparable to the overall population. Tumor recurrences, the number of surgeries, multivisceral resections or postoperative complications did not significantly affect long-term QoL ratings.

CONCLUSION

RPS patients rate their QoL relatively high, even after multiple and multivisceral resections. Psychosocial well-being should be monitored in follow-up sessions to offer tailored support if necessary, thus improving postoperative care.

The Role of Carbon Ion Therapy in the Changing Oncology Landscape-A Narrative Review of the Literature and the Decade of Carbon Ion Experience at the Italian National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy

BACKGROUND

Currently, 13 Asian and European facilities deliver carbon ion radiotherapy (CIRT) for preclinical and clinical activity, and, to date, 55 clinical studies including CIRT for adult and paediatric solid neoplasms have been registered. The National Center for Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO) is the only Italian facility able to accelerate both protons and carbon ions for oncological treatment and research.

METHODS

To summarise and critically evaluate state-of-the-art knowledge on the application of carbon ion radiotherapy in oncological settings, the authors conducted a literature search till December 2022 in the following electronic databases: PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane. The results of 68 studies are reported using a narrative approach, highlighting CNAO's clinical activity over the last 10 years of CIRT.

RESULTS

The ballistic and radiobiological hallmarks of CIRT make it an effective option in several rare, radioresistant, and difficult-to-treat tumours. CNAO has made a significant contribution to the advancement of knowledge on CIRT delivery in selected tumour types.

CONCLUSIONS

After an initial ramp-up period, CNAO has progressively honed its clinical, technical, and dosimetric skills. Growing engagement with national and international networks and research groups for complex cancers has led to increasingly targeted patient selection for CIRT and lowered barriers to facility access.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients undergoing neoadjuvant radiation for trunk and extremity soft tissue sarcoma

INTRODUCTION

Many patients with high-risk soft tissue sarcoma (STS) develop distant metastases. Meta-analyses suggest that chemotherapy confers a small survival benefit, though few studies focus on neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT). There has been more frequent use of neoadjuvant radiation therapy (NRT) in STS, but the utility of NCT for these patients remains unclear.

METHODS

Patients with stage II-III trunk/extremity STS who underwent NRT and resection were identified using the National Cancer Database (2006-2019). Predictors of NCT were analyzed using logistic regression. Change in rate of NCT use over time was assessed using log-linear regression modeling. Survival was examined using Kaplan-Meier (KM) and Cox proportional hazard modeling.

RESULTS

Of 5740 patients, 25% underwent NCT. The overall median age was 62, 55% of patients were male, and 67% had stage III disease. The most common histological subtypes were fibrosarcoma/myxofibrosarcoma (39%) and liposarcoma (16%). Use of NCT decreased by 4.0% per year throughout the study period (p < 0.01). Predictors of NCT included younger age (median 54, IQR 42-64 vs. median 65, IQR 53-75, p < 0.01), treatment at an academic center (odds ratio [OR] 1.5, p < 0.01), and stage III disease (OR 2.2, p < 0.01). Histologic predictors of NCT included synovial sarcoma (52%) and angiosarcoma (45%). With a median follow-up time of 77 months, NCT was associated with improved 5-year survival compared to NRT alone on KM analysis (70% vs. 63%, p < 0.01). This difference persisted on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio 0.86, p = 0.027) and after propensity matching (70% vs. 65%, p = 0.0064).

CONCLUSION

Despite risk of distant failure in high-risk STS, use of NCT has decreased over time in patients receiving NRT. In this retrospective analysis, NCT was associated with a modestly improved overall survival.

How to treat liposarcomas located in retroperitoneum

Almost half of retroperitoneal (RP) sarcomas are liposarcomas (LPS). The large majority of RP LPS are either well-differentiated LPS (WDLPS) or dedifferentiated LPS (DDLPS), these latter further classified according to grading in G2 and G3 DDLPS. Surgery is the only potentially curative treatment to achieve local control and possibly cure in primary localized disease. Over the last decade, a better delineation of the different histology-specific patterns of failure and the development of nomograms predictors of outcome has led to a better management of these rare tumors, with a special focus on non-surgical treatments. Available evidences - although far from exhaustive - show that radiation therapy might have a role, if any, as neoadjuvant treatment in locally aggressive histologies (i.e. WDLPS and G2 DDLPS), while it does not seem beneficial for histologies with a higher metastatic risk (i.e. G3 DDLPS and leiomyosarcoma). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, instead, can be considered to reduce the risk of distant metastasis while waiting for the results of an ongoing RCT (STRASS-2) evaluating its effect in these tumors. However, given the rarity of these diseases and the subsequent lack of strong evidences to guide treatment, outcome improvement in these patients remains a challenge. Patients' referral to a sarcoma center where a dedicated specialized multidisciplinary team tailor optimal treatment on a case-by-case basis is crucial to ensure these patients the best outcome. Refining available nomograms - e.g including molecular variables - and identifying predictors of response/toxicity to chemotherapy and immunotherapy might be significantly helpful in tailoring treatments to the patient's characteristics. Also, new systemic agents are eagerly awaited for improving the management further.

Preoperative Dose-Escalated Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) and Intraoperative Radiation Therapy (IORT) in Patients with Retroperitoneal Soft-Tissue Sarcoma: Final Results of a Clinical Phase I/II Trial

BACKGROUND

To report the final results of a prospective, one-armed, single-center phase I/II trial (NCT01566123).

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2017, 37 patients with primary or recurrent (N = 6) retroperitoneal sarcomas were enrolled. Treatment included preoperative IMRT of 45-50 Gy with a simultaneous integrated boost of 50-56 Gy, surgery and IORT. The primary endpoint was local control (LC) at 5 years. The most common histology was dedifferentiated liposarcoma (51%), followed by leiomyosarcoma (24%) and well-differentiated liposarcoma (14%). The majority of lesions were high-grade (FNCLCC G1: 30%, G2: 38%, G3: 27%, two missing). Five patients were excluded from LC analysis per protocol.

RESULTS

The minimum follow-up of the survivors was 62 months (median: 109; maximum 162). IORT was performed for 27 patients. Thirty-five patients underwent gross total resection; the pathological resection margin was mostly R+ (80%) and, less often, R0 (20%). We observed 10 local recurrences. The 5-year LC of the whole cohort was 59.6%. Eleven patients received a dose > 50 Gy plus IORT boost; LC was 64.8%; the difference, however, was not significant (p = 0.588). Of 37 patients, 15 were alive and 22 deceased at the time of final analysis. The 5-year OS was 59.5% (68.8% per protocol).

CONCLUSIONS

The primary endpoint of a 5-year LC of 70% was not met. This might be explained by the inclusion of recurrent disease and the high rate of G3 lesions and leiomyosarcoma, which have been shown to profit less from radiotherapy. Stratification by grading and histology should be considered for future studies.

Staging Systems and Nomograms for Soft Tissue Sarcoma

Reliable tools for prognosis prediction are crucially needed by oncologists so they can tailor individual treatments. However, the wide spectrum of histologies and prognostic behaviors of sarcomas challenges their development. In this field, nomograms could definitely better account for their granularity compared to the more widely used AJCC/UICC TNM staging system. Nomograms are predictive tools that incorporate multiple risk factors and return a numerical probability of a clinical event. Since the development of the first nomogram in 2002, several other nomograms have been built, either general, site-specific, histology-specific, or both. Recently, some new “dynamic” nomograms and prognostic tools have been developed, allowing doctors to “recalculate” a patient’s prognosis by taking into account the time since primary surgery, the event history, and the potential time-dependent effect of covariates. Due to these new tools, prognosis prediction is no longer limited to the time of the first computation but can be adapted and recalculated based on the occurrence (or not) of any event as time passes from the first computation. In this review, we aimed to give an overview of the available nomograms for STS and to help clinicians in the process of selecting the best tool for each patient.

Radiation Therapy for Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: A Strass-Ful Situation

Locoregional recurrence (LRR) is the predominant pattern of relapse and often the cause of death in patients with retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS). As a result, reducing LRR is a critical objective for RPS patients. However, unlike soft tissue sarcomas (STS) of the superficial trunk and extremity where the benefits of radiation therapy (RT) are well-established, the role of RT in the retroperitoneum remains controversial. Historically, preoperative or postoperative RT, either alone or in combination with intraoperative radiation (IORT), was commonly justified for RPS based on extrapolation from the superficial trunk and extremity STS literature. However, long-awaited results were recently published from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) STRASS study of preoperative radiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for patients with RPS; there was no statistical difference in the primary endpoint of abdominal recurrence-free survival. However, several subset analyses and study limitations complicate the interpretation of the results. This review explores and contextualizes the body of evidence regarding RT's role in managing RPS.

Neoadjuvant irradiation of extremity soft tissue sarcoma with ions (Extrem-ion): study protocol for a randomized phase II pilot trial

BACKGROUND

The standard of care treatment for soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities is a wide resection in combination with pre- or postoperative radiotherapy with high local control rates, sparing patients the necessity of amputation without compromising on overall survival rates. The currently preferred timing of radiotherapy is under debate. Albeit having higher rates of acute wound complications, late side effects like fibrosis, joint stiffness or edema are less frequent in preoperative compared to postoperative radiotherapy. This can be explained in smaller treatment volumes and a lower dose in the preoperative setting. Particles allow better sparing of surrounding tissues at risk, and carbon ions additionally offer biologic advantages and are preferred in less radiosensitive tumors. Hypofractionation allows for a significantly shorter treatment duration.

METHODS

Extrem-ion is a prospective, randomized, monocentric phase II trial. Patients with resectable or marginally resectable, histologically confirmed soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities will be randomized between neoadjuvant proton or neoadjuvant carbon ion radiotherapy in active scanning beam application technique (39 Gy [relative biological effectiveness, RBE] in 13 fractions [5-6 fractions per week] in each arm). The primary objective is the proportion of therapies without wound healing disorder the first 120 days after surgery or discontinuation of treatment for any reason related to the treatment. The secondary endpoints of the study consist of local control, local progression-free survival, disease-free survival, overall survival, and quality of life.

DISCUSSION

The aim of this study is to confirm that hypofractionated, preoperative radiotherapy is safe and feasible. The potential for reduced toxicity by the utilization of particle therapy is the rational of this trial. A subsequent randomized phase III trial will compare the hypofractionated proton and carbon ion irradiation in regards to local control.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04946357 ; Retrospectively registered June 30, 2021.

The Role of Hypofractionation in Proton Therapy

Hypofractionated radiotherapy is an attractive approach for minimizing patient burden and treatment cost. Technological advancements in external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) delivery and image guidance have resulted in improved targeting and conformality of the absorbed dose to the disease and a reduction in dose to healthy tissue. These advances in EBRT have led to an increasing adoption and interest in hypofractionation. Furthermore, for many treatment sites, proton beam therapy (PBT) provides an improved absorbed dose distribution compared to X-ray (photon) EBRT. In the past 10 years there has been a notable increase in reported clinical data involving hypofractionation with PBT, reflecting the interest in this treatment approach. This review will discuss the reported clinical data and radiobiology of hypofractionated PBT. Over 50 published manuscripts reporting clinical results involving hypofractionation and PBT were included in this review, ~90% of which were published since 2010. The most common treatment regions reported were prostate, lung and liver, making over 70% of the reported results. Many of the reported clinical data indicate that hypofractionated PBT can be well tolerated, however future clinical trials are still needed to determine the optimal fractionation regime.

The history of ion beam therapy in Germany

The advantageous depth dose profile of ion beams together with state of the art beam delivery and treatment planning systems allow for highly conformal tumor treatments in patients. First treatments date back to 1954 at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (LBL) and in Europe, ion beam therapy started in the mid-1990s at the Paul-Scherrer Institute (PSI) with protons and at the Helmholtz Center for Heavy Ion Research (GSI) with carbon ions, followed by the Heidelberg Ion Therapy Center (HIT) in Heidelberg. This review describes the historical development of ion beam therapy in Germany based on the pioneering work at LBL and in the context of simultaneous developments in other countries as well as recent developments.