| 1. |
- Whelan, Jeremy, et al.
(författare)
-
High-dose chemotherapy and blood autologous stem-cell rescue compared with standard chemotherapy in localized high-risk ewing sarcoma : Results of Euro-E.W.I.N.G.99 and Ewing-2008
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - 0732-183X. ; 36:31, s. 3110-3119
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose For over 30 years, the place of consolidation high-dose chemotherapy in Ewing sarcoma (ES) has been controversial. A randomized study was conducted to determine whether consolidation high-dose chemotherapy improved survival in patients with localized ES at high risk for relapse. Methods Randomization between busulfan and melphalan (BuMel) or standard chemotherapy (vincristine, dactinomycin, and ifosfamide [VAI], seven courses) was offered to patients if they were younger than 50 years of age with poor histologic response (≥ 10% viable cells) after receiving vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide (six courses); or had a tumor volume at diagnosis >200 mL if unresected, or initially resected, or resected after radiotherapy. A 15% improvement in 3-year eventfree survival (EFS) was sought (hazard ratio [HR], 0.60). Results Between 2000 and 2015, 240 patients classified as high risk (median age, 17.1 years) were randomly assigned to VAI (n = 118) or BuMel (n = 122). Seventy-eight percent entered the trial because of poor histologic response after chemotherapy alone. Median follow-up was 7.8 years. In an intent-to-treat analysis, the risk of event was significantly decreased by BuMel comparedwith VAI: HR, 0.64 (95%CI, 0.43 to 0.95; P = .026); 3- and 8-year EFS were, respectively, 69.0%(95% CI, 60.2%to 76.6%) versus 56.7%(95%CI, 47.6%to 65.4%) and 60.7%(95%CI, 51.1%to 69.6%) versus 47.1%(95%CI, 37.7% to 56.8%). Overall survival (OS) also favored BuMel: HR, 0.63 (95% CI, 0.41 to 0.95; P = .028); 3- and 8-year OS were, respectively, 78.0% (95% CI, 69.6% to 84.5%) versus 72.2% (95% CI, 63.3% to 79.6%) and 64.5%(95%CI, 54.4% to 73.5%) versus 55.6%(95%CI, 45.8%to 65.1%). Results were consistent in the sensitivity analysis. Two patients died as a result of BuMel-related toxicity, one after standard chemotherapy. Significantly more BuMel patients experienced severe acute toxicities from this course of chemotherapy compared with multiple VAI courses. Conclusion BuMel improved EFS and OS when given after vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide induction in localized ES with predefined high-risk factors. For this group of patients, BuMel may be an important addition to the standard of care.
|
|
| 2. |
- Koch, Raphael, et al.
(författare)
-
Zoledronic Acid Add-on Therapy for Standard-Risk Ewing Sarcoma Patients in the Ewing 2008R1 Trial
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. - 1078-0432. ; 29:24, s. 5057-5068
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: The phase III, open-label, prospective, multicenter, randomized Ewing 2008R1 trial (EudraCT2008-003658-13) was conducted in 12 countries to evaluate the effect of zoledronic acid (ZOL) maintenance therapy compared with no add-on regarding event-free survival (EFS, primary endpoint) and overall survival (OS) in standard-risk Ewing sarcoma (EWS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had localized EWS with either good histologic response to induction chemotherapy and/or small tumors (<200 mL). Patients received six cycles of VIDE induction and eight cycles of VAI (male) or eight cycles of VAC (female) consolidation. ZOL treatment started parallel to the sixth consolidation cycle. Randomization was stratified by tumor site (pelvis/other). The two-sided adaptive inverse-normal four-stage design (planned sample size 448 patients, significance level 5%, power 80%) was changed after the first interim analysis using the Müller-Schäfer method. RESULTS: Between April 2010 and November 2018, 284 patients were randomized (142 ZOL/142 no add-on). With a median follow-up of 3.9 years, EFS was not significantly different between ZOL and no add-on group in the adaptive design (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.43-1.28, P = 0.27, intention-to-treat). Three-year EFS rates were 84.0% (95% CI, 77.7%-90.8%) for ZOL vs. 81.7% (95% CI, 75.2%-88.8%) for no add-on. Results were similar in the per-protocol collective. OS was not different between groups. The 3-year OS was 92.8% (95% CI, 88.4%-97.5%) for ZOL and 94.6% (95% CI, 90.9%-98.6%) for no add-on. Noticeable more renal, neurologic, and gastrointestinal toxicities were observed for ZOL (P < 0.05). Severe renal toxicities occurred more often in the ZOL arm (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with standard-risk localized EWS, there is no additional benefit from maintenance treatment with ZOL.
|
|
| 3. |
- Kovar, Heinrich, et al.
(författare)
-
The first European interdisciplinary ewing sarcoma research summit.
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Frontiers in oncology. - : Frontiers Media SA. - 2234-943X. ; 2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Network for Cancer Research in Children and Adolescents (ENCCA) provides an interaction platform for stakeholders in research and care of children with cancer. Among ENCCA objectives is the establishment of biology-based prioritization mechanisms for the selection of innovative targets, drugs, and prognostic markers for validation in clinical trials. Specifically for sarcomas, there is a burning need for novel treatment options, since current chemotherapeutic treatment protocols have met their limits. This is most obvious for metastatic Ewing sarcoma (ES), where long term survival rates are still below 20%. Despite significant progress in our understanding of ES biology, clinical translation of promising laboratory results has not yet taken place due to fragmentation of research and lack of an institutionalized discussion forum. To fill this gap, ENCCA assembled 30 European expert scientists and five North American opinion leaders in December 2011 to exchange thoughts and discuss the state of the art in ES research and latest results from the bench, and to propose biological studies and novel promising therapeutics for the upcoming European EWING2008 and EWING2012 clinical trials.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Schober, Sebastian Johannes, et al.
(författare)
-
No Improvement of Survival for Alveolar Rhabdomyosarcoma Patients After HLA-Matched Versus -Mismatched Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Compared to Standard-of-Care Therapy
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Frontiers in Oncology. - : Frontiers Media S.A.. - 2234-943X. ; 12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundPatients with stage IV alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (RMA) have a 5-year-survival rate not exceeding 30%. Here, we assess the role of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) for these patients in comparison to standard-of-care regimens. We also compare the use of HLA-mismatched vs. HLA-matched grafts after reduced vs. myeloablative conditioning regimens, respectively. Patients and MethodsIn this retrospective analysis, we compare event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity of HLA-mismatched vs. -matched transplanted patients in uni- and multivariate analyses (total: n = 50, HLA-matched: n = 15, HLA-mismatched: n = 35). Here, the factors age at diagnosis, age at allo-HSCT, sex, Oberlin score, disease status at allo-HSCT, and HLA graft type are assessed. For 29 primarily transplanted patients, three matched non-transplanted patients per one transplanted patient were identified from the CWS registry. Outcomes were respectively compared for OS and EFS. Matching criteria included sex, age at diagnosis, favorable/unfavorable primary tumor site, and metastatic sites. ResultsMedian EFS and OS did not differ significantly between HLA-mismatched and -matched patients. In the mismatched group, incidence of acute GvHD was 0.87 (grade III-IV: 0.14) vs. 0.80 in HLA-matched patients (grade III-IV: 0.20). Transplant-related mortality (TRM) of all patients was 0.20 and did not differ significantly between HLA-mismatched and -matched groups. A proportion of 0.58 relapsed or progressed and died of disease (HLA-mismatched: 0.66, HLA-matched: 0.53) whereas 0.18 were alive in complete remission (CR) at data collection. Multivariate and competing risk analyses confirmed CR and very good partial response (VGPR) status prior to allo-HSCT as the only decisive predictor for OS (p < 0.001). Matched-pair survival analyses of primarily transplanted patients vs. matched non-transplanted patients also identified disease status prior to allo-HSCT (CR, VGPR) as the only significant predictor for EFS. Here, OS was not affected, however. ConclusionIn this retrospective analysis, only a subgroup of patients with good response at allo-HSCT survived. There was no survival benefit of allo-transplanted patients compared to matched controls, suggesting the absence of a clinically relevant graft-versus-RMA effect in the current setting. The results of this analysis do not support further implementation of allo-HSCT in RMA stage IV patients.
|
|
