Background NETSARC (netsarc.org) is a network of 26 sarcoma reference centers with specialized multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTB) aiming to improve the outcome of sarcoma patients. Since 2010, presentation to an MDTB and expert pathological review are mandatory for sarcoma patients nationwide. In the present work, the impact of surgery in a reference center on the survival of sarcoma patients investigated using this national NETSARC registry. Patients and methods Patients’ characteristics and follow-up are prospectively collected and data monitored. Descriptive, uni- and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors were conducted in the entire series ( N = 35 784) and in the subgroup of incident patient population ( N = 29 497). Results Among the 35 784 patients, 155 different histological subtypes were reported. 4310 (11.6%) patients were metastatic at diagnosis. Previous cancer, previous radiotherapy, neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), and Li–Fraumeni syndrome were reported in 12.5%, 3.6%, 0.7%, and 0.1% of patients respectively. Among the 29 497 incident patients, 25 851 (87.6%) patients had surgical removal of the sarcoma, including 9949 (33.7%) operated in a NETSARC center. Location, grade, age, size, depth, histotypes, gender, NF1, and surgery outside a NETSARC center all correlated to overall survival (OS), local relapse free survival (LRFS), and event-free survival (EFS) in the incident patient population. NF1 history was one of the strongest adverse prognostic factors for LRFS, EFS, and OS. Presentation to an MDTB was associated with an improved LRFS and EFS, but was an adverse prognostic factor for OS if surgery was not carried out in a reference center. In multivariate analysis, surgery in a NETSARC center was positively correlated with LRFS, EFS, and OS [ P < 0.001 for all, with a hazard ratio of 0.681 (95% CI 0.618–0.749) for OS]. Conclusion This nationwide registry of sarcoma patients shows that surgical treatment in a reference center reduces the risk of relapse and death.

Background: Cancer patients presenting with COVID-19 have a high risk of death. In this work, predictive factors for survival in cancer patients with suspected SARS-COV-2 infection were investigated.

Adequate surgical resection remains the treatment of choice for tenosyovial giant cell tumor (TGCT). However, diffuse type TGCT (D-TGCT) is more difficult to resect and has a higher rate of recurrence (up to 50 %), which is often multiple. D-TGCT is rarely lethal and only rare cases of metastases have been described. Nevertheless, patients might have a significant decline in their quality of life due to multiple operations, which may sometimes result in a partial loss of function of the affected joint and may also be associated with perioperative morbidity and secondary arthrosis. As of today, no systemic treatment is approved for this rare disease. The aims of systemic therapy in the context of a non-lethal tumor are to reduce surgical morbidity and to preserve function and patient quality of life. Because TGCT is associated with characteristic cytogenetic abnormalities resulting in the overexpression of CSF1, systemic therapies targeting the CSF1/CSF1R axis (imatinib, nilotinib, emactuzumab, and PLX3397) have been tested in patients with locally advanced or relapsed D-TGCT. The more recent and more specific CSF1R inhibitors have shown a very interesting clinical activity with acceptable toxicity in early phase trials. These results will need to be confirmed in larger, ideally randomized, trials. But the high rate of clinical and functional improvement seen in some patients with advanced D-TGCT, often after multiple operations, suggests that these inhibitors will likely have a role in the management of patients with an inoperable disease; the definition of "inoperable TGCT" still requires refinement to reach a consensus. Another point that will need to be addressed is that of "the optimal duration of therapy" for these patients. Indeed, we and others have observed often prolonged clinical benefit and symptomatic relief even after treatment was stopped, with both monoclonal antibodies and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Responses were observed very early on with emactuzumab and PLX3397, and patients experienced significant symptom improvement within a few weeks of starting therapy (2-4 weeks). Another possible application of CSF1R inhibitors could be used either as a preoperative or postoperative therapy for patients with operable TGCT. However, we currently lack sufficient follow-up to adequately address these questions which will each require specific trial designs. Overall, the striking clinical activity of CSF1R specific inhibitors in TGCT has created great enthusiasm among clinicians, and further development of these agents is clearly medically needed. Nevertheless, further investigations are necessary to validate those treatments and assess how to best incorporate them among other treatment modalities into the overall therapeutic strategy for a given patient.

Purpose: Perivascular epitheliod cell tumors (PEComas) are rare mesenchymal neoplasms for which the role of systemic treatments is not established as there are no published prospective clinical trials or sufficiently large retrospective case series. The aim of this study is to clarify the activity of conventional chemotherapy and biological agents in advanced/metastatic PEComas. Experimental Design: This was an observational, retrospective, international study that included patients with advanced/ metastatic PEComa treated with systemic therapy at 5 European sarcoma reference centers and within the Italian Rare Cancer Network. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and the Cox hazards regression models. Results: A total of 53 patients were included. Cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens were active only in a small proportion of PEComas. Gemcitabine-based regimens [objective response rate (ORR): 20%, median progression-free survival (PFS): 3.4 months] seemed to have the same activity of anthracycline-based regimens (ORR: 13%, median PFS: 3.2 months). Antiangiogenic agents resulted in disease stabilization in some patients, with a number having density changes/tissue response on imaging, with an ORR of 8.3% and a median PFS of 5.4 months. mTOR inhibitors were the most active agents, with an ORR of 41% and a median PFS of 9 months. Conclusions: Our study provides data for the selection of systemic therapy in patients with advanced/metastatic PEComa: mTOR inhibitors are the most active agents. Antiangiogenics and chemotherapy with gemcitabine-based regimens or anthracycline-based regimens are options in further line, but with a lower response rate and PFS.

Tenosynovial giant cell tumors (TGCT), are rare colony stimulating factor-1(CSF-1)-driven proliferative disorders affecting joints. Diffuse-type TGCT often causes significant morbidity due to local recurrences necessitating multiple surgeries. Imatinib mesylate (IM) blocks the CSF-1 receptor. This study investigated the long term effects of IM in TGCT. We conducted an international multi-institutional retrospective study to assess the activity of IM: data was collected anonymously from individual patients with locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic TGCT. Sixty-two patients from 12 institutions across Europe, Australia and the United States were identified. Four patients with metastatic TGCT progressed rapidly on IM and were excluded for further analyses. Seventeen of 58 evaluable patients achieved complete response (CR) or partial response (PR). One- and five-year progression-free survival rates were 71% and 48%, respectively. Thirty-eight (66%) patients discontinued IM after a median of 7 (range 1–80) months. Reported adverse events in 45 (78%) patients were among other edema (48%) and fatigue (50%), mostly grade 1–2 (89%). Five patients experienced grade 3–4 toxicities. This study confirms, with additional follow-up, the efficacy of IM in TGCT. In responding cases we confirmed prolonged IM activity on TGCT symptoms even after discontinuation, but with high rates of treatment interruption and additional treatments.

This is the largest retrospective series of systemic therapy in ES. We confirm a moderate activity of anthracycline-based and gemcitabine-based regimens in ES, with a similar response rate and PFS in both groups. The value of pazopanib was low. These data may serve as a benchmark for trials of novel agents in ES.

PURPOSE Primary or secondary mutations in KIT or platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha ( PDGFRA) underlie tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance in most GI stromal tumors (GISTs). Avapritinib selectively and potently inhibits KIT- and PDGFRA-mutant kinases. In the phase I NAVIGATOR study ( NCT02508532 ), avapritinib showed clinical activity against PDGFRA D842V–mutant and later-line KIT-mutant GIST. VOYAGER ( NCT03465722 ), a phase III study, evaluated efficacy and safety of avapritinib versus regorafenib as third-line or later treatment in patients with unresectable or metastatic GIST. PATIENTS AND METHODS VOYAGER randomly assigned patients 1:1 to avapritinib 300 mg once daily (4 weeks continuously) or regorafenib 160 mg once daily (3 weeks on and 1 week off). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by central radiology per RECIST version 1.1 modified for GIST. Secondary end points included objective response rate, overall survival, safety, disease control rate, and duration of response. Regorafenib to avapritinib crossover was permitted upon centrally confirmed disease progression. RESULTS Four hundred seventy-six patients were randomly assigned (avapritinib, n = 240; regorafenib, n = 236). Median PFS was not statistically different between avapritinib and regorafenib (hazard ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.57; 4.2 v 5.6 months; P = .055). Overall survival data were immature at cutoff. Objective response rates were 17.1% and 7.2%, with durations of responses of 7.6 and 9.4 months for avapritinib and regorafenib; disease control rates were 41.7% (95% CI, 35.4 to 48.2) and 46.2% (95% CI, 39.7 to 52.8). Treatment-related adverse events (any grade, grade ≥ 3) were similar for avapritinib (92.5% and 55.2%) and regorafenib (96.2% and 57.7%). CONCLUSION Primary end point was not met. There was no significant difference in median PFS between avapritinib and regorafenib in patients with molecularly unselected, late-line GIST.

Sarcomas are a heterogeneous group of malignancies that arise from cells of a mesenchymal origin. Surgery forms the mainstay of the treatment of most patients with localized sarcoma and might be followed or preceded by chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. In the metastatic setting, systemic treatments tend to improve survival and control symptoms. However, the adverse events and sometimes disappointing outcomes associated with these empirical approaches to treatment indicate a need for new approaches. The advent of next-generation sequencing (NGS) has enabled more targeted treatment of many malignancies based on the presence of specific alterations. NGS analyses of sarcomas have revealed the presence of many alterations that can be targeted using therapies that are already used in patients with other forms of cancer. In this Review, we describe the genomic alterations considered to define specific nosological subgroups of sarcoma and whose contribution to oncogenesis provides a biological rationale for the use of a specific targeted therapy. We also report several less successful examples that should guide researchers and clinicians to better define the extent to which the identification of driver molecular alterations should influence the development of novel treatments.