Selective avoidance of local therapy is justified in some patients, though further work is required to prospectively identify those for whom this is most applicable. Exclusion of alkylating agents is justified for the most favorable subset of patients. The value of the new six-drug chemotherapy combination is being evaluated further in a randomized study (MMT 95).

Intensification of chemotherapy for nonmetastatic RMS and other chemotherapy-sensitive STS provides no survival advantage or reduction in the intensity of local therapy and adds toxicity.

Girls with nonmetastatic RMS of the genital tract have an excellent prognosis. We found no difference in outcome between uterine and vulvovaginal RMS. Local treatment does not seem necessary in patients who have a complete response to CHT. When a local treatment is needed, BT may be an alternative to radical surgery or ERT.

No abstract

Background The aim of this analysis was to identify if the modified indications of radiotherapy (RT) or radical surgery compromised survival in pediatric synovial sarcoma (SS). Procedure Children with non‐metastatic SS, prospectively enrolled in three trials, were analyzed. After primary surgery or biopsy, they received chemotherapy. RT was planned after chemotherapy in patients who had not achieved a complete response (CR). The considered outcome was 5‐year overall survival (OS) and event‐free survival (EFS). Results Eighty‐eight patients were identified. Primary tumors were mainly located in limbs (66%). The first‐line therapy for 65 patients was primary resection. Of the 49 patients who had gross tumor resection, 43 received adjuvant chemotherapy, and 8 had RT. All of the 39 patients with macroscopic residual disease received chemotherapy, then only surgery (n = 12) ± RT (n = 22). The 5‐year EFS and OS rates were 68% and 85%, respectively. The TNM stage was a prognostic factor for relapse, whereas primary site of the tumor and TNM stage were prognostic factors for death. Conclusions Only 32% of survivors received RT. OS was similar to published data. Omission of RT may be considered in younger children, to limit the potential sequelae in patients with tumors less than 5 cm in size initially submitted to marginal resection. This strategy may also be considered in initially unresected cases, when the tumor is resected at delayed surgery with microscopically free margins, and in patients in complete remission after primary chemotherapy. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2011; 57: 1130–1136. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Males with paratesticular RMS have an excellent prognosis except for a selected group of patients older than 10 years or with tumor greater than 5 cm. Intensified chemotherapy incorporating alkylating agents for this subgroup may be preferred to the use of systematic lymphadenectomy to improve survival while minimizing the burden of therapy.

Background: The French Sarcoma Group assessed the efficacy, safety, and quality of life (QoL) of trabectedin versus best supportive care (BSC) in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Patients and methods: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III study included adults with STS who progressed after 1-3 prior treatment lines. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to receive trabectedin 1.5 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks or BSC, stratified into L-STS (liposarcoma/leiomyosarcoma) and non-L-STS groups (other histotypes). Patients from the BSC arm were allowed to cross over to trabectedin at progression. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) confirmed by blinded central review and analyzed in the intention-to-treat population.Results: Between 26 January 2015 and 5 November 2015, 103 heavily pre-treated patients (60.2% with L-STS) from 16 French centers were allocated to receive trabectedin (n ¼ 52) or BSC (n ¼ 51). Median PFS was 3.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-5.9 months] in the trabectedin arm versus 1.5 months (0.9-2.6 months) in the BSC arm (hazard ratio ¼ 0.39, 95% CI 0.24-0.64, P < 0.001) with benefits observed across almost all analyzed subgroups, but particularly in patients with L-STS (5.1 versus 1.4 months, P ¼ 0.0001). Seven patients (13.7%) in the trabectedin arm (all with L-STS) achieved a partial response, while no objective responses were observed in the BSC arm (P ¼ 0.004). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (44.2% of patients), leukopenia (34.6%), and transaminase increase (32.7%). Health-related 30-item core European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire evidenced no statistical differences between the arms for any domain and at any time point. After progression, 91.8% of patients crossed over from BSC to trabectedin. Conclusion: Trabectedin demonstrates superior disease control to BSC without impairing QoL in patients with recurrent STS of multiple histologies, with greater impact in patients with L-STS.

No abstract