No abstract

BackgroundThe ability to analyze the genomics of malignancies has opened up new possibilities for off-label targeted therapy in cancers that are refractory to standard therapy. At Mayo Clinic these efforts are organized through the Center for Individualized Medicine (CIM).ResultsPrior to GTB, datasets were analyzed and integrated by a team of bioinformaticians and cancer biologists. Therapeutically actionable mutations were identified in 65% (92/141) of the patients tested with 32% (29/92) receiving genomically targeted therapy with FDA approved drugs or in an independent clinical trial with 45% (13/29) responding. Standard of care (SOC) options were continued by 15% (14/92) of patients tested before exhausting SOC options, with 71% (10/14) responding to treatment. Over 35% (34/92) of patients with actionable targets were not treated with 65% (22/34) choosing comfort measures or passing away.Materials and MethodsPatients (N = 165) were referred to the CIM Clinic between October 2012 and December 2015. All patients received clinical genomic panel testing with selected subsets receiving array comparative genomic hybridization and clinical whole exome sequencing to complement and validate panel findings. A genomic tumor board (GTB) reviewed results and, when possible, developed treatment recommendations.ConclusionsTreatment decisions driven by tumor genomic analysis can lead to significant clinical benefit in a minority of patients. The success of genomically driven therapy depends both on access to drugs and robustness of bioinformatics analysis. While novel clinical trial designs are increasing the utility of genomic testing, robust data sharing of outcomes is needed to optimize clinical benefit for all patients.

Purpose: The role of chemotherapy (CT) and radiotherapy (RT) for management of extraskeletal osteosarcoma (ESOS) remains controversial. We examined disease outcomes for ESOS patients and investigated the association between CT/RT with recurrence and survival. Patients and methods: Retrospective review at 25 international sarcoma centers identified patients ≥18 years old treated for ESOS from 1971 to 2016. Patient/tumour characteristics, treatment, local/systemic recurrence, and survival data were collected. Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox proportional-hazards regression and cumulative incidence competing risks analysis were performed. Results: 370 patients with localized ESOS treated definitively with surgery presented with mainly deep tumours (n = 294, 80%). 122 patients underwent surgical resection alone, 96 (26%) also received CT, 70 (19%) RT and 82 (22%) both adjuvants. Five-year survival for patients with localized ESOS was 56% (95% CI 51%-62%). Almost half of patients (n = 173, 47%) developed recurrence: local 9% (35/370), distant 28% (102/370) or both 10% (36/370). Considering death as a competing event, there was no significant difference in cumulative incidence of local or systemic recurrence between patients who received CT, RT, both or neither (local p = 0.50, systemic p = 0.69). Multiple regression Cox analysis showed a significant association between RT and decreased local recurrence (HR 0.46 [95% CI 0.26-0.80], p = 0.01). Conclusion: Although the use of RT significantly decreased local recurrences, CT did not decrease the risk of systemic recurrence, and neither CT, nor RT nor both were associated with improved survival in patients with localized ESOS. Our results do not support the use of CT; however, adjuvant RT demonstrates benefit in patients with locally resectable ESOS.

Our study demonstrates excellent survival for localized tumors in the modern era. Anatomical localization within the pelvis likely correlates with outcomes. Local control remains problematic, especially for patients treated with definitive radiation. Though statistically not significant, surgery + radiation and definitive radiation dose ≥5,600 cGy were associated with the lowest incidence of local failure, suggesting treatment intensification may improve local control for pelvis ES.