High-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue in the primary treatment of metastatic and pelvic osteosarcoma: final results of the ISG/SSG II study

Poverty, race, ethnicity, and survival in pediatric nonmetastatic osteosarcoma: a Children's Oncology Group report

BACKGROUND

Children living in poverty and those of marginalized race or ethnicity experience inferior disease outcomes across many cancers. Whether survival disparities exist in osteosarcoma is poorly defined. We investigated the association between race, ethnicity, and proxied poverty exposures and event-free and overall survival for children with nonmetastatic osteosarcoma receiving care on a cooperative group trial.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of US patients with nonmetastatic, osteosarcoma aged 5-21 years enrolled on the Children's Oncology Group trial AOST0331. Race and ethnicity were categorized to reflect historically marginalized populations, as Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic Other, and non-Hispanic White. Poverty was proxied at the household and neighborhood levels. Overall survival and event-free survival functions of time from trial enrollment were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hypotheses of associations between risks for event-free survival, death, and postrelapse death with race and ethnicity were assessed using log-rank tests.

RESULTS

Among 758 patients, 25.6% were household-poverty and 28.5% neighborhood-poverty exposed. Of the patients, 21% of children identified as Hispanic, 15.4% non-Hispanic Black, 5.3% non-Hispanic Other, and 54.0% non-Hispanic White. Neither household or neighborhood poverty nor race and ethnicity were statistically significantly associated with risks for event-free survival or death. Postrelapse risk for death differed statistically significantly across race and ethnicity with non-Hispanic Black patients at greatest risk (4-year postrelapse survival 35.7% Hispanic vs 13.0% non-Hispanic Black vs 43.8% non-Hispanic Other vs 38.9% non-Hispanic White; P = .0046).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither proxied poverty exposures or race and ethnicity were associated with event-free survival or overall survival, suggesting equitable outcomes following frontline osteosarcoma trial-delivered therapy. Non-Hispanic Black children experienced statistically significant inferior postrelapse survival. Investigation of mechanisms underlying postrelapse disparities are paramount.

High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation in pediatric patients with relapsed osteosarcoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with relapsed osteosarcoma have poor treatment outcomes. High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (HDCT/ASCT) has been used in several high-risk malignant solid tumors; however, few studies have evaluated their role in treating osteosarcoma. We evaluated the effectiveness of HDCT/ASCT in relapsed pediatric osteosarcoma cases.

PROCEDURE

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 40 patients diagnosed with and treated for relapsed osteosarcoma at Asan Medical Center and Samsung Medical Center from January 1996 to July 2019.

RESULTS

The median age of this cohort was 13.4 years (range: 6.1-18.2). The cohort's 5-year overall survival (OS) was 51.0% ± 0.1% during a median follow-up period of 67.5 months. Twenty-five patients (62.5%) achieved complete remission (CR) with salvage treatment, and the 5-year OS was 82.4% ± 0.1%, whereas none of the remaining 15 patients who did not achieve CR survived (p < .0001). Of the 25 CR cases, 15 underwent subsequent HDCT/ASCT. We compared the effect of HDCT/ASCT among patients who achieved CR. There were no significant differences in the 5-year OS outcomes between patients who did and did not receive HDCT/ASCT (83.9% ± 0.1%, 13/15 vs. 80.0% ± 0.1%, 8/10, respectively; p = .923).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, we report the first comparative cohort study that proved HDCT/ASCT does not significantly improve survival outcomes in relapsed osteosarcoma. Achievement of CR remains the most crucial factor for good survival outcomes.

Favorable outcome of high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with nonmetastatic osteosarcoma and low-degree necrosis

Background

A low-degree tumor necrosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a poor prognostic factor for osteosarcoma (OSA). However, the role of high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in OSA remains controversial. We analyzed the treatment outcomes and prognostic factors of nonmetastatic OSA and compared the HDC and conventional chemotherapy (CC) outcomes of patients with <90% necrosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated patients with OSA treated at the Seoul National University Children’s Hospital from 2000 to 2020. Totally, 113 patients with non-metastatic OSA at diagnosis were included. The majority were treated with cisplatin, doxorubicin, and methotrexate as neoadjuvant chemotherapy. This was continued when the postoperative necrosis rate was >90% (good response [GR]), whereas most cases with <90% (poor response [PR]) were changed to chemotherapy. The HDC regimen was composed of melphalan, etoposide, and carboplatin.

Results

The median age at diagnosis was 12.6 years (range, 5.0–20.3), and 61.9% of patients were men. The 5-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 75.8% and 91.5%, respectively. Among these, 59 and 44 patients were included in the GR and PR groups, respectively. The GR group had a better 5-year EFS rate than the PR group (82.4% vs. 67.3%, p=0.071). Age at diagnosis, sex, tumor site, type of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and degree of tumor necrosis were not different between the PR-HDC (n=24) and PR-CC (n=20) groups. The 5-year EFS and OS rates in the PR-HDC (n=24) and PR-CC (n=20) groups were 78.6% and 53.6% (p=0.065) and 100% and 76.9% (p=0.024), respectively. In the Cox regression analysis, the PR-CC group (hazard ratio, 4.95; p=0.004) and age ≥12 years (hazard ratio, 2.68; p=0.024) were significant risk factors for 5-year EFS.

Conclusions

HDC showed favorable outcomes in patients with non-metastatic OSA and <90% necrosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Recent and Ongoing Research into Metastatic Osteosarcoma Treatments

The survival rate for metastatic osteosarcoma has not improved for several decades, since the introduction and refinement of chemotherapy as a treatment in addition to surgery. Over two thirds of metastatic osteosarcoma patients, many of whom are children or adolescents, fail to exhibit durable responses and succumb to their disease. Concerted efforts have been made to increase survival rates through identification of candidate therapies via animal studies and early phase trials of novel treatments, but unfortunately, this work has produced negligible improvements to the survival rate for metastatic osteosarcoma patients. This review summarizes data from clinical trials of metastatic osteosarcoma therapies as well as pre-clinical studies that report efficacy of novel drugs against metastatic osteosarcoma in vivo. Considerations regarding the design of animal studies and clinical trials to improve survival outcomes for metastatic osteosarcoma patients are also discussed.

State-of-the-art, approved therapeutics for the pharmacological management of osteosarcoma

Introduction: Advances in the treatment of osteosarcoma (OS) came in the mid-1970s, when adding chemotherapy to surgery significantly improved patient survival. OS outcomes have since plateaued, however, despite exhaustive clinical investigations.Area covered: This review focuses on the most significant recent results of trials (in phases II and III) on localized and metastatic/relapsing OS and offers an overview of new targeted drugs.Expert opinion: Recent findings confirm the MAP (methotrexate, doxorubicin, and cisplatin) regimen as the gold standard for OS patients, also in metastatic cases, and the inefficacy of augmenting or modifying chemotherapy in poor responder patients. Immunotherapy and several tyrosine kinase inhibitors seem to be effective and promising in the treatment of OS. Optimizing the use of active drugs available by personalizing chemotherapies might prove important in the future. We urgently need bench-to-bedside research on OS. This will need to involve the extensive sequencing and immunoprofiling of all resected tumor tissue to find new therapeutic agents, especially for relapsing/metastatic patients. The low incidence of OS, its genomic complexity, and differences within and between tumors combine to complicate efforts to elucidate the biology of this disease. This means that we need to pool the resources of different groups studying OS and support translational research.

Managing axial bone sarcomas in childhood

Introduction: Axial osteosarcoma and Ewing sarcoma are rare, aggressive neoplasms with a worse prognosis than with tumors involving the extremities because they are more likely to be associated with larger tumor volumes, older age, primary metastases, and a poor histological response to chemotherapy. The 5-year OS rates are reportedly in the range of 18-41% for axial osteosarcoma, and 46-64% for Ewing sarcoma.Area covered: The treatment of axial bone tumors is the same as for extremity bone tumors, and includes chemotherapy, surgery and/or radiotherapy.Expert opinion: Local treatment of axial tumors is particularly difficult due to their proximity to neurological and vascular structures, which often makes extensive and en bloc resections impossible without causing significant morbidity. The incidence of local relapse is consequently high, and this is the main issue in the treatment of these tumors. Radiotherapy is an option in the case of surgical resections with close or positive margins, as well as for inoperable tumors. Delivering high doses of RT to the spinal cord can be dangerous. Given the complexity and rarity of these tumors, it is essential for this subset of patients to be treated at selected reference institutions with specific expertise and multidisciplinary skills.

Derivation and validation of risk groups in patients with osteosarcoma utilizing regression tree analysis

BACKGROUND

For patients with osteosarcoma, apart from stage and primary site, we lack reliable prognostic factors for risk stratification at diagnosis. There is a need for further defined, discrete prognostic groups using presenting clinical features.

METHODS

We analyzed a cohort of 3069 patients less than 50 years of age, diagnosed with primary osteosarcoma of the bone between 1986 and 2013 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Patients were randomly split into test and validation cohorts. Optimal cut points for age, tumor size, and grade were identified using classification and regression tree analysis. Manual recursive partitioning was used to identify discrete prognostic groups within the test cohort. These groups were applied to the validation cohort, and overall survival was analyzed using Cox models, Kaplan Meier methods, and log-rank tests.

RESULTS

After applying recursive partitioning to the test cohort, our initial model included six groups. Application of these groups to the validation cohort resulted in four final groups. Key risk factors included presence of metastases, tumor site, tumor grade, age, and tumor size. Patients with localized axial tumors were identified as having similar outcomes to patients with metastases. Age and tumor size were only prognostically important in patients with extremity tumors when assessed in the validation cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis supports prior reports that patients with axial tumors are a high-risk group, and demonstrates the importance of age and tumor size in patients with appendicular tumors. Biologic and genetic markers are needed to further define subgroups in osteosarcoma.

A Pharmacological Analysis of the Activity and Failure of the Medical Treatment of High-Grade Osteosarcoma

Osteosarcomas (OSs) are a group of neoplasms originating from bone cells, usually presenting in three specific age groups: children, young adults, and the elderly. High-grade OS is an extremely malignant tumor mainly due to evolution into metastatic disease, usually in the lungs. Survival of these patients has improved since the 1980s thanks to close cooperation between oncologists, oncological surgeons and orthopedic surgeons. Unfortunately, no progress has been made in the last 30 years and new, more effective drugs are needed. This article reviews the biological and pharmacological basis of the treatment of OS. Models of clinical pharmacology of the active drugs, toxic effects and reasons for primary and secondary resistance to old and new drugs are discussed.

GD2 or HER2 targeting T cell engaging bispecific antibodies to treat osteosarcoma

BACKGROUND

The cure rate for metastatic osteosarcoma has not substantially improved over the past decades. Clinical trials of anti-HER2 trastuzumab or anti-GD2 dinutuximab for metastatic or refractory osteosarcoma were not successful, and neither was immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).

METHODS

We tested various target antigen expressions on osteosarcoma cell lines using flow cytometry and analyzed in vitro T cell engaging BsAb (T-BsAb)-dependent T cell-mediated cytotoxicity using 4-h ⁵¹Cr release assay. We tested in vivo anti-tumor activities of T-BsAb targeting GD2 or HER2 in established osteosarcoma cell line or patient-derived xenograft (PDX) mouse models carried out in BALB-Rag2^-/-IL-2R-γc-KO (BRG) mice. We also generated ex vivo BsAb-armed T cells (EATs) and studied their tumor-suppressive effect against osteosarcoma xenografts. In order to improve the anti-tumor response, ICIs, anti-human PD-1 (pembrolizumab) or anti-human PD-L1 (atezolizumab) antibodies were tested their synergy with GD2- or HER2-BsAb against osteosarcoma.

RESULTS

GD2 and HER2 were chosen from a panel of surface markers on osteosarcoma cell lines and PDXs. Anti-GD2 BsAb or anti-HER2 BsAb exerted potent anti-tumor effect against osteosarcoma tumors in vitro and in vivo. T cells armed with anti-GD2-BsAb (GD2-EATs) or anti-HER2-BsAb (HER2-EATs) showed significant anti-tumor activities as well. Anti-PD-L1 combination treatment enhanced BsAb-armed T cell function in vivo and improved tumor control and survival of the mice, when given sequentially and continuously.

CONCLUSION

Anti-GD2 and anti-HER2 BsAbs were effective in controlling osteosarcoma. These data support the clinical investigation of GD2 and HER2 targeted T-BsAb treatment in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors, particularly anti-PD-L1, in patients with osteosarcoma to improve their treatment outcome.

Current Treatment Considerations for Osteosarcoma Metastatic at Presentation

Approximately one-fourth of osteosarcoma patients have metastases at presentation. The best treatment options for these patients include chemotherapy, surgery, and radiotherapy; however, the optimal scheme has not yet been defined. Standard chemotherapy for osteosarcoma metastatic at presentation is based on high-dose methotrexate, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (the MAP regimen), with the possible addition of ifosfamide. Surgical treatment continues to be fundamental; complete surgical resection of all sites of disease (primary and metastatic) remains essential for survival. In patients whose tumors do not respond to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, early surgical resection of the primary tumor with limb-salvage surgery or amputation and multiple metastasectomies, if feasible, after the completion of adjuvant chemotherapy is a reasonable option, as the reduction of the tumor volume could probably increase the effect of chemotherapy. Advanced radiotherapy techniques, such as carbon ion radiotherapy and stereotactic radiosurgery, and molecular targeted chemo-therapy with drugs such as pazopanib or apatinib have improved the dismal prognosis, especially for patients who are medically inoperable or who refuse surgery. Given that the presence of metastatic disease at diagnosis of a patient with osteosarcoma is a poor prognostic factor, a multidisciplinary approach by surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiotherapists is important. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(5):e345-e358.].

Identification of Osteosarcoma Metastasis-Associated Gene Biomarkers and Potentially Targeted Drugs Based on Bioinformatic and Experimental Analysis

BACKGROUND

Metastasis is the leading cause of death for patients with osteosarcoma (OS). In the present study, we explore the biomarkers for metastatic OS and provide potential therapeutic approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RNA-Seq data and clinical follow-up information were downloaded from TARGET and GEO databases. A Cox regression model was used to analyze metastatic events. L1000FWD, DGIdb, and CMap databases were used to identify potential drugs related to metastasis. Invasion and migration transwell assays and an adhesion assay were used to identify biological functions of genes.

RESULTS

A total of 15 metastasis-related signatures (MRSs) were associated with the prognosis based on the TARGET or GSE21257 cohorts, among which IL10RA and TLR7 genes were especially significant. In the DGIdb drug-gene interaction database, TLR7 and IFNGR1 were found to have potential interactions with drugs. After inhibiting the expression of TLR7, the migration, invasion, and adhesion ability of OS cells were significantly enhanced, which further promoted metastasis.

CONCLUSION

We identified a set of MRS that may be related to OS metastases. Among them, TLR7 plays a vital role and may be a potential target for OS metastasis treatment.

What is the best clinical approach to recurrent/refractory osteosarcoma?

Introduction: Osteosarcoma is the most common malignant bone tumor. It is currently treated with pre-and postoperative chemotherapy, associated with surgical resection of the tumor.Area covered: Relapses occur in about one in three patients presenting with localized disease, and three in four of those with metastases at diagnosis. Relapsing disease carries a very poor prognosis, with 5-year survival rates ranging between 13% and 40%.Expert opinion: Patients with unilateral lung involvement or solitary lung metastases and a recurrence-free interval (RFI) longer than 24 months have a better prognosis, and could be managed with surgical resection and close observation. Complete surgical resection of all sites of disease remains essential to survival: patients unable to achieve complete remission have a catastrophic overall survival rate. The role of second-line chemotherapy is not at all clear, and no controlled studies are available on this topic. It is worth considering for patients unable to achieve complete surgical remission, and those with multiple metastases and/or a RFI <24 months. Given their dismal prognosis, patients with multiple sites of disease not amenable to complete surgical resection should also be considered for innovative therapeutic approaches.

Retrospective analysis of high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation for high-risk pediatric osteosarcoma

The outcomes of osteosarcoma with poor prognostic factors, such as poor responders, metastatic disease at diagnosis, and relapsed or refractory disease, are poor. We reviewed the clinical records of the patients diagnosed with osteosarcoma at our institute between 2004 and 2018 who received high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in our institute. Ten patients of osteosarcoma with poor responder, refractory status, and metastatic disease at diagnosis received high-dose chemotherapy followed by ASCT. Four patients underwent high-dose chemotherapy followed by ASCT with the conditioning regimen consisted of thiotepa and melphalan (MEL). Five patients underwent high-dose chemotherapy followed by ASCT with the conditioning regimen consisted of intravenous busulfan (BU) and MEL. One patient underwent tandem high-dose chemotherapy followed by ASCT with BU and MEL followed by carboplatin and etoposide. None of the ten patients died of regimen related toxicities. None of the five patients with poor responders who underwent high-dose chemotherapy followed by ASCT as part of consolidation therapy died of disease after ASCT. High-dose chemotherapy followed by ASCT might be effective for poor responders in osteosarcoma.

Association of high PDPN expression with pulmonary metastasis of osteosarcoma and patient prognosis

Podoplanin (PDPN) is an important positive regulator of platelet aggregation and functions as a lymphatic endothelial marker. PDPN has been observed to be expressed in human tumor tissues and various cancer cell lines. In the present study, PDPN expression in patients with primary osteosarcoma was assessed at the mRNA and protein levels, and the associations between PDPN expression and pulmonary metastasis (PM) and prognosis were examined. Reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) analysis was used to detect the expression levels of PDPN in primary osteosarcoma tissues and paired normal bone tissues (n=20 pairs). In addition, immunohistochemical analysis of PDPN expression was performed in 168 paraffin-embedded osteosarcoma tissue specimens and 23 matched normal tissues. The RT-qPCR results revealed higher mRNA expression levels of PDPN in patients with PM compared with patients without PM. Further survival analyses identified Enneking stage and PM as two independent prognostic indicators. Finally, univariate analysis revealed that high PDPN protein expression was significantly associated with Enneking stage and PM in patients with osteosarcoma.

Interventions for cisplatin-induced hearing loss in children and adolescents with cancer

The identification of preventive interventions that are safe and effective for cisplatin-induced ototoxicity is important, especially in children because hearing loss can impair speech-language acquisition development. Previous randomised trials assessed systemic drugs such as amifostine, sodium diethyldithiocarbamate or disulfiram, and sodium thiosulfate. Amifostine, sodium diethyldithiocarbamate, and disulfiram did not show hearing preservation. Paediatric trials assessing sodium thiosulfate showed efficacy in terms of hearing protection. The SIOPEL 6 trial consisted solely of patients with localised hepatoblastoma and no effects on survival were shown. In the ACCL0431 trial, which included heterogeneous patients, a post-hoc analysis showed significantly worse overall survival among patients who had disseminated disease receiving sodium thiosulfate than among controls, but not among those with localised disease. Intratympanically administered drugs have mainly been assessed in adults and include N-acetylcysteine and dexamethasone. Inconsistent effects of these drugs were identified but these studies were limited by design, small sample size, and statistical approach. Future studies of systemic drugs will need to consider the measurement of disease outcomes through study design and sample size, and ototoxicity endpoints should be harmonised to enhance comparability between trials.

Methotrexate, doxorubicin, and cisplatinum regimen is still the preferred option for osteosarcoma chemotherapy: A meta-analysis and clinical observation

BACKGROUND

We designed the study to investigate whether methotrexate, doxorubicin, and cisplatinum (MAP) chemotherapy strategy was still the preferred option for the survival of osteosarcoma patients.

METHOD

We collected some trials of osteosarcoma to make a meta-analysis first. Then, we retrospectively collected data from 115 patients with osteosarcoma and performed further analysis to verify the impact of MAP regimen on the survival of patients.

RESULTS

Seven studies including 3433 participants met the preliminary inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of the 3-year disease-free survival (odds ratio [OR] = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88-1.28; P = .52) and overall survival (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.70-2.11; P = .54), 5-year disease-free survival (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.87-1.30; P = .54) and overall survival (OR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.65-1.12; P = .26), and mortality rate (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.70-1.17; P = .44), showed no statistically significant differences. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (498 [85.9%] patients in MAP vs 533 [93.3%] in MAP plus ifosfamide and etoposide, or other adjuvant therapy drugs [MAP]). MAP was associated with less frequent toxicities than MAP group with statistical significance in thrombocytopenia, febrile neutropenia, anemia, and hypophosphatemia. The same phenomenon could also be seen in the analysis of clinical data.

CONCLUSION

MAP regimen remains the preferred option for osteosarcoma chemotherapy.

Survival and prognosis with osteosarcoma: outcomes in more than 2000 patients in the EURAMOS-1 (European and American Osteosarcoma Study) cohort

Background

High-grade osteosarcoma is a primary malignant bone tumour mainly affecting children and young adults. The European and American Osteosarcoma Study (EURAMOS)-1 is a collaboration of four study groups aiming to improve outcomes of this rare disease by facilitating randomised controlled trials.

Methods

Patients eligible for EURAMOS-1 were aged ≤40 years with M0 or M1 skeletal high-grade osteosarcoma in which case complete surgical resection at all sites was deemed to be possible. A three-drug combination with methotrexate, doxorubicin and cisplatin was defined as standard chemotherapy, and between April 2005 and June 2011, 2260 patients were registered. We report survival outcomes and prognostic factors in the full cohort of registered patients.

Results

For all registered patients at a median follow-up of 54 months (interquartile range: 38–73) from biopsy, 3-year and 5-year event-free survival were 59% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 57–61%) and 54% (95% CI: 52–56%), respectively. Multivariate analyses showed that the most adverse factors at diagnosis were pulmonary metastases (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.34, 95% CI: 1.95–2.81), non-pulmonary metastases (HR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.38–2.73) or an axial skeleton tumour site (HR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.10–2.13). The histological subtypes telangiectatic (HR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.33–0.80) and unspecified conventional (HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52–0.88) were associated with a favourable prognosis compared with chondroblastic subtype. The 3-year and 5-year overall survival from biopsy were 79% (95% CI: 77–81%) and 71% (95% CI: 68–73%), respectively. For patients with localised disease at presentation and in complete remission after surgery, having a poor histological response was associated with worse outcome after surgery (HR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.76–2.58). In radically operated patients, there was no good evidence that axial tumour site was associated with worse outcome.

Conclusions

In conclusion, data from >2000 patients registered to EURAMOS-1 demonstrated survival rates in concordance with institution- or group-level osteosarcoma trials. Further efforts are required to drive improvements for patients who can be identified to be at higher risk of adverse outcome. This trial reaffirms known prognostic factors, and owing to the large numbers of patients registered, it sheds light on some additional factors to consider.

•

Osteosarcoma is a rare disease, and treatment can only improve with international collaboration.

•

We have assembled prospectively collected data from treatments of all the patients in the intercontinental European and American Osteosarcoma Study-1 protocol.

•

These consistently treated patients provided a strong data set for reporting survival outcomes and reporting on prognostic factors.

•

The trial reaffirms known prognostic factors, and the most adverse factors were metastases and tumours in the axial skeleton.

•

Owing to the large numbers of patients registered, light is shed on some additional factors to be considered. Around seven in ten patients were still alive five years after diagnosis.

Does intensified chemotherapy increase survival outcomes of osteosarcoma patients? A meta-analysis

Study Design

Meta-analysis.

Background

Although some new insights have been offered for clinical and scientific relevance, minor progress has been made in osteosarcoma treatment after a dramatic survival improvement in the late 1980s with the addition of chemotherapy to surgery. Intensified chemotherapy strategies have been suggested to increase the survival rate of patients with osteosarcoma. We performed this study to access whether intensified chemotherapy strategiesincreased survival outcomes of osteosarcoma patients compared with conventional chemotherapy strategies.

Methods

MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, BIOSIS Previews, and Cochrane Library were searched from database set up to October2016. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative clinical trials (CCTs) on intensified versus conventional chemotherapy strategies for osteosarcoma patients met the inclusion criteria, and the methodological quality standard were retrieved and reviewed. Data on participant characteristics, interventions, follow-up period, and outcomes were extracted from the included studies and analyzed by Review Manager 5.3.

Results

12 studies (8 RCTs and 4CCT) involving 4112 patients were selected. There were no significant differences between intensified and conventional chemotherapy strategies group in 3-year event-free survival (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, [0.74–1.37]; P = 0.97), 5-year event-free survival (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, [0.86–1.17]; P = 0.97), and 5-year overall survival (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, [0.87–1.26]; P = 0.64), and good histologic response to preoperative chemotherapy (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, [0.78–1.60]; P = 0.55). Pooled analysis of local recurrence rate showed that local recurrence rate was significantly decreased in the intensified group compared with that in the conventional group (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, [0.42–0.85]; P = 0.004).

Conclusions

Intensified chemotherapy might not be a preferred treatment for all of the osteosarcoma patients.

Osteosarcoma: Accelerating Progress Makes for a Hopeful Future

Patients who develop osteosarcoma in 2017 receive treatment that remains essentially unchanged since the 1970s. Outcomes likewise remain largely unimproved. Large, collaborative, multinational efforts to improve therapy have evaluated strategies leveraging both cytotoxic intensification and immunomodulatory agents. While these have confirmed our capacity to conduct such trials, results have proved largely disappointing. This has motivated efforts to focus on the basic biology of osteosarcoma, where understanding remains poor but has improved significantly. Recent advances have identified characteristic genetic features of osteosarcoma, including profound chromosomal disruption, marked patient-patient heterogeneity, and a paucity of recurrent mutations. Analyses suggest genesis in early catastrophic genetic events, although the nature of the inciting events remains unclear. While p53 and Rb inactivation occurs in most osteosarcomas, the landscape of associated driver mutations has proved extensive. Few mutations recur with high frequency, though patterns continue to emerge that suggest recurrent alterations within specific pathways. Biological pathways implicated in osteosarcoma biology through genetic and other preclinical studies include PI3K/mTOR, WNT/βcatenin, TGFβ, RANKL/NF-κB, and IGF. Unfortunately, clinical studies evaluating targeted agents have to date yielded disappointing results, as have studies examining modern immunotherapeutics. It remains unclear whether this pattern of clinical failures exposes inadequacies of our preclinical models, unrealistic expectations for single-agent responses in heavily pretreated patients, or biology less relevant than suggested. Nearly all patients who succumb to osteosarcoma develop lung metastases, which exhibit marked chemoresistance. Much scientific effort has recently sought to enhance our mechanistic understanding of metastasis biology. This research has potential to reveal novel targets for preventing and treating metastasis and for uncovering key vulnerabilities of osteosarcoma cells. Efforts to implement drug development strategies that leverage clinical studies in veterinary patients have potential to accelerate the translation of novel experimental regimens toward human studies. These could reduce costs and development timelines, prioritize agents, and refine regimens prior to human clinical trials. The rise of philanthropic groups focused on osteosarcoma has enhanced cross-disciplinary and cross-institutional focus and provided much needed resources. Transformative new therapies will likely arise from collaborative, interdisciplinary efforts that extend our understanding of osteosarcoma's most basic inner workings.

Advances in the management of osteosarcoma

Osteosarcoma, a bone cancer most commonly seen in adolescents and young adults, is usually a high-grade malignancy characterized by a very high risk for the development of pulmonary metastases. High-grade osteosarcomas are usually treated by preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy and surgery, with a very limited number of active agents available. Rarer lower-grade variants such as parosteal and periosteal osteosarcoma or low-grade central osteosarcoma are treated by surgery only. Imaging to search for possible metastases focuses on the lung. Computed tomography is the most sensitive method but cannot reliably distinguish small metastases from benign lesions. Advances of local imaging and surgical reconstruction now allow the use of limb-salvage in an ever-increasing proportion of patients. While still troubled by complications, non-invasive endoprosthesis-lengthening mechanisms have led to an increased uptake of limb-salvage, even for young, skeletally immature patients. Radiotherapy is employed when osteosarcomas cannot be removed with clear margins, but very high doses are required, and both proton and carbon-ion radiotherapy are under investigation. Unfortunately, the past 30 years have witnessed few, if any, survival improvements. Novel agents have not led to universally accepted changes of treatment standards. In patients with operable high-grade osteosarcomas, the extent of histological response to preoperative chemotherapy is a significant predictive factor for both local and systemic control. Attempts to improve prognosis by adapting postoperative treatment to response, recently tested in a randomized, prospective setting by the European and American Osteosarcoma Study Group, have not been proven to be beneficial. Many agree that only increased knowledge about osteosarcoma biology will lead to novel, effective treatment approaches and will be able to move the field forward.

Pharmacogenomics of second-line drugs used for treatment of unresponsive or relapsed osteosarcoma patients

Second-line treatment of high-grade osteosarcoma (HGOS) patients is based on different approaches and chemotherapy protocols, which are not yet standardized. Although several drugs have been used in HGOS second-line protocols, none of them has provided fully satisfactory results and the role of rescue chemotherapy is not well defined yet. This article focuses on the drugs that have most frequently been used for second-line treatment of HGOS, highlighting the present knowledge on their mechanisms of action and resistance and on gene polymorphisms with possible impact on treatment sensitivity or toxicity. In the near future, validation of the so far identified candidate genetic biomarkers may constitute the basis for tailoring treatment by taking the patients' genetic background into account.

Metastatic osteosarcoma: a challenging multidisciplinary treatment

Osteosarcoma is the most common malignant bone tumor, currently treated with pre-and postoperative chemotherapy in association with the surgical removal of the tumor. About 15-20% of patients have evidence of metastases at diagnosis, mostly in the lungs. Patients with metastatic disease still have a very poor prognosis, with approximately 20-30% of long-term survivors, as compared with 65-70% of patients with localized disease. The optimum management of these patients has not been standardized yet due to several patterns of metastatic disease harboring different prognosis. Complete surgical resection of all sites of disease is mandatory and predictive of survival. Patients with multiple sites of disease not amenable to complete surgery removal should be considered for innovative therapeutic approaches because of poor prognosis.

Risk-Based Therapy for Localized Osteosarcoma

BACKGROUND

The outcome of localized osteosarcoma has remained constant over the past 30 years. Histological response to preoperative chemotherapy is the best predictor of outcome. Strategies to alter treatment based on histological response have not resulted in increased survival.

PROCEDURE

Patients with localized osteosarcoma received preoperative chemotherapy with cisplatin, doxorubicin, and methotrexate. Patients whose tumors had a good histological response (≥90% necrosis) continued with the same treatment postoperatively. Patients with poor histological response (<90% necrosis) received three courses of melphalan 100 mg/m(2) on day -4, cyclophosphamide 2,000 mg/m(2) on days -3, and -2 followed by stem cell infusion.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were enrolled. Median age was 14 years, and 56% of patients were male. The femur was the most common site. Forty patients underwent limb salvage surgery and amputation was performed in six patients. Forty-eight percent of tumors showed good histological response. Forty patients were evaluable for outcome; 18 patients with poor histologic response received high-dose chemotherapy. The 5-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients treated on the high-dose chemotherapy arm were 28% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10-49) and 48% (95% CI, 23-69), respectively. The 5-year EFS and OS for patients treated on the standard chemotherapy arm were 62% (95% CI, 36-80) and 74% (95% CI, 44-90), respectively. All patients who received high-dose chemotherapy developed grade 3 or higher hematological toxicity. There were no treatment-related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative alkylator intensification with high-dose cyclophosphamide and melphalan in patients with localized osteosarcoma with poor histological response failed to improve survival.

An update on chemotherapy for osteosarcoma

INTRODUCTION

In the early seventies chemotherapy significantly improved survival in osteosarcoma. Since then minor innovations have occurred although recent years have offered insights of clinical and scientific relevance.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on the most recent results of phase 3 and 2 studies. Published data or presentations at International meetings are discussed. A specific section discusses recent insights from studies supporting the hypothesis of a possible personalized chemotherapy approach.

EXPERT OPINION

Osteosarcoma is a rare tumor and any effort should be made to improve the level of International collaboration. The MAP (methotrexate, doxorubicin and cisplatin) regimen has become the treatment of choice. Poor pathological response to primary chemotherapy is confirmed as a predictive factor of survival and, presently with the available drugs, it is not recommended to intensify or change post-operative treatment on the basis of pathological response to primary chemotherapy. The genomic complexity and the heterogeneity of osteosarcoma makes active and effective molecularly targeted therapies unlikely to be available in the near future. A relation between pharmacogenetic profile and chemotherapy toxicity and prognosis has been reported. The new frontier for clinical research in osteosarcoma is to optimize the use of the active drugs available by personalizing chemotherapy treatment.

Referral patterns, treatment and outcome of high-grade malignant bone sarcoma in Scandinavia--SSG Central Register 25 years' experience

AIMS

The objectives of this study were to present changes in referral patterns, treatment and survival in patients with high-grade malignant bone sarcoma in Sweden and Norway based on data in the Scandinavian Sarcoma Group (SSG) Central Register.

METHOD

Data on 1,437 patients with diagnosis 1986-2010 was analyzed.

RESULTS

Osteosarcoma was the most frequentl diagnosis (45%), followed by Ewing sarcoma (21%) and chondrosarcoma (17%). Thirty-one percent of Swedish and 41% of Norwegian patients had tumors in the axial skeleton. Eighty-six percent of extremity tumors and 66% of axial tumors were referred to a sarcoma center prior to unplanned surgery or biopsy. During the past decade, limb salvage surgery has risen from under 50% to over 80%. Five-year overall survival in non-metastatic osteosarcoma was 70% for extremity tumors, and 35% for axial tumors. No improvement in osteosarcoma survival was observed during the last decade. Five-year survival in Ewing sarcoma improved from 50% to 69%.

CONCLUSION

Referral patterns in bone sarcomas have improved. However, greater efforts should be dedicated to improving referral of patients with possible tumors in the axial skeleton to multidisciplinary teams (MDTs). Overall survival of patients with high-grade malignant bone sarcomas in Sweden and Norway is in line with other reports.

Prognostic factors and treatment results of high-grade osteosarcoma in norway: a scope beyond the "classical" patient

Purpose. A retrospective study of prognostic factors and treatment outcome of osteosarcoma (OS) during modern chemotherapy era with focus on patients with primary metastatic disease, nonextremity localisation, or age >40 years (nonclassical OS). Methods. A nationwide cohort, comprising 424 high-grade Norwegian bone OS patients, was based on registry sources supplemented with clinical records from hospitals involved in sarcoma management between 1975 and 2009. Results. Only 48% were younger patients with tumour in the extremities and without metastasis at diagnosis (classical OS). A considerable discrepancy in survival between classical and nonclassical OS was observed: 61% versus 26% 10-year sarcoma specific survival. Twice as many of the former received both adequate surgery and chemotherapy compared to the latter. This could only partly explain the differences in survival due to inherent chemoresistance in primary metastatic disease and a higher rate of local relapse among patients with axial tumours. Metastasis at diagnosis, increased lactate dehydrogenase, age > 40 years, and tumour size above median value were all adverse prognostic factors for overall survival. Conclusion. We confirm a dramatic difference in outcome between classical and nonclassical high-grade OS patients, but treatment variables could only partly explain the dismal outcome of the latter.