Background:With negligible risk of distant metastasis, the primary treatment focus in patients with primary retroperitoneal well-differentiated liposarcoma (pRP-WDLPS) is local control. The recently completed phase 3 STRASS trial suggested a potential benefit to neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) in optimizing local control in these patients. This study investigates outcomes associated with neoadjuvant RT in a larger cohort of patients undergoing surgery for pRP-WDLPS. Methods:In this study from 24 participating sites, we retrospectively identified all patients with pRP-WDLPS who underwent curative-intent resection between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2017. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence function (CIF) of local recurrence (LR), and the secondary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The impact of neoadjuvant RT on the CIF of LR was analyzed using a 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM). Findings:Of 582 patients included in the entire cohort, 72 patients (12%) received neoadjuvant RT. The 1:2 PSM group included 208 patients of which 138 patients (66%) underwent surgery alone and 70 patients (34%) underwent neoadjuvant RT and surgery. With a median follow up of 73 months, the 5- and 8-year CIF of LR for neoadjuvant RT and surgery group was 6% and 10%, respectively, and 26% and 33%, respectively, for the surgery alone group (odds ratio (OR) 0·85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0·76-0·97, P < 0·001). The 5- and 10-year OS for the neoadjuvant RT and surgery group was 92% and 80%, respectively, and 84% and 71%, respectively, for the surgery alone group (HR 0·50, 95% CI 0·27-1·21, P = 0·07). Interpretation:To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest study to report outcomes of neoadjuvant RT for pRP-WDLPS. Neoadjuvant RT was associated with a significant decrease in LR compared to surgery alone. These data further validate the use of neoadjuvant RT for pRP-WDLPS. Funding:Funding was received from the Susan and Habib Gorgi Family Fund for Sarcoma Research.
Enzalutamide (ENZA), a next-generation non-steroidal androgen receptor (AR) inhibitor, plays a pivotal role in the management of both hormone-sensitive (HSPC) and androgen deprivation-resistant prostate cancer (ARPC). This paper presents real-world clinical outcomes of ENZA in a subgroup of metastatic HSPC (mHSPC) patients included in the ARON-3 study. Clinical information was extracted retrospectively from medical records at 29 cancer centres in 9 countries worldwide. Overall Survival (OS) was calculated from starting ENZA to death from any cause and the time on treatment (ToT) from ENZA initiation to discontinuation for any reason. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate OS and ToT. PSA90 was defined as a ≥90% PSA reduction from baseline, and PSA0.2 as the achievement of an ultra-low PSA level ≤0.2 ng/ml. Adverse events (AEs) were categorised according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. The study population comprised 424 patients treated with ENZA for mHSPC, of whom 80 (19%) had lymph node-only metastases, 265 (63%) bone-only metastases, and 50 (12%) visceral metastases. 273 patients (64%) had synchronous metastases and 151 (36%) had developed metachronous metastases. A total of 228 patients were diagnosed with low-volume disease, and 196 patients (46%) with high-volume disease. The median ToT was 31.8 months, and the median OS was not reached. The median time to PSA90 (achieved in 76% of patients) and PSA0.2 (59% of patients) was 6.0 months and 8.3 months, respectively. Statistically significant associations were identified between lymph node-only patterns, PSA90 and ultra-low PSA responses, and longer treatment duration and better overall survival. Grade 3–4 AEs were observed in 9% of patients <70 years and in 10% ≥70 years. Real-world clinical practice corroborates the findings from clinical trials, confirming the effectiveness and safety of ENZA in mHSPC patients.
The implementation of mainstream germline genetic testing in breast cancer patients has both benefits and challenges. Multiple aspects need to be considered for the outline of gene panels and the amount of pre-test genetic counselling. Mainstream genetic testing is mainly performed to stratify patients for targeted treatment. In addition, identification of germline pathogenic variants in cancer risk genes may have surgical implications, consequences for surveillance of other organs at risk of cancer, as well as family implications among relatives at risk. To ensure that patients are well informed, the introduction of mainstream genetic testing performed by non-genetic health care specialists requires an adapted pre-test counselling visit. Here, we review the literature and propose a web-based educational session and pocket guide to support implementation of mainstream testing in oncology practice.
Rationale Despite significant advances in patient care and outcomes, criteria for cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in risk stratification guidelines for lung resection have not been updated in over a decade. We hypothesised that CPET no longer holds additional predictive value for postoperative complications.Methods In this secondary analysis, we included lung resection candidates from two prospective, multicentre studies eligible for CPET and assessed with preoperative pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and arterial blood gas analysis. Postoperative pulmonary (PPCs) and cardiovascular complications (PCCs) were documented during hospitalisation. We trained five types of machine learning models applying nested cross-validation to predict complications and compared predictive performance based on four metrics, including area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC).Results A total of 497 patients were included. PPCs developed in 71 (14%) patients. Adding CPET parameters to PFTs and baseline clinical data did not improve the ability of models to predict PPCs in unselected patients (AUC-ROC=0.72-0.78; p=0.47), nor in those meeting American College of Chest Physicians (ACCPs) (n=236; AUC-ROC=0.64-0.78; p=0.70) or European Respiratory Society/European Society of Thoracic Surgery (ERS/ESTS) criteria (n=168; AUC-ROC=0.59-0.76; p=0.92). PCCs developed in 90 (18%) patients. CPET parameters likewise did not improve model performance for the prediction of PCCs in unselected patients (AUC-ROC=0.65-0.73; p=0.96), nor in the ACCP (AUC-ROC=0.61-0.73; p=0.82) or ERS/ESTS subgroups (AUC-ROC=0.62-0.69; p=0.87).Conclusions In contemporary surgical practice, CPET did not improve the predictive performance of machine learning models for PPCs or PCCs in patients with an indication based on established guidelines or in those without. The role of CPET in preoperative risk stratification for lung resection should be re-evaluated.Trial registration number NCT03498352, NCT04826575.
Diagnosing ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors can be difficult in some cases due to the overlapping morphologic and immunohistochemical (IHC) features, especially for adult granulosa cell tumors (AGCTs), juvenile granulosa cell tumors (JGCTs), Sertoli-Leydig cell tumors (SLCTs), and thecomas. In such situations, molecular testing can be helpful, as these tumors are often associated with specific genetic alterations. SLCTs, for instance, are known to be associated with DICER1 mutations. However, expression of DICER1 has not yet been systematically investigated in sex cord-stromal tumors. We evaluated the potential use of DICER1 IHC for detecting DICER1 mutations in ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors, including 267 AGCTs, 38 SLCTs, 5 JGCTs, and 21 Leydig cell tumors/steroid cell tumors (SCTs). Specifically, DICER1 positivity was found in 21 of 38 (55.3%) of SLCTs and 16 of 21 (76.2%) of SCTs. All DICER1-positive moderately differentiated SLCTs harbored a DICER1 mutation. One DICER1-negative moderately differentiated SLCT carried 2 DICER1 mutations. Additionally, 3 of 10 well-differentiated SLCTs showed IHC positivity. No SCT harbored a DICER1 mutation. Among AGCTs, 4 of 267 (1.5%) were DICER1 positive, and 1 of these cases harbored 2 DICER1 mutations. No JGCT demonstrated a DICER1 mutation or expression. In cases with both analyses available, DICER1 expression was found in 39 of 273 (14.3%), whereas 21 of 273 (7.7%) harbored a DICER1 mutation. Using an optimal cutoff of ≥10% positive tumor cells, IHC closely matched mutational status (sensitivity of 90.5%, specificity of 92.1%). Our study found substantial concordance between DICER1 IHC and mutation status in a subset of sex cord-stromal tumors, suggesting that IHC detection of DICER1 protein may serve as a useful surrogate marker for DICER1 mutation, especially in SLCTs and AGCTs. This could be particularly valuable in settings where molecular testing is limited by cost and/or availability. However, in SCTs, the DICER1 expression is common but unrelated to DICER1 mutation. This suggests that alternative mechanisms, potentially involving androgen-related pathways, may contribute to DICER1 expression in these tumors.
