TY - JOUR
T1 - Alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma with regional nodal involvement
T2 - Results of a combined analysis from two cooperative groups
AU - European paediatric Soft tissue sarcoma Study Group and Children's Oncology Group
AU - Gallego, Soledad
AU - Chi, Yueh Yun
AU - De Salvo, Gian Luca
AU - Li, Minjie
AU - Merks, Johannes H.M.
AU - Rodeberg, David A.
AU - van Scheltinga, Sheila Terwisscha
AU - Mascarenhas, Leo
AU - Orbach, Daniel
AU - Jenney, Meriel
AU - Million, Lynn
AU - Minard-Colin, Veronique
AU - Wolden, Suzanne
AU - Zanetti, Ilaria
AU - Parham, David M.
AU - Mandeville, Henry
AU - Venkatramani, Rajkumar
AU - Bisogno, Gianni
AU - Hawkins, Douglas S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC
PY - 2021/3/1
Y1 - 2021/3/1
N2 - Background: Treatment of children and adolescents with alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (ARMS) and regional nodal involvement (N1) have been approached differently by North American and European cooperative groups. In order to define a better therapeutic strategy, we analyzed two studies conducted between 2005 and 2016 by the European paediatric Soft tissue sarcoma Study Group (EpSSG) and Children's Oncology Group (COG). Methods: We retrospectively identified patients with ARMS N1 enrolled in either EpSSG RMS2005 or in COG ARST0531. Chemotherapy in RMS2005 comprised ifosfamide + vincristine + dactinomycin + doxorubicin (IVADo), IVA and maintenance (vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide); in ARST0531, it consisted of either vincristine + dactinomycin + cyclophosphamide (VAC) or VAC alternating with vincristine + irinotecan (VI). Local treatment was similar in both protocols. Results: The analysis of the clinical characteristics of 239 patients showed some differences between study groups: in RMS2005, advanced Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRS) and large tumors predominated. There were no differences in outcomes between the two groups: 5-year event-free survival (EFS), 49% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 39-59) and 44% (95% CI: 30-58), and overall survival (OS), 51% (95% CI: 41-61) and 53.6% (95% CI: 40-68) in RMS2005 and ARST0531, respectively. In RMS2005, EFS of patients with FOXO1-positive tumors was significantly inferior to those with FOXO1-negative (49.3% vs 73%, P =.034). In contrast, in ARST0531, EFS of patients with FOXO1-positive tumors was 45% compared with 43.8% for those with FOXO1-negative. Conclusions: The outcome of patients with ARMS N1 was similar in both protocols. However, patients with FOXO1 fusion-negative tumors enrolled in RMS2005 showed a significantly better outcome, suggesting that different strategies of chemotherapy may have an impact in the outcome of this subgroup of patients.
AB - Background: Treatment of children and adolescents with alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (ARMS) and regional nodal involvement (N1) have been approached differently by North American and European cooperative groups. In order to define a better therapeutic strategy, we analyzed two studies conducted between 2005 and 2016 by the European paediatric Soft tissue sarcoma Study Group (EpSSG) and Children's Oncology Group (COG). Methods: We retrospectively identified patients with ARMS N1 enrolled in either EpSSG RMS2005 or in COG ARST0531. Chemotherapy in RMS2005 comprised ifosfamide + vincristine + dactinomycin + doxorubicin (IVADo), IVA and maintenance (vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide); in ARST0531, it consisted of either vincristine + dactinomycin + cyclophosphamide (VAC) or VAC alternating with vincristine + irinotecan (VI). Local treatment was similar in both protocols. Results: The analysis of the clinical characteristics of 239 patients showed some differences between study groups: in RMS2005, advanced Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRS) and large tumors predominated. There were no differences in outcomes between the two groups: 5-year event-free survival (EFS), 49% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 39-59) and 44% (95% CI: 30-58), and overall survival (OS), 51% (95% CI: 41-61) and 53.6% (95% CI: 40-68) in RMS2005 and ARST0531, respectively. In RMS2005, EFS of patients with FOXO1-positive tumors was significantly inferior to those with FOXO1-negative (49.3% vs 73%, P =.034). In contrast, in ARST0531, EFS of patients with FOXO1-positive tumors was 45% compared with 43.8% for those with FOXO1-negative. Conclusions: The outcome of patients with ARMS N1 was similar in both protocols. However, patients with FOXO1 fusion-negative tumors enrolled in RMS2005 showed a significantly better outcome, suggesting that different strategies of chemotherapy may have an impact in the outcome of this subgroup of patients.
KW - alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma
KW - chemotherapy
KW - nodal involvement
KW - prognostic factors
KW - rhabdomyosarcoma
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85096639971&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/pbc.28832
DO - 10.1002/pbc.28832
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85096639971
SN - 1545-5009
VL - 68
JO - Pediatric Blood and Cancer
JF - Pediatric Blood and Cancer
IS - 3
M1 - e28832
ER -