Kasper, Bernd

In the phase III placebo-controlled DeFi trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03785964 ) primary analysis, nirogacestat showed significant improvement versus placebo in progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in adult patients with progressing desmoid tumors (DT; median [range] exposure: 20.6 [0.3-33.6] months). Here, long-term nirogacestat efficacy and safety were evaluated in patients randomly assigned to nirogacestat and followed through the final data cutoff date of December 19, 2024. End points included PFS and ORR per RECIST v1.1, PRO, and safety. The median (range) duration of exposure was 33.6 (0.3-61.8) months. Median PFS was not reached. The ORR with up to 4 years of nirogacestat treatment was 45.7% (32 of 70), with three additional partial and three additional complete responses since the primary analysis. Further target tumor size reduction occurred in most patients. Benefits in PROs were sustained while on treatment. Frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) decreased in incidence and severity over time. Since the primary analysis, four patients discontinued nirogacestat because of TEAEs between years 2 and 4. In conclusion, long-term continuous nirogacestat treatment was associated with further tumor size reductions, durable objective responses, sustained PRO benefits, and a manageable safety profile consistent with the primary analysis.

ABSTRACT Introduction Sinonasal sarcomas are exceedingly rare entities, constituting less than 7% of head and neck sarcomas. Their complex histology needs specialized treatment, which is often based on multimodal approaches including surgery, radiation therapy, and/or chemotherapy. This manuscript aims to gather expert opinions to establish common management principles for sinonasal sarcomas. Methods This international consensus followed a modified Delphi method in seven steps, including statements definition by the core group, expert panel recruitment, and a two‐round survey. Sixty‐two statements on sinonasal sarcoma management were developed. Experts from multiple continents participated, and results were anonymized and analyzed between March and May 2025. Results A total of 44 invited experts were recruited, 43.2% otorhinolaryngologists/head and neck surgeons, 31.8% medical oncologists, and 25% radiation oncologists. Participants varied in age and experience, representing Europe (70.5%), North America (18.2%), South America (6.8%), and Asia (4.5%). Among all histologies, biphenotypic sarcoma, chondrosarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, and myofibrosarcoma are principally treated with an upfront surgical management, differently from Ewing sarcoma and rhabdomyosarcoma in which chemotherapy, eventually associated with radiotherapy, is often chosen. In the remaining histologies (angiosarcoma, liposarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor [MPNST], osteosarcoma, and synovial sarcoma), a precise multimodal treatment is less standardized and needs to be discussed on a case‐by‐case basis. Conclusion Sinonasal sarcomas require a histology‐driven approach to determine upfront treatment, whether surgical, medical, or multimodal. Despite this structured strategy, prognosis remains highly variable across subtypes. Multidisciplinary evaluation and individualized management in referral centers are crucial to address the biological diversity and anatomical complexity of these rare malignancies.

11558 Background: Nirogacestat (niro) is a targeted and selective gamma secretase inhibitor approved in the US for adults with progressing desmoid tumors (DT). In the phase 3 DeFi study, niro demonstrated significant improvement vs placebo (pbo) in progression-free survival (PFS: HR, 0.29 [95% CI: 0.15-0.55]; P<.001), objective response rate (ORR: 41% vs 8%; P<.001); and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of pain, DT-specific symptom burden, physical and role functioning, and overall quality of life ( P≤.01, all). DT are driven by Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway alterations and about 10-20% of DT are associated with mutations in the APC tumor suppressor gene, which may confer more aggressive DT behavior. Because patients with APC mutations may do worse, regardless of specific therapy, a post hoc analysis was conducted to assess effects of niro in patients with progressing DT and APC mutations. Methods: DeFi was a global, double-blind study that evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of niro in adults with progressing DT. Patients were randomized to oral niro (150 mg) or pbo twice-daily in continuous 28-day cycles. Descriptive post hoc analyses were conducted to assess effects of niro in patients with somatic and/or germline APC mutations. Results: Among 29 patients in DeFi with APC mutations (niro=13; pbo=16), 19 (66%) were female, 16 (55%) were aged ≤30 years, and 22 (76%) were refractory to prior treatment (with a median of 3 prior lines of treatment). In patients with APC mutation, PFS was improved with niro vs pbo (HR, 0.21 [95% CI: 0.05-1.00], P=.016). Confirmed ORR was 38% (5/13) for niro vs 13% (2/16) for pbo. Niro-treated patients also had greater reduction in median best percent change from baseline compared with pbo-treated patients in target tumor size (-29.5 vs +2.2), volumetric MRI (-71.0 vs +5.4), and T2 hyperintensity (-74.1 vs -21.0). Across all PROs assessed — Brief Pain Inventory, GODDESS DT Symptom Scale and DT Impact Scale, and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 — patients treated with niro had numerically greater improvement from baseline at cycle 10 than pbo. Analyses were limited due to the small sample size. Adverse events in >50% of niro-treated patients with APC mutation were diarrhea, nausea, rash maculopapular, and fatigue; ovarian toxicity occurred in 9 of 10 of females of reproductive potential (6 resolved, 2 lost to follow-up, 1 ongoing and receiving niro). Conclusions: Improvement in PFS, ORR, tumor imaging characteristics and PROs was observed with niro compared to pbo in patients with DT harboring APC mutations. Efficacy and safety of niro in patients with APC mutations were generally consistent with findings for the overall DeFi population, suggesting that niro can provide clinically meaningful benefit to patients with progressing DT and APCmutations. Clinical trial information: NCT03785964 .

PURPOSE Antitumor activity in preclinical models and a phase I study of patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DD-LPS) was observed with selinexor. We evaluated the clinical benefit of selinexor in patients with previously treated DD-LPS whose sarcoma progressed on approved agents. METHODS SEAL was a phase II-III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients age 12 years or older with advanced DD-LPS who had received two-five lines of therapy were randomly assigned (2:1) to selinexor (60 mg) or placebo twice weekly in 6-week cycles (crossover permitted). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included for safety analysis (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02606461 ). RESULTS Two hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled (selinexor, n = 188; placebo, n = 97). PFS was significantly longer with selinexor versus placebo: hazard ratio (HR) 0.70 (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.95; one-sided P = .011; medians 2.8 v 2.1 months), as was time to next treatment: HR 0.50 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.66; one-sided P < .0001; medians 5.8 v 3.2 months). With crossover, no difference was observed in overall survival. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade versus grade 3 or 4 with selinexor were nausea (151 [80.7%] v 11 [5.9]), decreased appetite (113 [60.4%] v 14 [7.5%]), and fatigue (96 [51.3%] v 12 [6.4%]). Four (2.1%) and three (3.1%) patients died in the selinexor and placebo arms, respectively. Exploratory RNA sequencing analysis identified that the absence of CALB1 expression was associated with longer PFS with selinexor compared with placebo (median 6.9 v 2.2 months; HR, 0.19; P = .001). CONCLUSION Patients with advanced, refractory DD-LPS showed improved PFS and time to next treatment with selinexor compared with placebo. Supportive care and dose reductions mitigated side effects of selinexor. Prospective validation of CALB1 expression as a predictive biomarker for selinexor in DD-LPS is warranted.

As leiomyosarcoma patients are challenged by the development of metastatic disease, effective systemic therapies are the cornerstone of outcome. However, the overall activity of the currently available conventional systemic treatments and the prognosis of patients with advanced or metastatic disease are still poor, making the treatment of this patient group challenging. Therefore, in a joint effort together with patient networks and organizations, namely Sarcoma Patients EuroNet (SPAEN), the international network of sarcoma patients organizations, and the National LeioMyoSarcoma Foundation (NLMSF) in the United States, we aim to summarize state-of-the-art treatments for leiomyosarcoma patients in order to identify knowledge gaps and current unmet needs, thereby guiding the community to design innovative clinical trials and basic research and close these research gaps. This position paper arose from a leiomyosarcoma research meeting in October 2020 hosted by the NLMSF and SPAEN.