Back to Authors

Brown, Kenneth L.

Mayo Clinic

BC Children's Hospital

Citations 2

Maximum tumor dimension and tumor volume as prognostic factors in patients with newly diagnosed localized Ewing sarcoma (ES)- a report from the Children’s Oncology Group (COG).
Buxton, Allen, DuBois, Steven G. , Wang, Dian , Brown, Kenneth L., Pawel, Bruce , Davis, Justin , Grier, Holcombe E. , Womer, Richard B. , Stringham, Del, Janeway, Katherine A. , Bernstein, Mark L. , Krailo, Mark , Mascarenhas, Leo , Laack, Nadia N. , Nadel, Helen , Davis, Justin, Hawkins, Douglas S. , Reed, Damon R. , Görlick, Richard , Marina, Neyssa , Leavey, Patrick J.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 25, 2020 | Volume: 38 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: 11529-11529

10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.11529 Get It

11529 Background: Maximum tumor dimension > 8 cm. and large tumor volume have been reported to be adverse prognostic factors in patients with ES but have not been prospectively evaluated in the context of a phase 3 clinical trial with interval compressed chemotherapy. Methods: COG AEWS1031 (NCT01231906) was a randomized phase 3 clinical trial comparing interval compressed chemotherapy regimens in patients with newly diagnosed localized ES of bone and soft tissue. A correlative objective of AEWS1031 was to evaluate tumor size and volume as prognostic factors. Institution-reported dimensions of the primary tumor from baseline imaging were prospectively collected. For inclusion in this analysis, patients had to have at least 1 tumor dimension reported for tumor size analyses and dimensions in 3 axes for tumor volume analyses. Maximum dimension was dichotomized as less than vs. > / = 8cm. Tumor volume was dichotomized as less than vs. > / = 200 mL. Event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) from enrollment were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods and compared between groups using a two-sided log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HR) and confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the Cox model. Results: The 5-year EFS and OS of the 629 eligible patients was 78% (95% CI: 75-81%) and 87% (95% CI: 84-90%) respectively and there was no significant difference in both EFS and OS between the randomized interval compressed chemotherapy arms of AEWS1031. 590 of 629 (94%) patients were evaluable for maximum tumor dimension and 307 (52%) had tumors > / = 8 cm. Patients with tumors > / = 8 cm were at significantly increased risk for EFS events (p = 0.016) with estimated 5-year EFS of 73.7% (95% CI: 68.1 vs.78.4%) vs. 82.9% (95% CI 77.7-87.1%) for patients with tumors < 8 cm [HR: 1.53 (1.08-2.17)]. For tumor volume, 586 of 629 patients (93%) were evaluable and 180 (31%) had tumors > / = 200 mL. Patients with tumor volume > / = 200 mL were at significantly increased risk for EFS events (p = 0.003) with estimated 5-year EFS of 70% (95% CI: 62.3-76.4%) vs. 81.6% (95% CI: 77.2-85.2%) for patients with tumors < 200 mL [HR: 1.69 (1.2-2.39)]. Conclusions: Maximum tumor dimension and tumor volume as defined are both prognostic in patients with newly diagnosed localized ES treated with interval compressed chemotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01231906 .
Delayed primary excision with subsequent modification of radiotherapy dose for intermediate‐risk rhabdomyosarcoma: A report from the Children's Oncology Group Soft Tissue Sarcoma Committee
Rodeberg, David A. , Wharam, Moody D., Lyden, Elizabeth , Stoner, Julie A., Brown, Kenneth L., Paidas, Charles N. , Donaldson, Sarah S. , Hawkins, Douglas S. , Spunt, Sheri L. , Arndt, Carola A.S., Wolden, Suzanne L. , Hawkins, Douglas S , Spunt, Sheri L , Donaldson, Sarah S

International Journal of Cancer | November 21, 2014 | Volume: 137 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 204-211

10.1002/ijc.29351 Get It

The majority of intermediate‐risk rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) patients have gross residual disease (Group III) after their first operative procedure. It is currently not known if local control rates can be maintained when, following induction chemotherapy, the radiation therapy (RT) dose is decreased after a delayed primary excision (DPE). To answer this question we evaluated patients enrolled on COG D9803 (1999–2005) who had Group III tumors of the bladder dome, extremity or trunk (thorax, abdomen and pelvis) were candidates for DPE at Week 12 if the primary tumor appeared resectable. RT dose was then adjusted by the completeness of DPE: no evidence of disease 36 Gy, microscopic residual 41.4 Gy and gross residual disease (GRD) 50.4 Gy. A total of 161 Group III patients were evaluated (24 bladder dome, 63 extremity and 74 trunk). Seventy‐three patients (45%) underwent DPE which achieved removal of all gross disease in 61 (84%) who were then eligible for reduced RT dose (43/73 received 36 Gy, 19/73 received 41.4 Gy). The local 5‐year failure rate (0% for bladder dome, 7% for extremity and 20% for trunk) was similar to IRS‐IV, which did not encourage DPE and did not allow for DPE adapted RT dose reduction. In conclusion, DPE was performed in 45% of Group III RMS patients with tumors at select anatomic sites (bladder dome, extremity and trunk) and 84% of those who had DPE were eligible for RT dose reduction. Local control outcomes were similar to historic results with RT alone.