Allen‐Rhoades, Wendy

AbstractChildren and adolescents with rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) comprise a heterogeneous population with variable overall survival rates ranging between approximately 6% and 100% depending on defined risk factors. Although the risk stratification of patients has been refined across five decades of collaborative group studies, molecular prognostic biomarkers beyond FOXO1 fusion status have yet to be incorporated prospectively in upfront risk‐based therapy assignments. This review describes the evolution of risk‐based therapy and the current risk stratification, defines a new risk stratification incorporating novel biomarkers, and provides the rationale for the current and upcoming Children's Oncology Group RMS studies.

ARST1321, a trial of patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma, was the first National Clinical Trials Network study codeveloped by pediatric and adult consortia with two treatment cohorts. We report on the findings of a survey to identify barriers to enrolling adolescent and young adult patients (15–39 years) onto the nonchemotherapy arm. The survey response rate was 31% with a 70% completion rate. Common identified reasons for low accrual in order of decreasing frequency included insufficient funding, lack of study awareness or interest, competing trials, toxicity concerns, philosophical differences in the therapy backbone, and regulatory and infrastructure barriers. Clinical Trials.gov ID: NCT02180867.

11040 Background: Although women outnumber men in US medical school enrollment, women constitute < 50% of faculty in academic oncology. This study aimed to determine factors affecting women oncologists’ decisions to pursue academic versus non-academic oncology in Hematology/Oncology (HO), Pediatric Oncology (PO), Radiation Oncology (RO), and Surgical Oncology (SO), and to characterize the challenges women oncologists face. Methods: A survey was designed to collect cross-sectional data on factors affecting career choices among US women oncologists. The survey was distributed via email and social media. Data were collected anonymously and analyzed using t-tests for continuous variables and Chi-squared tests for categorical variables. Results: Six hundred sixty-seven women oncologists responded: 245 (45.3%) specialized in HO, 173 (25.9%) RO, 88 (13.2%) PO, 56 (8.4%) SO, and 48 (7.2%) other. Four-hundred twenty-two (63.2%) women identified as an academic oncologist (AO); 245 (36.8%) women identified as a non-academic oncologist (non-AO). Approximately ¼ of women oncologists reported their partner (156, 23.5%) or family (176, 26.4%) extremely or moderately impacted their decision whether to pursue academic practice. There was no difference in the timing of childbearing between AO and non-AO. AO perceived the biggest sacrifice of pursuing academics to be time with loved ones (181, 42.9%). Non-AO perceived the biggest sacrifice for AO to be pressure for academic promotion (102, 41.6%), which was the third most common response (44, 18.0%) among AO. Thirty-three (7.9%) AO and 5 (2.0%) non-AO reported feeling that they rarely or never have a sense of belonging in their work environment (p < 0.01). AO and non-AO had significantly different perceptions on how their gender impacted their ability to obtain a chosen job (p < 0.01), with 100 (23.8%) AO and 52 (21.2%) non-AO reporting a negative or somewhat negative impact, and 116 (27.6%) AO and 101 (41.2%) non-AO reporting a positive or somewhat positive impact. More than half of women surveyed (230 AO, 54.6%; 123 non-AO, 50.6%; p = 0.61) felt that they were somewhat or much less likely to be promoted compared to male colleagues. The majority of women reported they would choose the same career path again (71% of AO, 69% of non-AO); however, 92 (21.9%) of AO responded that they were likely or very likely to pursue a career outside academics in the next 5 years. Conclusions: While partners/family have a substantial impact on 1 in 4 women oncologists, this does not differ between AO and non-AO. Significantly more non-AO find their gender to have positively impacted their ability to obtain their chosen job. In contrast, a meaningful number of AO report a poor sense of belonging and perceived discrimination in obtaining jobs and being promoted; 1 in 5 are considering leaving academia. Academic oncology remains at high risk for continued gender inequality if the culture is not addressed.

Rhabdomyosarcoma is the most common soft tissue sarcoma diagnosed in children and adolescents. Patients that are diagnosed with advanced or relapsed disease have exceptionally poor outcomes. The Children’s Oncology Group (COG) convened a rhabdomyosarcoma new agent task force in 2020 to systematically evaluate novel agents for inclusion in phase 2 or phase 3 clinical trials for patients diagnosed with rhabdomyosarcoma, following a similar effort for Ewing sarcoma. The task force was comprised of clinicians and basic scientists who collectively identified new agents for evaluation and prioritization in clinical trial testing. Here, we report the work of the task force including the framework upon which the decisions were rendered and review the top classes of agents that were discussed. Representative agents include poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in combination with cytotoxic agents, mitogen-activated protein kinase (MEK) inhibitors in combination with type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGFR1) inhibitors, histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors, and novel cytotoxic agents.

e19214 Background: ARST1321(PAZNTIS): A Phase II/III Randomized Trial of Preoperative Chemoradiation or Preoperative Radiation Plus or Minus Pazopanib (NCT02180867) was the first National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) study co-developed by pediatric (COG) and adult (NRG Oncology) consortia anticipating enrollment of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients. ARST1321 had two treatment cohorts, enrolling patients ≥ 2 years of age to either chemotherapy (C) (chemoradiation ± pazopanib) or non-chemotherapy (NC) (radiation ± pazopanib) arms. It was anticipated adults would contribute the majority of enrollments on the NC arm based on prior enrollment patterns. While the C arm accrued as anticipated (with high enrollment of adults and children), the NC arm had low enrollment leading to premature closure. We report on AYA accrual (defined as 15-39 years) to the NC arm and a survey aiming to identify barriers to enrolling AYA patients onto ARST1321. Methods: Our survey was emailed to 161 adult, surgical, and radiation oncologists at large sarcoma centers. A link was sent to an online questionnaire via SurveyMonkey Inc. and responses were reviewed on their platform. Results: 33 patients enrolled on the ARST1321 NC arm, of which 24% were AYA. 25% of AYA enrollments were from non-COG adult cooperative groups. This trial arm was closed in October 2017 after 3.25 years of accrual below anticipated rates. The survey response rate was 31% with a 70% completion rate. Almost half of respondents were medical oncologists with most seeing 50-200 new sarcoma cases/year at an academic institution and 30% in a pediatric environment (divided equally between radiation and surgical oncologists). 70% of respondents have a joint collaboration with their pediatric oncology team with 23% having a joint clinic. 70% of respondents’ sites opened ARST1321 and anticipated 1-5 patients would be eligible for the NC cohort. However, 42% of respondents’ sites had zero patients enrolled on that arm. The most common reasons for not opening the study and/or not enrolling patients on the NC arm included: lack of interest, disagreement with the therapy, lack of a site investigator, premature study closure, patient/family decision, competing trials, insufficient reimbursement, and regulatory delays. Conclusions: Our survey highlights multiple barriers to enrollment of AYA onto cross-NCTN consortia clinical trials spanning the age spectrum. The information obtained will help inform investigators aiming to effectively design, enroll, and conduct similar trial efforts for AYA in the future.

Abstract Purpose To determine the impact of surgery and/or radiation therapy on distant metastatic sites (DMS) in children with stage IV rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS). Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted on all patients with stage IV RMS at Texas Children's Hospital from 1992 to 2012. Data analyzed included age, gender, primary site, histologic subtype, number and sites of metastases, treatment including local therapy to DMS, and Oberlin score. Results The 5‐year progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 20% and 25%. The 5‐year PFS in patients receiving local therapy to all DMS (n = 16) and to less than all DMS (n = 19) was 31.3% versus 0% ( P = 0.002), whereas the 5‐year OS was 37.3% versus 0% ( P < 0.001), respectively. The 5‐year PFS in patients with isolated lung metastasis versus other types of metastasis was 29% versus 7% ( P = n.s.), whereas the 5‐year OS was 43% versus 10% ( P = 0.01). The 5‐year pulmonary local control was improved by the use of whole lung irradiation (WLI; 56% vs. 10%, P = 0.03). Conclusions Local treatment to all metastatic sites was associated with improved PFS and OS at 5 years. The use of WLI improved pulmonary control in patients with lung metastasis. We recommend an aggressive approach including local therapy to DMS in children with stage IV RMS.