Anderson, James R.

10012 Background: The prognostic significance of response to induction therapy for rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) by anatomic imaging (computerized tomographic [CT] or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] scan) is controversial. We previously reported no relationship between early response and failure-free survival (FFS) for patients on IRS-IV. We repeated the same analysis using an independent cohort of patients with non-metastatic, initially unresected RMS treated on a more recent clinical trial. Methods: A total of 338 patients enrolled in Children’s Oncology Group study D9803 met the following inclusion criteria for this analysis: 1) non-metastatic, initially unresected (Group III); 2) embryonal (ERMS) or alveolar (ARMS) histology; 3) documented response to induction chemotherapy (excluding progressive disease) based on anatomic imaging; and 4) documented therapy beyond week 12. Response at week 12 was determined by the treating institution as complete response (CR, complete resolution), partial response (PR, decrease of >= 50% of the sum of the products of maximum perpendicular diameters), or no response (NR, between 50% reduction and 25% increase in the sum of the products of maximum perpendicular diameters). FFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and comparisons between groups were made using the log-rank test. Results: Overall objective response rate (CR+PR) at week 12 of therapy was 85%, with similar responses for ERMS and ARMS. FFS was similar among all patients with CR, PR, or NR (p=0.49). Restricting the analysis to either ERMS or ARMS, there was no difference in FFS by histology (p=0.20 and p=0.45, respectively). Conclusions: These findings provide additional evidence that anatomic imaging assessment of early response to therapy among RMS patients does not predict outcome and should not be used to tailor subsequent therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT00003958. [Table: see text]

10554 Background: Age at diagnosis is a prognostic factor in patients with RMS. We sought to determine whether AYA with metastatic alveolar (ARMS) or embryonal (ERMS) RMS had a different failure-free survival (FFS) compared to younger patients, and to identify treatment related factors that may be associated with outcome. Methods: COG ARST0431 patients were reviewed. The incidence of toxicities (AE, grade3/4 using CTCAEv3) by age was determined in 4 reporting periods (RP: wks 1-6; RP2:7-19; RP3: 20-34; RP4: 35-54). The AEs in younger patients (<=13 years) were compared with those in AYA. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare differences between the groups. Results: Of 109 patients, 60 (55%) were AYA. In RP1, they were more likely to have nausea/vomiting (4.1 vs. 16.9%, p=0.06), pain (6.1 vs. 20.3%, p=0.05), and metabolic disturbances (4.1 vs. 20.3%, p=0.02) compared to younger patients. In RP4, older patients trended to have less infection (15.8 vs. 30.1, p=0.07). All other toxicities were similar between the two age cohorts in the other RPs. AYA were less likely to complete therapy (52 vs. 73%, p=0.03) and more likely (in RP 4) to have unplanned dose modifications (outside of protocol guidelines) (23 vs. 2.7%). Of patients that completed therapy, there was no age-related difference in the time to completion. As shown in the table, younger patients had better 3-yr FFS, driven by a lower FFS for AYA with ARMS. Conclusions: This evaluation suggests that AYA with RMS were less likely to complete therapy and experienced a higher prevalence of pain and nausea compared to younger patients; the role of reporting bias and reasons for treatment discontinuation need further study. Children were more likely than AYA to have infection. Inferior FFS was only seen in AYA with ARMS suggesting a clear need for novel therapies for these patients. This study may be underpowered to demonstrate significant differences in other toxicities or in FFS among ERMS patients. [Table: see text]

Purpose Intermediate-risk rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) includes patients with either nonmetastatic, unresected embryonal RMS (ERMS) with an unfavorable primary site or nonmetastatic alveolar RMS (ARMS). The primary aim of this study was to improve the outcome of patients with intermediate-risk RMS by substituting vincristine and irinotecan (VI) for half of vincristine, dactinomycin, and cyclophosphamide (VAC) courses. All patients received a lower dose of cyclophosphamide and earlier radiation therapy than in previous trials. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned at study entry to either VAC (cumulative cyclophosphamide dose, 16.8 g/m 2 ) or VAC/VI (cumulative cyclophosphamide dose, 8.4 g/m 2 ) for 42 weeks of therapy. Radiation therapy started at week 4, with individualized local control plans permitted for patients younger than 24 months. The primary study end point was event-free survival (EFS). The study design had an 80% power (5% one-sided α-level) to detect an improved long-term EFS from 65% (with VAC) to 76% (with VAC/VI). Results A total of 448 eligible patients were enrolled in the study. At a median follow-up of 4.8 years, the 4-year EFS was 63% with VAC and 59% with VAC/VI ( P = .51), and 4-year overall survival was 73% for VAC and 72% for VAC/VI ( P = .80). Within the ARMS and ERMS subgroups, no difference in outcome by treatment arm was found. Severe hematologic toxicity was less common with VAC/VI therapy. Conclusion The addition of VI to VAC did not improve EFS or OS for patients with intermediate-risk RMS. VAC/VI had less hematologic toxicity and a lower cumulative cyclophosphamide dose, making VAC/VI an alternative standard therapy for intermediate-risk RMS.

AbstractBackgroundVaginal/uterine rhabdomyosarcoma (VU RMS) is one of the most favorable RMS sites. To determine the optimal therapy, the experience of four cooperative groups (Children's Oncology Group [COG], International Society of Pediatric Oncology (SIOP) Malignant Mesenchymal Tumor Group [MMT], Italian Cooperative Soft Tissue Sarcoma Group [ICG], and European pediatric Soft tissue sarcoma Study Group [EpSSG]) was analyzed.ProcedureFrom 1981 to 2009, 237 patients were identified. Median age (years) at diagnosis differed by tumor location; it was 1.9 for vagina (n = 160), 2.7 for uterus corpus (n = 26), and 13.5 for uterus cervix (n = 51). Twenty‐eight percent of patients received radiation therapy (RT) as part of primary therapy (23% COG, 27% MMT, 46% ICG, and 42% EpSSG), with significant differences in the use of brachytherapy between the cooperative groups (23% COG, 76% MMT, 64% ICG, and 88% EpSSG).ResultsTen‐year event‐free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were 74% (95% CI, 67–79%) and 92% (95% CI, 88–96%), respectively. In univariate analysis, OS was inferior for patients with uterine RMS and for those with regional lymph node involvement. Although EFS was slightly lower in patients without initial RT (71% without RT vs. 81% with RT; P = 0.08), there was no difference in OS (94% without RT vs. 89% with RT; P = 0.18). Local control using brachytherapy was excellent (93%). Fifty‐one (51.5%) of the 99 survivors with known primary therapy and treatment for relapse were cured with chemotherapy with or without conservative surgery.ConclusionsAbout half of all patients with VU RMS can be cured without systematic RT or radical surgery. When RT is indicated, modalities that limit sequelae should be considered, such as brachytherapy.

AbstractBackgroundWe sought to determine whether adolescents with metastatic alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (ARMS) or embryonal RMS (ERMS) had a different event‐free survival (EFS) compared with younger patients, and to identify treatment‐related factors (adverse events, AEs) that may be associated with differences in outcome.MethodsThe prevalence of AEs in adolescents older than 13 years was compared with that in patients less than or equal to 13 years of age (Fisher exact test) in patients enrolled onto ARST0431. EFS by age and histology was compared by log–rank test.ResultsOf 109 patients, 60 (55%) were older than 13 years; they were more likely to have nausea (17 vs. 4%, P = 0.06) and pain (20 vs. 6%, P = 0.05) compared with younger patients. Adolescents were less likely to complete therapy (63 vs. 76%) and more likely to have unplanned dose modifications outside of protocol guidelines (23 vs. 2.7%). The 3‐year EFS was 26% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 15–38) for adolescents compared with 46% (95% CI: 32–60) for those less than or equal to 13 years (P = 0.011). Forty‐two (59%) adolescents with ARMS had a 3‐year EFS of 13% (95% CI: 2–23) compared with 30% (95% CI: 10–51) for those less than or equal to 13 years (P = 0.032). EFS was comparable between older and younger patients with ERMS (64 vs. 55%, P = 0.53).ConclusionsAlthough there was a significant difference in EFS and protocol compliance by age, the differences in age‐related toxicity are unlikely to account for this. Observed differences in pain and nausea by age could be real or be dependent on patient reporting of symptoms. Future studies in RMS should include patient‐reported outcomes to better evaluate health‐related quality of life.

PURPOSE: To identify which patients with rhabdomyosarcoma and microscopic residual disease (group II) are likely to not respond to therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Six hundred ninety-five patients with group II tumors received chemotherapy and 90% received radiation therapy on Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study (IRS)-I to IRS-IV (1972 to 1997). Tumors were subgrouped depending on the presence of microscopic residual disease only (subgroup IIa), resected positive regional lymph nodes, (subgroup IIb), or microscopic residual disease and resected positive regional lymph nodes (subgroup IIc). RESULTS: Overall, the 5-year failure-free survival rate (FFSR) was 73%, and patients with embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma treated on IRS-IV fared especially well (5-year FFSR, 93%; n = 90). Five-year FFSRs differed significantly by subgroup (IIa, 75% and n = 506; IIb, 74% and n = 101; IIc, 58% and n = 88; P = .0037) and treatment (IRS-I, 68%; IRS-II, 67%; IRS-III, 75%; IRS-IV, 87%; P < .001). Multivariate analysis revealed positive associations between primary site (favorable), histology (embryonal), subgroup IIa or IIb, treatment (IRS-III/IV), and better FFSRs. Patterns of treatment failure revealed local failure to be 8%, regional failure, 4%, and distant failure, 14%. The relapse pattern noted over the course of IRS-I to IRS-IV shows a decrease in the systemic relapse rates, particularly for patients with embryonal histology, suggesting that improvement in FFSRs is primarily a result of improved chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Group II rhabdomyosarcoma has an excellent prognosis with contemporary therapy as used in IRS-III/IV, and those less likely to respond can be identified using prognostic factors: histology, subgroup, and primary site. Patients with embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma are generally cured, although patients with alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma or undifferentiated sarcoma, particularly subgroup IIc at unfavorable sites, continue to need better therapy.

PURPOSE: To determine the toxicity and response rate in children treated with dexamethasone, etoposide, cisplatin, high-dose cytarabine, and l-asparaginase (DECAL) for recurrent non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) and Hodgkin’s disease (HD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-seven children with recurrent NHL (n = 68) or HD (n = 29) were enrolled. Treatment consisted of two cycles of DECAL, then bone marrow transplantation or up to four cycles of ifosfamide, mesna, and etoposide alternating with DECAL maintenance therapy. RESULTS: After two cycles of DECAL induction therapy, complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) was reported in 19 (65.5%; 10 CRs and nine PRs) of 29 patients with HD and 29 (41.6%; 23 CRs and six PRs) of 68 patients with NHL. When only 24 patients with HD and 58 patients with NHL who were assessable for response were considered, the response rates were 79.2% (19 of 24 patients) and 50.0% (29 of 58 patients), respectively. Five-year event-free survival was 26% ± 9% and 23% ± 5% in patients with HD and NHL, respectively. Five-year survival was 31% ± 14% and 30% ± 6%, respectively. Although median time to treatment failure was significantly longer in patients with HD (EFS, P = .002; survival, P = .011), this difference did not translate into a higher long-term survival. Grade 3 or 4 toxic effects were observed during induction in 70 (72%) of 97 patients and during maintenance in 45 (70%) of 64 courses of DECAL therapy. Pancytopenia and systemic infections in particular were frequently observed. Other toxic effects were uncommon. Although not a formal part of the therapy or the study design, 42 patients who responded to therapy who underwent bone marrow transplant did not show any benefit from this approach. CONCLUSION: DECAL is an effective and tolerable salvage regimen for treating patients with recurrent NHL and HD.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in therapy, nearly 30% of children with rhabdomyosarcoma experience progressive or relapsed disease, which is often fatal. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To facilitate the development of a retrieval therapy protocol, we studied potential risk factors that were predictive of survival after first relapse in 605 children who were enrolled onto three consecutive Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group protocols. RESULTS: The median survival time from first recurrence was 0.8 years; the estimated percentage of patients who survived 5 years from first recurrence was 17% ± 2% (mean ± SD). Univariate analysis showed that tumor histology was an important predictor of 5-year survival (P < .001): the 5-year survival rate was 64% for patients with botryoid tumors (n = 19), 26% for patients with embryonal tumors (n = 313), and 5% for patients with alveolar or undifferentiated sarcoma (n = 273). Further analysis identified prognostic factors within histologic subtypes (P < .001). For patients with embryonal tumors, the estimated 5-year survival rate was 52% for patients who initially presented with stage 1 or group I disease, 20% for those with stage 2/3 or group II/III disease, and 12% for those with group IV disease. For patients with stage 1/group I disease, estimated 5-year survival rates were higher for patients with local (72%) or regional (50%) recurrence than for those with distant (30%) recurrence. Among patients with alveolar or undifferentiated sarcoma, only the disease group predicted outcome: the 5-year survival estimate was 40% for group I versus 3% for groups II through IV. We identified a “favorable risk” group (approximately 20% of patients) whose 5-year estimated survival rate was near 50%; for all other patients, the estimated survival was near 10%. CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrates that the probability of 5-year survival after relapse for rhabdomyosarcoma is dependent on several factors at the time of initial diagnosis, including histologic subtype, disease group, and stage. These findings will form the basis of a multi-institutional risk-adapted relapse protocol for childhood rhabdomyosarcoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome of patients with rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) treated with complete surgical resection and multiagent chemotherapy, with or without local radiotherapy (RT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four hundred thirty-nine patients with completely resected (ie, group I) RMS were further treated with chemotherapy (vincristine and actinomycin D ± cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin) on Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Studies (IRS) I to III between 1972 and 1991. Eighty-three patients (19%) also received local RT as a component of initial treatment. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients relapsed (10-year failure-free survival [FFS] 79%, overall survival 89%). Six percent of failure sites were local, 6% were regional, and 7% were distant. Poor prognostic factors were tumor size greater than 5 cm, alveolar or undifferentiated histology, primary tumor sites other than genitourinary, and treatment on IRS-I or II. For patients with embryonal RMS who were treated with RT, there was a trend for improved FFS but no difference in overall survival. On IRS-I and II, patients with alveolar or undifferentiated sarcoma who received RT compared with those who did not receive RT had greater 10-year FFS rates (73% v 44%, respectively; P = .03) and overall survival rates (82% v 52%, respectively; (P = .02). Such patients who received RT on IRS III also benefited more than those who did not receive RT (10-year FFS, 95% v 69%; P = .01; overall survival, 95% v 86%; P = .23). CONCLUSION: Patients with group I embryonal RMS have an excellent prognosis when treated with adjuvant multiagent chemotherapy without RT. Patients with alveolar RMS or undifferentiated sarcoma fare worse; however, FFS and overall survival are substantially improved when RT is added to multiagent chemotherapy (IRS-I and II). The best outcome occurred in IRS-III, when RT was used in conjunction with intensified chemotherapy.