Indelicato, Daniel J.

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.

10521 Background: Sarcomas are rare cancers, with > 50 subtypes, and require multi-disciplinary care. Their management benefits from multi-institutional input due to the paucity of concentrated experience with each subtype. However, sarcoma tumor boards, wherein a patient-specific, consensus treatment approach is determined, are predominantly conducted in isolation at individual centers. Methods: Since March 2010, we have conducted a weekly multi-institutional, multi-disciplinary sarcoma tumor board to combine knowledge and experience in the management of our most challenging patients. The Mayo Clinic bridge links sites by interactive videofeed. Each site may contribute cases. De-identified history, radiology and pathology are reviewed. A didactic series reviews a rotation of seminal papers, newly published research, or our own data. An “Expert Guest" series allows outside experts to connect to one conference. A yearly participant survey assesses quality. Conference is free to sites and is CME accredited. Results: Currently, 8 sarcoma programs connect Mondays from 8-9am ET. Median attendance is 20 (range: 8-27). In 2012, 342 cases were reviewed over 43 conferences (median: 8 cases/conference; range: 4-12 cases/conference). The 2012 survey revealed 96% (25/26) agreed HIPAA rules are followed; 93% (25/27) agreed conference is educational; 93% (25/27) agreed recommendations are evidenced-based or reasonable; 100% (27/27) agreed participants are respectful; and 86% (18/21) agreed input from other sites has changed their management. Staff attendance (quantity) rated as meets/exceeds needs was 100% (25/25) for medical oncology; 96% (26/27) for pathology; 93% (25/27) for orthopedic oncology; 92% (23/25) for radiation oncology, surgical oncology and radiology; and 61% (17/23) for thoracic oncology. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the only weekly multi-institutional sarcoma tumor board in existence. It permits consistent oncology care across a wide geographic area, and is a model for providing consensus recommendations regardless of the remoteness of the patient and care team. Future plans for this group include prospective collection of outcomes data.

Aim/Objectives/Background: The American College of Radiology (ACR) and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) have jointly developed the following practice parameter for proton beam radiation therapy. Proton radiotherapy is the application of a high-energy proton beam to a patient in a clinical setting with therapeutic intent. Proton radiotherapy may permit improved therapeutic ratios with lower doses to sensitive normal structures and greater dose to target tumor tissues. Methods: A literature search was performed to identify published articles regarding clinical outcomes, reviews, quality assurance methodologies, and guidelines and standards for proton radiation therapy. Selected articles are referenced in the text. The following recommendations are based on firsthand experiences of multiple clinical authorities who employ proton therapy and have been peer reviewed by experts at different practicing institutions. Results: This practice parameter is developed to serve as a tool in the appropriate application of this evolving technology in the care of cancer patients or other patients with conditions where radiation therapy is indicated. It addresses clinical implementation of proton radiation therapy, including personnel qualifications, quality assurance standards, indications, and suggested documentation. Conclusions: This practice parameter is a tool to guide technical use of proton therapy and does not assess the relative clinical indication of proton radiotherapy when compared with other forms of radiotherapy, but to focus on the best practices required to deliver proton therapy safely and effectively, when clinically indicated. Costs of proton treatments are high, and the economic costs of proton radiotherapy may also need to be considered.

Objective: The Pediatric Proton/Photon Consortium Registry (PPCR) is a comprehensive data registry composed of pediatric patients treated with radiation. It was established to expedite outcomes-based research. The attributes which allow the PPCR to be a successful collaboration are reviewed. Methods and materials: Current eligibility criteria are radiotherapy patients < 22 years treated at one of the 15 US participating institutions. Detailed health and treatment data are collected about the disease presentation and treatment exposures, and annually thereafter, in REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture). DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) imaging and radiation plans are collected through MIM/MIMcloud. An optional patient-reported quality-of-life (PedsQL) study is administered at 10 sites. Results: Accrual started October 2012 with 2,775 participants enrolled as of 25 July 2019. Most patients, 62.0%, were treated for central nervous system (CNS) tumors, the most common of which are medulloblastoma (n = 349), ependymoma (n = 309), and glial/astrocytoma tumors (n = 279). The most common non-CNS diagnoses are rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 284), Ewing’s sarcoma (n = 153), and neuroblastoma (n = 130). While the majority of participants are US residents, 18.7% come from 36 other countries. Over 685 patients participate in the PedsQL study. Conclusions: The PPCR is a valuable research platform capable of answering countless research questions that will ultimately improve patient care. Centers outside of the USA are invited to participate directly or may engage with the PPCR to align data collection strategies to facilitate large-scale international research. Advances in knowledge: For investigators looking to carry out research in a large pediatric oncology cohort or interested in registry work, this paper provides an updated overview of the PPCR.

We report a response to pazopanib in a 69-year-old man with heavily pre-treated metastatic extraosseous Ewing sarcoma in addition to molecular profiling of his tumor. To our knowledge, this case is the earliest to demonstrate activity of an oral multi-targeted kinase inhibitor in Ewing sarcoma. This case provides rationale for adding a Ewing sarcoma arm to SARC024, a phase II study of regorafenib, another multi-targeted kinase inhibitor, in patients with liposarcoma, osteosarcoma and Ewing and Ewing-like sarcomas (NCT02048371). This national multi-institutional study is ongoing.