Citations

The treatment landscape for soft tissue sarcomas (STS) is evolving constantly. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for STS specific to surgical management and systemic therapy recommendations for various subtypes.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are the most common type of soft tissue sarcoma that occur throughout the gastrointestinal tract. Most of these tumors are caused by oncogenic activating mutations in the KIT or PDGFRA genes. The NCCN Guidelines for GIST provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with these tumors. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines, including revised systemic therapy options for unresectable, progressive, or metastatic GIST based on mutational status, and updated recommendations for the management of GIST that develop resistance to specific tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare malignancies of mesenchymal cell origin that display a heterogenous mix of clinical and pathologic characteristics. STS can develop from fat, muscle, nerves, blood vessels, and other connective tissues. The evaluation and treatment of patients with STS requires a multidisciplinary team with demonstrated expertise in the management of these tumors. The complete NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Soft Tissue Sarcoma provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of extremity/superficial trunk/head and neck STS, as well as retroperitoneal/intra-abdominal STS, desmoid tumors, and rhabdomyosarcoma. This portion of the NCCN Guidelines discusses general principles for the diagnosis and treatment of retroperitoneal/intra-abdominal STS, outlines treatment recommendations, and reviews the evidence to support the guidelines recommendations.

The NCCN Guidelines for Soft Tissue Sarcoma provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up for patients with soft tissue sarcomas. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines, including the development of a separate and distinct guideline for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs); reconception of the management of desmoid tumors; inclusion of further recommendations for the diagnosis and management of extremity/body wall, head/neck sarcomas, and retroperitoneal sarcomas; modification and addition of systemic therapy regimens for sarcoma subtypes; and revision of the principles of radiation therapy for soft tissue sarcomas.

10588 Background: Accurate tumor classification is increasingly critical to individualized care as patient outcomes improve with use of targeted cancer therapies and predictive biomarkers. In metastatic cancers of uncertain or unknown origin, identification of a primary site remains equivocal in a significant number of cases. Gene expression signatures may improve accuracy and specificity of tumor classification, however, large-scale, blinded validation studies that demonstrate stable performance in metastatic and poorly differentiated cases are currently lacking. Methods: Seven hundred and ninety cases (51% female, 44% metastatic, 63% grade 2 and 3, 14% limited tissue specimens) representing 28 tumor types and 50 subtypes were processed and adjudicated between Mayo Clinic, UCLA and Massachusetts General Hospital. Blinded FFPE tumor sections were submitted and tested using a 92-gene RT-PCR assay (CancerTYPE ID, bioTheranostics Inc.). Molecular predictions were evaluated for concordance with the reference diagnosis; diagnostic accuracy between clinical subsets was compared. Results: The 92-gene assay demonstrated overall sensitivities of 87% for tumor classification and 82% for subtyping. Forty-seven (5.9%) cases were considered unclassifiable. Comparative analysis of performance between metastatic (n=329) and primary (n=414) tumors showed no statistically significant difference in accuracy (85% vs 88%, p=0.16). Similarly, no significant decreases in performance were observed across histological grades (p=0.58) and when comparing limited tissue to excisional biopsy specimens (p=0.16). Strong precision was demonstrated for accurate identification of a primary tumor in tissues biopsied from common metastatic sites, reported as positive predictive values of 100% for lung, brain and peritoneum, 92% for ovary and 80% for liver. Conclusions: Results from this multisite, blinded study validate the diagnostic accuracy of the 92-gene assay for classifying a diverse set of tumors, and support its clinical utility in the diagnosis of metastatic tumors to determine tissue of origin, and in the differential diagnosis of metastatic vs new primary disease.

AbstractContextChronic pancreatitis (CP) is characterized by inflammation, fibrosis, and a loss of pancreatic acinar cells, which can result in exocrine and eventually endocrine deficiency. Pancreatitis has been reported to induce formation of new endocrine cells (neogenesis) in mice. Our recent data have implicated chromogranin A–positive hormone-negative (CPHN) cells as potential evidence of neogenesis in humans.ObjectiveWe sought to establish if CPHN cells were more abundant in CP in humans.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsWe investigated the frequency and distribution of CPHN cells and the expression of the chemokine C-X-C motif ligand 10 (CXCL10) and its receptor chemokine C-X-C motif receptor 3 in pancreas of nondiabetic subjects with CP.ResultsCPHN cell frequency in islets was increased sevenfold in CP [2.1% ± 0.67% vs 0.35% ± 0.09% CPHN cells in islets, CP vs nonpancreatitis (NP), P < 0.01], as were the CPHN cells found as scattered cells in the exocrine areas (17.4 ± 2.9 vs 4.2 ± 0.6, CP vs NP, P < 0.001). Polyhormonal endocrine cells were also increased in CP (2.7 ± 1.2 vs 0.1 ± 0.04, CP vs NP, % of polyhormonal cells of total endocrine cells, P < 0.01), as was expression of CXCL10 in α and β cells.ConclusionThere is increased islet endogenous expression of the inflammation marker CXCL10 in islets in the setting of nondiabetic CP and an increase in polyhormonal (insulin-glucagon expressing) cells. The increase in CPHN cells in CP, often in a lobular distribution, may indicate foci of attempted endocrine cell regeneration.

Abstract Purpose: Accurate tumor classification is essential for cancer management as patient outcomes improve with use of site- and subtype-specific therapies. Current clinicopathologic evaluation is varied in approach, yet standardized diagnoses are critical for determining therapy. While gene expression–based cancer classifiers may potentially meet this need, imperative to determining their application to patient care is validation in rigorously designed studies. Here, we examined the performance of a 92-gene molecular classifier in a large multi-institution cohort. Experimental Design: Case selection incorporated specimens from more than 50 subtypes, including a range of tumor grades, metastatic and primary tumors, and limited tissue samples. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumors passed pathologist-adjudicated review between three institutions. Tumor classification using a 92-gene quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay was conducted on blinded tumor sections from 790 cases and compared with adjudicated diagnoses. Results: The 92-gene assay showed overall sensitivities of 87% for tumor type [95% confidence interval (CI), 84–89] and 82% for subtype (95% CI, 79–85). Analyses of metastatic tumors, high-grade tumors, or cases with limited tissue showed no decrease in comparative performance (P = 0.16, 0.58, and 0.16). High specificity (96%–100%) was showed for ruling in a primary tumor in organs commonly harboring metastases. The assay incorrectly excluded the adjudicated diagnosis in 5% of cases. Conclusions: The 92-gene assay showed strong performance for accurate molecular classification of a diverse set of tumor histologies. Results support potential use of the assay as a standardized molecular adjunct to routine clinicopathologic evaluation for tumor classification and primary site diagnosis. Clin Cancer Res; 18(14); 3952–60. ©2012 AACR.