Current Treatment Options in Oncology

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 285–298 | Cite as

Histology-Specific Therapy for Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcoma and Benign Connective Tissue Tumors

Sarcomas (SH Okuno, Section Editor)

Opinion statement

Molecularly targeted agents have shown activity in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) and benign connective tissue tumors over the past ten years, but response rates differ by histologic subtype. The field of molecularly targeted agents in sarcoma is increasingly complex. Often, clinicians must rely on phase II data or even case series due to the rarity of these diseases. In subtypes with a clear role of specific factors in the pathophysiology of disease, such as giant cell tumor of the bone and diffuse-type tenosynovial giant cell tumor, it is reasonable to treat with newer targeted therapies, when available, in place of chemotherapy when systemic treatment is needed to control disease. In diseases without documented implication of a pathway in disease pathogenesis (e.g. soft tissue sarcoma and vascular endothelial growth factor), clear benefit from drug treatment should be established in randomized phase III trials before implementation into routine clinical practice. Histologic subtype will continue to emerge as a critical factor in treatment selection as we learn more about the molecular drivers of tumor growth and survival in different subtypes. Many of the drugs that have been recently developed affect tumor growth more than survival, therefore progression-free survival may be a more clinically relevant intermediate endpoint than objective response rate using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) in early phase sarcoma trials. Because of the rarity of disease and increasing need for multidisciplinary management, patients with connective tissue tumors should be evaluated at a center with expertise in these diseases. Participation in clinical trials, when available, is highly encouraged.

Keywords

Sarcoma Connective tissue tumor Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor Tyrosine kinase inhibitor Pazopanib mTOR inhibitor PEComa Giant cell tumor 

Notes

Disclosure

A.W. Silk: none; S.M. Schuetze: Consultant to GlaxoSmithKline, payment for manuscript preparation and speakers’ bureau for Novartis.

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Maki RG, Wathen JK, Patel SR, et al. Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine and docetaxel compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas: results of sarcoma alliance for research through collaboration study 002. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2755–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Penel N, Bui BN, Bay J-O, et al. Phase II trial of weekly paclitaxel for unresectable angiosarcoma: the ANGIOTAX Study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:5269–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chugh R, Wathen JK, Maki RG, et al. Phase II multicenter trial of imatinib in 10 histologic subtypes of sarcoma using a Bayesian hierarchical statistical model. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3148–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.•
    Rutkowski P, Van Glabbeke M, Rankin CJ, et al. Imatinib mesylate in advanced dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans: pooled analysis of two phase II clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1772–1779. Analysis of patients with advanced dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans treated with imatinib suggesting that a dose of 400 mg daily is as effective and better tolerated than 400 mg twice daily.Google Scholar
  5. 5.•
    Cassier PA, Gelderblom H, Stacchiotti S, et al. Efficacy of imatinib mesylate for the treatment of locally advanced and/or metastatic tenosynovial giant cell tumor/pigmented villonodular synovitis. Cancer 2012;118:1649–1655. Series documenting activity of imatinib in managing patients with recurrent or unresectable diffuse-type tenosynovial giant cell tumor.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maki RG, D'Adamo DR, Keohan ML, et al. Phase II study of sorafenib in patients with metastatic or recurrent sarcomas. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3133–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pacey S, Ratain M, Flaherty K, et al. Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in a subset of patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma from a Phase II randomized discontinuation trial. Investigational New Drugs. 2011;29:481–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ray-Coquard I, Italiano A, Bompas E, et al. Sorafenib for patients with advanced angiosarcoma: a phase II trial from the French Sarcoma Group (GSF/GETO). Oncologist 2012;17(2):260–6.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    von Mehren M, Rankin C, Goldblum JR, et al. Phase 2 Southwest Oncology Group-directed intergroup trial (S0505) of sorafenib in advanced soft tissue sarcomas. Cancer. 2012;118:770–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grignani G, Palmerini E, Dileo P, et al. A phase II trial of sorafenib in relapsed and unresectable high-grade osteosarcoma after failure of standard multimodal therapy: an Italian Sarcoma Group study. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:508–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hurwitz HI, Dowlati A, Saini S, et al. Phase I trial of pazopanib in patients with advanced cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:4220–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.•
    Sleijfer S, Ray-Coquard I, Papai Z, et al. Pazopanib, a multikinase angiogenesis inhibitor, in patients with relapsed or refractory advanced soft tissue sarcoma: a phase II study from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer–Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (EORTC Study 62043). J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3126–3132. Pazopanib was well-tolerated and had clinical activity in patients with advanced leiomyosarcomas, synovial sarcomas, and other STS types, but not adipocytic sarcomas.Google Scholar
  13. 13.••
    Van Der Graaf WT, Blay J, Chawla SP, et al. PALETTE: A randomized, double-blind, phase III trial of pazopanib versus placebo in patients (pts) with soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) whose disease has progressed during or following prior chemotherapy—An EORTC STBSG Global Network Study (EORTC 62072). Abstract presented at the 47th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Chicago, IL; June 3–7, 2011. Abstract LBA10002. The PALETTE study showed that pazopanib significantly improved PFS (median: 20 vs 7 weeks; HR = 0.31, 95 % CI 0.24-0.40 ; P < 0.0001).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    George S, Merriam P, Maki RG, et al. Multicenter phase II trial of sunitinib in the treatment of nongastrointestinal stromal tumor sarcomas. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3154–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.•
    Stacchiotti S, Negri T, Zaffaroni N, et al. Sunitinib in advanced alveolar soft part sarcoma: evidence of a direct antitumor effect. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:1682–1690. One of the first trials to demonstrate a significant objective response rate in alveolar soft part sarcoma treated with a drug.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ghose A, Tariq Z, Veltri S. Treatment of multidrug resistant advanced alveolar soft part sarcoma with sunitinib. Am J Ther. 2012;19:e56–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    NCCN Guidelines, version 1. Soft Tissue Sarcoma. 2012. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/index.asp. Accessed March 18, 2012.
  18. 18.
    Gardner K, Judson I, Leahy M, et al. Activity of cediranib, a highly potent and selective VEGF signaling inhibitor, in alveolar soft part sarcoma. Abstract presented at the 45th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Orlando, FL; May 29–June 2, 2009. Abstract 10523.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kummar S, Strassberger A, Monks A, et al. An evaluation of cediranib as a new agent for alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS). Abstract presented at the 47th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Chicago, IL; June 3–7, 2011. Abstract 10001.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials: Sunitinib or cediranib for alveolar soft part sarcoma. 2012. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01391962. Accessed March 3, 2012.
  21. 21.
    Mita MM, Mita AC, Chu QS, et al. Phase I trial of the novel mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor deforolimus (AP23573; MK-8669) administered intravenously daily for 5 days every 2 weeks to patients with advanced malignancies. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:361–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.•
    Chawla SP, Staddon AP, Baker LH, et al. Phase II study of the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor ridaforolimus in patients with advanced bone and soft tissue sarcomas. J Clin Oncol 2012, 30:78–84. In this relatively large study of patients with unresectable or metastatic sarcoma, 29 % had stable disease or partial response at 16 weeks, but the objective response rate was less than 5 %.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chawla SP, Blay J, Ray-Coquard IL, et al. Results of the phase III, placebo-controlled trial (SUCCEED) evaluating the mTOR inhibitor ridaforolimus (R) as maintenance therapy in advanced sarcoma patients (pts) following clinical benefit from prior standard cytotoxic chemotherapy (CT). Abstract presented at the 47th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Chicago, IL; June 3–7, 2011. Abstract 10005.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Okuno S, Bailey H, Mahoney MR, et al. A phase 2 study of temsirolimus (CCI-779) in patients with soft tissue sarcoas. Cancer. 2011;117:3468–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Italiano A, Kind Ml, Stoeckle E, Jones N, Coindre J-M, Bui B. Temsirolimus in advanced leiomyosarcomas: patterns of response and correlation with the activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin pathway. Anticancer Drugs. 2011;22:463–467.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Quek R, Wang Q, Morgan JA, et al. Combination mTOR and IGF-1R inhibition: phase I trial of everolimus and figitumumab in patients with advanced sarcomas and other solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:871–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bullock K, Petros W, Younis I, et al. A phase I study of bevacizumab (B) in combination with everolimus (E) and erlotinib (E) in advanced cancer (BEE). Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2011;67:465–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.•
    Wagner AJ, Malinowska-Kolodziej I, Morgan JA, et al. Clinical activity of mTOR inhibition with sirolimus in malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumors: targeting the pathogenic activation of mTORC1 in tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:835–840. Small series demonstrating that malignant PEComa may respond to treatment with mTOR inhibitor.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Italiano A, Delcambre C, Hostein I, et al. Treatment with the mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus in patients with malignant PEComa. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:1135–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dabora SL, Franz DN, Ashwal S, et al. Multicenter phase 2 trial of sirolimus for tuberous sclerosis: kidney angiomyolipomas and other tumors regress and VEGF- D levels decrease. PLoS One. 2011;6:e23379.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Davies DM, de Vries PJ, Johnson SR, et al. Sirolimus therapy for angiomyolipoma in tuberous sclerosis and sporadic lymphangioleiomyomatosis: a phase 2 trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:4071–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wolff N, Kabbani W, Bradley T, Raj G, Watumull L, Brugarolas J. Sirolimus and temsirolimus for epithelioid angiomyolipoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:e65–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shitara K, Yatabe Y, Mizota A, Sano T, Nimura Y, Muro K. Dramatic tumor response to everolimus for malignant epithelioid angiomyolipoma. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2011;41:814–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McCormack FX, Inoue Y, Moss J, et al. Efficacy and safety of sirolimus in lymphangioleiomyomatosis. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1595–606.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stacchiotti S, Palassini E, Sanfilippo R, et al. Gemcitabine in advanced angiosarcoma: a retrospective case series analysis from the Italian Rare Cancer Network. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(2):501–8.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mir O, Domont J, Cioffi A, et al. Feasibility of metronomic oral cyclophosphamide plus prednisolone in elderly patients with inoperable or metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47:515–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    West RB, Rubin BP, Miller MA, et al. A landscape effect in tenosynovial giant-cell tumor from activation of CSF1 expression by a translocation in a minority of tumor cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103:690–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Blay J-Y, El Sayadi H, Thiesse P, Garret J, Ray-Coquard I. Complete response to imatinib in relapsing pigmented villonodular synovitis/tenosynovial giant cell tumor (PVNS/TGCT). Ann Oncol. 2008;19:821–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Penel N, Le Cesne A, Bui BN, et al. Imatinib for progressive and recurrent aggressive fibromatosis (desmoid tumors): an FNCLCC/French Sarcoma Group phase II trial with a long-term follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:452–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Chugh R, Wathen JK, Patel SR, et al. Efficacy of imatinib in aggressive fibromatosis: results of a phase II multicenter Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration (SARC) trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16:4884–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gounder MM, Lefkowitz RA, Keohan ML, et al. Activity of sorafenib against desmoid tumor/deep fibromatosis. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:4082–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.••
    Butrynski JE, D'Adamo DR, Hornick JL, et al. Crizotinib in ALK-rearranged inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1727–1733. This case report of two patients led to the recent update to the NCCN guidelines to include crizotinib as an option for management of patients with ALK + IMT.Google Scholar
  43. 43.••
    Thomas D, Henshaw R, Skubitz K, et al. Denosumab in patients with giant-cell tumour of bone: an open-label, phase 2 study. The Lancet Oncology 2010;11:275–280. Phase II study demonstrating significant activity of denosumab, a monoclonal antibody to RANK ligand, in the management of patients with locally advanced or metastatic giant cell tumor of bone.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of Michigan, Comprehensive Cancer CenterAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations