Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Response Evaluation of Neoadjuvant Therapies in Sarcoma

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

Sarcoma is a complex and heterogeneous disease with a rapidly evolving treatment landscape. With a growing emphasis on neoadjuvant therapy as a way to improve surgical and oncologic outcomes, our approach to monitor treatment efficacy must also continue to evolve. This is paramount to both clinical trial design, where endpoints must accurately reflect disease outcomes, and individual patient, whose treatment response informs therapeutic decisions. In the era of personalized medicine, the response to neoadjuvant treatment in sarcoma remains most effectively gauged by pathologic review following surgical resection. Although measures of pathologic complete response most effectively predict outcome, the requisite surgical excision precludes their use in real-time monitoring of neoadjuvant treatment response. Current image-based metrics such as RECIST and PERCIST have been utilized in many trials; however, they are limited by their unilateral measurement approach. More effective tools are needed to better measure the response to therapy prior to neoadjuvant regimen completion, so that the medication or regimen may be best tailored to patient response in an ongoing fashion. Delta-radiomics and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) represent promising novel tools for real-time monitoring of treatment efficacy. These metrics have been shown to predict pathologic complete response and disease progression at a superior level to traditional CT-based guidelines. Delta-radiomics is currently being utilized in a clinical trial among soft tissue sarcoma patients in which radiation dosage is adjusted based on radiomic data. The ability of ctDNA to detect molecular residual disease is also under study in multiple clinical trials, although none in the field of sarcoma. Future directions in the field include the use of ctDNA and molecular residual disease testing among sarcoma patients, as well as increased utilization of delta-radiomics, to more effectively monitor neoadjuvant treatment response prior to surgical resection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The authors declare that the data supporting this publication are available within the paper and its references.

References and Recommended Reading 

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

  1. Gamboa AC, Gronchi A. Cardona K 2020 Soft-tissue sarcoma in adults: an update on the current state of histiotype-specific management in an era of personalized medicine. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2020;70(3):200–29. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21605.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Grünewald TG, Alonso M, Avnet S, et al. Sarcoma treatment in the era of molecular medicine. EMBO Mol Med. 2020;12(11). https://doi.org/10.15252/emmm.201911131

  3. Gronchi A, Lo Vullo S, Colombo C, et al. Extremity soft tissue sarcoma in a series of patients treated at a single institution: local control directly impacts survival. Ann Surg. 2010;251(3):506–11. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181cf87fa.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Trovik CS, Bauer HCF, Alvegard TA, et al. Surgical margins, local recurrence and metastasis in soft tissue sarcomas: 559 surgically-treated patients from the Scandinavian Sarcoma Group Register. Eur J Cancer. 2000;2000(36):710–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gronchi A, Ferrari S, Quagliuolo V, et al. Histotype-tailored neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus standard chemotherapy in patients with high-risk soft-tissue sarcomas (ISG-STS 1001): an international, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3, multicentre trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(6):812–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30334-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Keung EZ, Nassif E, Lin H, et al. Randomized phase II study of neoadjuvant checkpoint blockade for surgically resectable undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS) and dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS): Survival results after 2 years of follow-up and intratumoral Bcell receptor (BCR) correlates. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2022.40.17_suppl.LBA11501

  7. Ayodele O, Razak ARA. Immunotherapy in soft-tissue sarcoma. Curr Oncol. 2020;27(11):17–23. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.27.5407.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Petitprez F, De Reyniès A, Keung EZ, et al. B cells are associated with survival and immunotherapy response in sarcoma. Nature. 2020;577(7791):556–60. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1906-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Melake M, Smith H, Mansfield D, et al. OX40 and 4–1BB delineate distinct immune profiles in sarcoma. OncoImmunology. 2022;11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2162402x.2022.2066050

  10. Zhu MMT, Shenasa E, Nielsen TO. Sarcomas: Immune biomarker expression and checkpoint inhibitor trials. Cancer Treat Rev. 2020;91:102115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2020.102115.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dancsok AR, Setsu N, Gao D, et al. Expression of lymphocyte immunoregulatory biomarkers in bone and soft-tissue sarcomas. Mod Pathol. 2019;32(12):1772–85. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41379-019-0312-y.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Song Z, Lu L, Gao Z, et al. Immunotherapy for liposarcoma: emerging opportunities and challenges. Future Oncol. 2022;18(30):3449–61. https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2021-1549.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Espejo-Freire A, Elliott A, Rosenberg A, et al. Genomic landscape of angiosarcoma: a targeted and immunotherapy biomarker analysis. Cancers. 2021;13(19):4816. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13194816.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Network NCC. Soft Tissue Sarcoma (Version 2.2022). Accessed 08/01/2022, https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/sarcoma.pdf

  15. Wang D, Zhang Q, Eisenberg BL, et al. Significant reduction of late toxicities in patients with extremity sarcoma treated with image-guided radiation therapy to a reduced target volume: results of radiation therapy oncology group RTOG-0630 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(20):2231–8. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.58.5828.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Guadagnolo BA, Bassett RL, Mitra D, et al. Hypofractionated, 3-week, preoperative radiotherapy for patients with soft tissue sarcomas (HYPORT-STS): a single-centre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(12):1547–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00638-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. • Bonvalot S, Rutkowski PL, Thariat J, et al. NBTXR3, a first-in-class radioenhancer hafnium oxide nanoparticle, plus radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in patients with locally advanced soft-tissue sarcoma (Act.In.Sarc): a multicentre, phase 2–3, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(8):1148–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30326-2. This phase 2/3 randomized controlled trial describes the efficacy of NBTXR3, a novel radioenhancer found to improve pathologic complete response rates when combined with neoadjuvant radiation among patients with locally advanced soft tissue sarcoma.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wardelmann E, Haas RL, Bovee JV, et al. Evaluation of response after neoadjuvant treatment in soft tissue sarcomas; the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (EORTC-STBSG) recommendations for pathological examination and reporting. Eur J Cancer. 2016;53:84–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2015.09.021.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bonvalot S, Wunder J, Gronchi A, et al. Complete pathological response to neoadjuvant treatment is associated with better survival outcomes in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: results of a retrospective multicenter study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021;47(8):2166–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2021.02.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lucas DR, Kshirsagar MP, Biermann JS, et al. Histologic alterations from neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma: clinicopathological correlation. Oncologist. 2008;13(4):451–8. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2007-0220.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Eilber FC, Rosen G, Eckardt J, et al. Treatment-induced pathologic necrosis: a predictor of local recurrence and survival in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy for high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcomas. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(13):3203–9. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2001.19.13.3203.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Shah D, Borys D, Martinez SR, et al. Complete pathologic response to neoadjuvant radiotherapy is predictive of oncological outcome in patients with soft tissue sarcoma. Anticancer Res. 2012;32(9):3911–5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. • Weiss AR, Chen Y-L, Scharschmidt TJ, et al. Pathological response in children and adults with large unresected intermediate-grade or high-grade soft tissue sarcoma receiving preoperative chemoradiotherapy with or without pazopanib (ARST1321): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(8):1110–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(20)30325-9. This study utilizes the pCR threshold of 90% as a primary endpoint. It is the first study to include both pediatric and adult patients with STS and demonstrated improvement in pCR rate with the addition of pazopanib to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Trojani M, Contesso G, Coindre JM, et al. Soft-tissue sarcomas of adults; study of pathological prognostic variables and definition of a histopathological grading system. Int J Cancer. 1984;33(1):37–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.2910330108.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cates J. Histologic response to neoadjuvant therapy is not predictive of favorable outcomes in high-grade pleomorphic soft tissue sarcoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2019;43(4):564–72. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000001214.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gennaro N, Reijers S, Bruining A, et al. Imaging response evaluation after neoadjuvant treatment in soft tissue sarcomas: where do we stand? Crit Rev Oncol/Hematol. 2021;160:103309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2021.103309.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Grunwald V, Litiere S, Young R, et al. Absence of progression, not extent of tumour shrinkage, defines prognosis in soft-tissue sarcoma - an analysis of the EORTC 62012 study of the EORTC STBSG. Eur J Cancer. 2016;64:44–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2016.05.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Seymour L, Bogaerts J, Perrone A, et al. iRECIST: Guidelines for response criteria for use in trials testing immunotherapeutics. Lancet Oncology. 2017;18(3):E143–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30074-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Choi H. Response evaluation of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Oncologist. 2008;13(Suppl 2):4–7. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.13-S2-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Arshad J, Ahmed J, Subhawong T, Trent JC. Progress in determining response to treatment in gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2020;20(4):279–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737140.2020.1745068.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. • Kyriazoglou A, Jespers P, Vandecavaye V, et al. Exploratory analysis of tumor imaging in a phase 2 trial with cabozantinib in gastrointestinal stromal tumor: lessons learned from study EORTC STBSG 1317 ‘CaboGIST.’ Acta Oncol. 2022;61(6):663–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186x.2022.2068967. This study highlights the superiority of the Choi criteria to RECIST in assessing TKI response in the treatment of GIST.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Nardone V, Reginelli A, Grassi R, et al. Delta radiomics: a systematic review. Radiol Med (Torino). 2021;126(12):1571–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-021-01436-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Crombé A, Périer C, Kind M, et al. T<sub>2</sub> -based MRI Delta-radiomics improve response prediction in soft-tissue sarcomas treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019;50(2):497–510. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26589.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. • Peeken JC, Asadpour R, Specht K, et al. MRI-based delta-radiomics predicts pathologic complete response in high-grade soft-tissue sarcoma patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy. Radiother Oncol. 2021;164:73–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2021.08.023. This paper highlights the utility of delta radiomics over historical unilateral imaging criteria in response evaluation of neoadjuvant therapies by demonstrating ability to predict pCR.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Clayer M, Doyle S, Sangha N, Grimer R. The toronto extremity salvage score in unoperated controls: an age, gender, and country comparison. Sarcoma. 2012;2012:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/717213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Macarthur I, McInnes C, Dalke K, et al. Patient reported outcomes following lower extremity soft tissue sarcoma resection with microsurgical preservation of ambulation. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2019;35(03):168–75. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1668116.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Uehara K, Ogura K, Akiyama T, et al. Reliability and validity of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Scoring System for the upper extremity in Japanese patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(9):2253–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-017-5390-x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Moon TM, Furdock R, Rhea L, Pergolotti M, Cipriano C, Spraker MB. PROMIS scores of patients undergoing neoadjuvant and adjuvant radiation therapy for surgically excised soft tissue sarcoma. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2021;31:42–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2021.08.008.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Blight TJ, Choong PFM. The need for improved patient reported outcome measures in patients with extremity sarcoma: a narrative review. ANZ J Surg. 2021;91(10):2021–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.17028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Combination chemotherapy with or without hyperthermia therapy in treating patients with soft tissue sarcoma. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT00003052. Accessed 15 Nov 2022

  42. Slatko BE, Gardner AF, Ausubel FM. Overview of next-generation sequencing technologies. Curr Protocol Mol Biol. 2018;122(1):e59. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpmb.59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Gusho CA, Weiss MC, Lee L, et al. The clinical utility of next-generation sequencing for bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Acta Oncol. 2022;61(1):38–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186x.2021.1992009.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Samstein RM, Lee C-H, Shoushtari AN, et al. Tumor mutational load predicts survival after immunotherapy across multiple cancer types. Nat Genet. 2019;51(2):202–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-018-0312-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Pessoa LS, Heringer M, Ferrer VP. ctDNA as a cancer biomarker: a broad overview. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2020;155:103109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2020.103109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. • Coombs CC, Dickherber T, Crompton BD. Chasing ctDNA in patients with sarcoma. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2020;40:e351–60. https://doi.org/10.1200/edbk_280749. This article reviews the current state of ctDNA with regard to sarcoma therapy.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Allegretti M, Casini B, Mandoj C, et al. Precision diagnostics of Ewing’s sarcoma by liquid biopsy: circulating <i>EWS-FLI1</i> fusion transcripts. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2018;10:175883591877433. https://doi.org/10.1177/1758835918774337.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Hemming ML, Klega KS, Rhoades J, et al. Detection of circulating tumor DNA in patients with leiomyosarcoma with progressive disease. JCO Precis Oncol. 2019;2019. https://doi.org/10.1200/po.18.00235

  49. Circulating Tumor DNA (ctDNA) for Early treatment response assessment of solid tumors. https://ClinicalTrials.gov/show/NCT04354064. Accessed 15 Nov 2022

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Divison of Surgical Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Caroline R. Medin MD & Kenneth Cardona MD

Authors
  1. Caroline R. Medin MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kenneth Cardona MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Caroline R. Medin MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Caroline Medin declares that she has no conflict of interest. Kenneth Cardona declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Medin, C.R., Cardona, K. Response Evaluation of Neoadjuvant Therapies in Sarcoma. Curr. Treat. Options in Oncol. 24, 515–527 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-023-01075-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-023-01075-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation