International Collaboration is Feasible in Trials for Rare Conditions: The EURAMOS Experience

  • N. Marina
  • S. Bielack
  • J. Whelan
  • S. Smeland
  • M. Krailo
  • M. R. Sydes
  • T. Butterfass-Bahloul
  • G. Calaminus
  • M. Bernstein
Part of the Cancer Treatment and Research book series (CTAR, volume 152)


The introduction of multi-agent chemotherapy dramatically improved the outcome for patients with osteosarcoma. However, we appear to have reached a plateau in outcome with a long-term event-free survival of 60-70%. Therefore, detection of further improvements will likely require larger numbers of patients. This goal is best achieved via randomized clinical trials (RCTs) requiring large-scale cooperation and collaboration. With this background, four multinational groups agreed on the merits of collaboration: Children’s Oncology Group (COG), Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group (COSS), European Osteosarcoma Intergroup (EOI) and Scandinavian Sarcoma Group (SSG); they designed a study to determine whether altering postoperative therapy based on histological response improved the outcome. The study design includes a backbone of 10 weeks of preoperative therapy using MAP (methotrexate, Adriamycin and cisplatin). Following surgery, patients are stratified according to histological response. Patients classified as “good responders” (≥90% necrosis) are randomized to continue MAP or to receive MAP followed by maintenance pegylated interferon, while “poor responders” (<90% necrosis) are randomized to either continue MAP or to receive MAPIE (MAP+ifosfamide, etoposide). The design includes the registration of 1,400 patients over 4 years as well as the evaluation of quality of life using two different instruments. The group has established an efficient infrastructure to ensure successful implementation of the trial. This has included the EURAMOS Intergroup Safety Desk, which has established an international system for SAE, SAR and SUSAR reporting to the relevant competent authorities and ethics committees for each participating country. The group has also developed trial site monitoring and data center audits with funding from the European Science Foundation (ESF). The ESF has also funded three training courses to familiarize institutional staff with the requirements of multinational GCP trials. We have established a successful collaboration, and as of February 2008, 901 patients have been enrolled (COG 448; COSS 226; EOI 181; SSG 46) from 249 institutions in 16 different countries. As expected, 80% of the patients are <18 years of age, and accrual into the Quality of Life sub-study is proceeding as planned with 90% of the subjects agreeing to participate. International awareness is increasing and procedures for applicant countries wishing to join the collaboration have been implemented. Details about EURAMOS can be found at International trials in rare diseases are practicable with appropriate funding, planning and support. Although the implementation of such trials is difficult and time consuming, it is a worthwhile effort to rapidly complete RCTs and identify interventions that will improve the outcome of all osteosarcoma patients.EURAMOS-1 is the fastest accruing osteosarcoma trial and is already the largest osteosarcoma study conducted.


European Science Foundation Pediatric Oncology Group Metastatic Osteosarcoma Independent Data Monitoring Committee Poor Histological Response 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Friedman MA, Carter SK. The therapy of osteogenic sarcoma: current status and thoughts for the future. J Surg Oncol. 1972;4:482-510.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marcove RC, Mike V, Hajek JV, et al. Osteogenic sarcoma under the age of twenty-one. A review of one hundred and forty-five operative cases. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1970;52:411-423.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weinfeld MS, Dudley HR. Osteogenic sarcoma: a follow-up study of the ninety-four cases observed at the Massachusetts General Hospital from 1920 to 1960. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1962;44A:269-276.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dahlin DC, Coventry MB. Osteogenic sarcoma. A study of six hundred cases. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1967;49:101-110.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ochs JJ, Freeman AI, Douglass HO, et al. cis-Dichlorodiammineplatinum (II) in advanced osteogenic sarcoma. Cancer Treat Rep. 1978;62:239-245.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gasparini M, Rouesse J, van Oosterom A, et al. Phase II study of cisplatin in advanced osteogenic sarcoma. European Organization for Research on Treatment of Cancer: Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group. Cancer Treat Rep. 1985;69:211-213.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baum ES, Gaynon P, Greenberg L, et al. Phase II trail cisplatin in refractory childhood cancer: Children’s Cancer Study Group Report. Cancer Treat Rep. 1981;65:815-822.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pratt CB, Shanks EC. Doxorubicin in treatment of malignant solid tumors in children. Am J Dis Child. 1974;127:534-536.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cortes EP, Holland JF, Wang JJ, et al. Amputation and adriamycin in primary osteosarcoma. N Engl J Med. 1974;291:998-1000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jaffe N, Frei E, Traggis D, et al. Adjuvant methotrexate and citrovorum-factor treatment of osteogenic sarcoma. N Engl J Med. 1974;291:994-997.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pratt CB, Howarth C, Ransom JL, et al. High-dose methotrexate used alone and in combination for measurable primary or metastatic osteosarcoma. Cancer Treat Rep. 1980;64:11-20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pratt CB, Roberts D, Shanks EC, et al. Clinical trials and pharmacokinetics of intermittent high-dose methotrexate-”leucovorin rescue” for children with malignant tumors. Cancer Res. 1974;34:3326-3331.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harris MB, Cantor AB, Goorin AM, et al. Treatment of osteosarcoma with ifosfamide: comparison of response in pediatric patients with recurrent disease with patients previously untreated− A Pediatric Oncology Group study. Med Pediatr Oncol. 1995;24:87-92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goorin AM, Harris MB, Bernstein M, et al. Phase II/III trial of etoposide and high-dose ifosfamide in newly diagnosed metastatic osteosarcoma: a pediatric oncology group trial. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:426-433.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pratt C, Shanks E, Hustu O, et al. Adjuvant multiple drug chemotherapy for osteosarcoma of the extremity. Cancer. 1977;39:51-57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pratt CB, Rivera G, Shanks E, et al. Combination chemotherapy for osteosarcoma. Cancer Treat Rep. 1978;62:251-257.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sutow WW, Gehan EA, Dyment PG, et al. Multidrug adjuvant chemotherapy for osteosarcoma: interim report of the Southwest Oncology Group Studies. Cancer Treat Rep. 1978;62:265-269.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sutow WW, Sullivan MP, Fernbach DJ, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy in primary treatment of osteogenic sarcoma. A Southwest Oncology Group study. Cancer. 1975;36:1598-1602.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Goorin AM, Frei E III, Abelson HT. Adjuvant chemotherapy for osteosarcoma: a decade of experience. Surg Clin North Am. 1981;61:1379-1389.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Taylor WF, Ivins JC, Pritchard DJ, et al. Trends and variability in survival among patients with osteosarcoma: a 7-year update. Mayo Clin Proc. 1985;60:91-104.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carter SK. Adjuvant chemotherapy in osteogenic sarcoma: the triumph that isn’t? J Clin Oncol. 1984;2:147-148.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Edmonson JH, Green SJ, Ivins JC, et al. A controlled pilot study of high-dose methotrexate as postsurgical adjuvant treatment for primary osteosarcoma. J Clin Oncol. 1984;2:152-156.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Eilber F, Giuliano A, Eckardt J, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for osteosarcoma: a randomized prospective trial. J Clin Oncol. 1987;5:21-26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Link MP, Goorin AM, Miser AW, et al. The effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on relapse-free survival in patients with osteosarcoma of the extremity. N Engl J Med. 1986;314:1600-1606.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rosen G, Marcove RC, Caparros B, et al. Primary osteogenic sarcoma: the rationale for preoperative chemotherapy and delayed surgery. Cancer. 1979;43:2163-2177.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosen G, Murphy ML, Huvos AG, et al. Chemotherapy, en bloc resection, and prosthetic bone replacement in the treatment of osteogenic sarcoma. Cancer. 1976;37:1-11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Winkler K, Beron G, Delling G, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy of osteosarcoma: results of a randomized cooperative trial (COSS-82) with salvage chemotherapy based on histological tumor response. J Clin Oncol. 1988;6:329-337.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Provisor AJ, Ettinger LJ, Nachman JB, et al. Treatment of nonmetastatic osteosarcoma of the extremity with preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy: a report from the Children’s Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:76-84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bacci G, Picci P, Ruggieri P, et al. Primary chemotherapy and delayed surgery (neoadjuvant chemotherapy) for osteosarcoma of the extremities. The Istituto Rizzoli Experience in 127 patients treated preoperatively with intravenous methotrexate (high versus moderate doses) and intra-arterial cisplatin. Cancer. 1990;65:2539-2553.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Goorin AM, Schwartzentruber DJ, Devidas M, et al. Presurgical chemotherapy compared with immediate surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy for nonmetastatic osteosarcoma: Pediatric Oncology Group Study POG-8651. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1574-1580.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bielack SS, Kempf-Bielack B, Delling G, et al. Prognostic factors in high-grade osteosarcoma of the extremities or trunk: an analysis of 1,702 patients treated on neoadjuvant cooperative osteosarcoma study group protocols. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:776-790.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Meyers PA, Schwartz CL, Krailo M, et al. Osteosarcoma: a randomized, prospective trial of the addition of ifosfamide and/or muramyl tripeptide to cisplatin, doxorubicin, and high-dose methotrexate. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:2004-2011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lewis IJ, Nooij MA, Whelan J, et al. Improvement in histologic response but not survival in osteosarcoma patients treated with intensified chemotherapy: a randomized phase III trial of the European Osteosarcoma Intergroup. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:112-128.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ferrari S, Smeland S, Mercuri M, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with high-dose Ifosfamide, high-dose methotrexate, cisplatin, and doxorubicin for patients with localized osteosarcoma of the extremity: a joint study by the Italian and Scandinavian Sarcoma Groups. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8845-8852.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rosen G, Caparros B, Huvos AG, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy for osteogenic sarcoma: selection of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy based on the response of the primary tumor to preoperative chemotherapy. Cancer. 1982;49:1221-1230.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Meyers PA, Heller G, Healey J, et al. Chemotherapy for nonmetastatic osteogenic sarcoma: the Memorial Sloan-Kettering experience. J Clin Oncol. 1992;10:5-15. [see comments].PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Meyers PA, Gorlick R, Heller G, et al. Intensification of preoperative chemotherapy for osteogenic sarcoma: results of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering (T12) protocol. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:2452-2458.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Winkler K, Beron G, Kotz R, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for osteogenic sarcoma: results of a Cooperative German/Austrian study. J Clin Oncol. 1984;2:617-624.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Fuchs N, Bielack SS, Epler D, et al. Long-term results of the co-operative German-Austrian-Swiss osteosarcoma study group’s protocol COSS-86 of intensive multidrug chemotherapy and surgery for osteosarcoma of the limbs. Ann Oncol. 1998;9:893-899.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jaffe N, Knapp J, Chuang VP, et al. Osteosarcoma: intra-arterial treatment of the primary tumor with cis-diammine-dichloroplatinum II (CDP). Angiographic, pathologic, and pharmacologic studies. Cancer. 1983;51:402-407.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Jaffe N, Robertson R, Ayala A, et al. Comparison of intra-arterial cis-diamminedichloroplatinum II with high-dose methotrexate and citrovorum factor rescue in the treatment of primary osteosarcoma. J Clin Oncol. 1985;3:1101-1104.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Winkler K, Bielack S, Delling G, et al. Effect of intra-arterial versus intravenous cisplatin in addition to systemic doxorubicin, high-dose methotrexate, and ifosfamide on histologic tumor response in osteosarcoma (study COSS-86). Cancer. 1990;66:1703-1710.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Souhami RL, Craft AW, Van der Eijken JW, et al. Randomised trial of two regimens of chemotherapy in operable osteosarcoma: a study of the European Osteosarcoma Intergroup. Lancet. 1997;350:911-917.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bramwell VH, Burgers M, Sneath R, et al. A comparison of two short intensive adjuvant chemotherapy regimens in operable osteosarcoma of limbs in children and young adults: the first study of the European Osteosarcoma Intergroup. J Clin Oncol. 1992;10:1579-1591.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bacci G, Ferrari S, Delepine N, et al. Predictive factors of histologic response to primary chemotherapy in osteosarcoma of the extremity: study of 272 patients preoperatively treated with high-dose methotrexate, doxorubicin, and cisplatin. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:658-663.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Saeter G, Alvegard TA, Elomaa I, et al. Treatment of osteosarcoma of the extremities with the T-10 protocol, with emphasis on the effects of preoperative chemotherapy with single-agent high-dose methotrexate: a Scandinavian Sarcoma Group study. J Clin Oncol. 1991;9:1766-1775.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Smeland S, Muller C, Alvegard TA, et al. Scandinavian Sarcoma Group Osteosarcoma Study SSG VIII: prognostic factors for outcome and the role of replacement salvage chemotherapy for poor histological responders. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39:488-494.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Meyers PA, Schwartz CL, Krailo MD, et al. Osteosarcoma: the addition of muramyl tripeptide to chemotherapy improves overall survival – a report from the Children’s Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:633-638.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Harris MB, Gieser P, Goorin AM, et al. Treatment of metastatic osteosarcoma at diagnosis: a Pediatric Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:3641-3648.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bacci G, Picci P, Ferrari S, et al. Primary chemotherapy and delayed surgery for nonmetastatic osteosarcoma of the extremities: results of 164 patients preoperatively treated with high doses of methotrexate followed by cisplatin and doxorubicin. Cancer. 1993;72:3227-3238.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Strander H, Einhorn S. Effect of human leukocyte interferon on the growth of human osteosarcoma cells in tissue culture. Int J Cancer. 1977;19:468-473.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Brosjo O, Bauer HC, Brostrom LA, et al. Influence of human alpha-interferon on four human osteosarcoma xenografts in nude mice. Cancer Res. 1985;45:5598-5602.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Bauer HC, Brosjo O, Strander H. Comparison of the growth inhibiting effect of natural and recombinant interferon-alpha on human osteosarcomas in nude mice. J Interferon Res. 1987;7:365-369.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Allen IE, Ross SD, Borden SP, et al. Meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of interferon-alpha in patients with follicular non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Immunother. 2001;24:58-65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Bjorkstrand B, Svensson H, Goldschmidt H, et al. Alpha-interferon maintenance treatment is associated with improved survival after high-dose treatment and autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma: a retrospective registry study from the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT). Bone Marrow Transplant. 2001;27:511-515.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Strander H, Bauer HC, Brosjo O, et al. Long-term adjuvant interferon treatment of human osteosarcoma. A pilot study. Acta Oncol. 1995;34:877-880.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Bukowski R, Ernstoff MS, Gore ME, et al. Pegylated interferon alfa-2b treatment for patients with solid tumors: a phase I/II study. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:3841-3849.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Bunn S, Kelly D, Murray KF. Safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of interferon alfa-2b and ribavirin in children with chronic hepatitis C. J Hepatol. 2000;32:763.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Wozniakowska-Gesicka T, Wisniewska-Ligier M, Kups J, et al. Influence of interferon-alpha therapy on the count and function of T lymphocytes in children with chronic hepatitis C. Pol Merkur Lekarski. 2001;11:344-347.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bhatia S, Landier W, Robison L. Late effects of childhood cancer therapy. In: DeVita V, Hellman S, Rosenberg S, eds. Progress in Oncology 2002. Sudbury: Jone and Barlett Publications; 2003:171-201.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Hudson MM, Tyc VL, Cremer LK, et al. Patient satisfaction after limb-sparing surgery and amputation for pediatric malignant bone tumors. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs. 1998;15:60-69. discussion 70-71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Nicholson HS, Mulvihill JJ, Byrne J. Late effects of therapy in adult survivors of osteosarcoma and Ewing’s sarcoma. Med Pediatr Oncol. 1992;20:6-12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Postma A, Kingma A, De Ruiter JH, et al. Quality of life in bone tumor patients comparing limb salvage and amputation of the lower extremity. J Surg Oncol. 1992;51:47-51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Weddington WW. Psychological outcomes in survivors of extremity sarcomas following amputation or limb-sparing surgery. Cancer Treat Res. 1991;56:53-60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Calaminus G, Weinspach S, Teske C, et al. Quality of life in children and adolescents with cancer. First results of an evaluation of 49 patients with the PEDQOL questionnaire. Klin Padiatr. 2000;212:211-215.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Varni JW, Burwinkle TM, Katz ER, et al. The PedsQL in pediatric cancer: reliability and validity of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Generic Core Scales, Multidimensional Fatigue Scale, and Cancer Module. Cancer. 2002;94:2090-2106.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Nagarajan R, Neglia JP, Clohisy DR, et al. Limb salvage and amputation in survivors of pediatric lower-extremity bone tumors: what are the long-term implications? J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:4493-4501.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wilhelmsen L. Role of the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC). Stat Med. 2002;21:2823-2829.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    DeMets DL, Yusuf S. The Data and Safety Monitoring Committee: some final thoughts. Am Heart J. 2001;141:548-549.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. Marina
    • 1
  • S. Bielack
  • J. Whelan
  • S. Smeland
  • M. Krailo
  • M. R. Sydes
  • T. Butterfass-Bahloul
  • G. Calaminus
  • M. Bernstein
  1. 1.Stanford University Medical CenterPalo AltoUSA

Personalised recommendations