Maud Toulmonde

Retroperitoneal sarcomas: patterns of care in advanced stages, prognostic factors and focus on main histological subtypes: a multicenter analysis of the French Sarcoma Group

BACKGROUND Retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) are heterogeneous. Advanced stages include unresectable locoregional (LR) disease, abdominal sarcomatosis and distant metastasis. There is no available report assessing palliative chemotherapy in advanced RPS. This study analyzes management and outcome in a large cohort of patients with advanced RPS, considering main histological subtypes separately. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of adult patients diagnosed with a RPS between 1 January 1988 and 31 December 2008 across 12 centers of the French Sarcoma Group. All cases were centrally reviewed by an expert pathologist. RESULTS Five-hundred eighty-six patients were included, 299 patients received palliative chemotherapy, with a median of two lines (range 0-8). Fifty patients underwent palliative surgery. Two hundred fifty-five patients (85%) were assessable for response after first line of chemotherapy. Among them, 69 patients (27%) had progressive disease, 145 (57%) had stable disease, 37 (14.5%) had partial response and 4 (1.5%) complete response. Median time from first line of palliative chemotherapy to progression was 5.9 months [4.9-7.3] and median overall survival (OS), 15.8 months [13-18]. In multivariate analysis, prognosis factors independently associated with poor OS were male gender, performance status (PS) >1 and grade >1. There was no difference according to stage of disease. Palliative surgery did not appear to add any survival benefit. CONCLUSION These results emphasize the scarcity of available options for RPS in the advanced setting and the urgent need to develop new strategies. Patients with good PS should be included in clinical trials and best supportive care should be considered in those with poor PS.BACKGROUND Retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) are heterogeneous. Advanced stages include unresectable locoregional (LR) disease, abdominal sarcomatosis and distant metastasis. There is no available report assessing palliative chemotherapy in advanced RPS. This study analyzes management and outcome in a large cohort of patients with advanced RPS, considering main histological subtypes separately. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of adult patients diagnosed with a RPS between 1 January 1988 and 31 December 2008 across 12 centers of the French Sarcoma Group. All cases were centrally reviewed by an expert pathologist. RESULTS Five-hundred eighty-six patients were included, 299 patients received palliative chemotherapy, with a median of two lines (range 0-8). Fifty patients underwent palliative surgery. Two hundred fifty-five patients (85%) were assessable for response after first line of chemotherapy. Among them, 69 patients (27%) had progressive disease, 145 (57%) had stable disease, 37 (14.5%) had partial response and 4 (1.5%) complete response. Median time from first line of palliative chemotherapy to progression was 5.9 months [4.9-7.3] and median overall survival (OS), 15.8 months [13-18]. In multivariate analysis, prognosis factors independently associated with poor OS were male gender, performance status (PS) >1 and grade >1. There was no difference according to stage of disease. Palliative surgery did not appear to add any survival benefit. CONCLUSION These results emphasize the scarcity of available options for RPS in the advanced setting and the urgent need to develop new strategies. Patients with good PS should be included in clinical trials and best supportive care should be considered in those with poor PS.

Safety and efficacy of regorafenib in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (REGOSARC): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND Regorafenib is a multikinase inhibitor with proven activity in refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumours and chemotherapy-refractory advanced colorectal cancers. We assessed this agents efficacy and safety in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas previously treated with anthracycline. METHODS In this randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial undertaken in France and Austria, we enrolled patients aged 18 years and older with advanced soft tissue sarcomas who had received previous doxorubicin or other anthracycline treatment. These patients were randomly assigned (1:1) into one of the following four cohorts: liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, synovial sarcoma, and other sarcomas. Participants were treated with oral regorafenib (160 mg per day 3 weeks on and 1 week off) or matched placebo. Patients receiving placebo were offered optional crossover in case of centrally confirmed disease progression. The random allocation schedule was computer-generated with permuted blocks of four patients, with two stratification factors: country (France or Austria) and previous exposure to pazopanib (yes or no). Eligibility criteria included patients with histologically proven advanced and inoperable soft tissue sarcomas with intolerance or failure to doxorubicin or other anthracycline-based chemotherapy and at least one unidimensionally or bidimensionally measurable lesion according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST; version 1.1). The primary endpoint was RECIST-based progression-free survival after central radiological review in the intention-to-treat population. Patients, physicians, and radiologists of the panel were masked to treatment allocation. This study is still open for recruitment for an additional stratum (patients previously treated with pazopanib) and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01900743. FINDINGS From Aug 5, 2013, to Nov 26, 2014, 182 patients were randomly assigned to one of four cohorts and included in the final analysis. At the cutoff date (Jan 7, 2016), the number of required events was reached for the four cohorts. In the liposarcoma cohort, progression-free survival was 1·1 months (95% CI 0·9-2·3) with regorafenib versus 1·7 months (0·9-1·8) with placebo (HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·48-1·64] p=0·70). In the leiomyosarcoma cohort, progression-free survival was 3·7 months (95% CI 2·5-5·0) with regorafenib versus 1·8 (1·0-2·8) months with placebo (HR 0·46 [95% CI 0·46-0·80] p=0·0045). In the synovial sarcoma cohort, progression-free survival was 5·6 months (95% CI 1·4-11·6) with regorafenib versus 1·0 (0·8-1·4) with placebo (HR 0·10 [95% CI 0·03-0·35] p<0·0001). In the other sarcoma cohort, progression-free survival was 2·9 months (95% CI 1·0-7·8) with regorafenib versus 1·0 (0·9-1·9) with placebo (HR 0·46 [95% CI 0·25-0·81] p=0·0061). Before crossover, the most common clinically significant grade 3 or higher adverse events were arterial hypertension (17 [19%] events in the 89 patients in the regorafenib group vs two [2%] events in the 92 patients in the placebo group), hand and foot skin reaction (14 [15%] vs no events) and asthenia (12 [13%] vs six [6%]). One treatment-related death occurred in the regorafenib group due to liver failure. INTERPRETATION Regorafenib has an important clinical antitumour effect in non-adipocytic soft tissue sarcomas, improving progression-free survival. Regorafenib should be further evaluated in this setting, and its therapeutic role has to be defined in the context of the growing therapeutic armamentarium, already including one approved multikinase inhibitor, pazopanib. FUNDING Bayer HealthCare.

Advanced well-differentiated/dedifferentiated liposarcomas: role of chemotherapy and survival

BACKGROUND Data regarding the role of systemic therapy in patients with advanced well-differentiated/dedifferentiated liposarcomas (WDLPS/DDLPS) are limited. METHODS From 2000 to 2010, 208 patients with advanced WDLPS/DDLPS received chemotherapy in 11 participating institutions. Clinical and pathological data were collected by reviewing medical records. RESULTS Median age was 63 years (range 32-84). Combination chemotherapy was delivered in 85 cases (41%) and single agent in 123 cases (59%), respectively. One hundred and seventy-one patients (82%) received an anthracycline-containing regimen. Using RECIST, objective response was observed in 21 patients (12%), all treated with anthracyclines. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.3-5.9]. On multivariate analysis, age and performance status (PS) were the sole factors significantly associated with poor PFS. Median overall survival (OS) was 15.2 months (95% CI 11.8 -18.7). On multivariate analysis, grade and PS were the sole factors significantly associated with OS. CONCLUSIONS Chemotherapy was associated with clinical benefit in 46% of patients with advanced WDLPS/DDLPS. OS remains poor, even though visceral metastatic disease is less frequent than in other sarcomas.

Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials Reporting in the Treatment of Sarcomas

PURPOSE Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represent the best evidence in oncology practice. The aim of this study was to assess the reporting quality of sarcoma RCTs and to identify significant predictors of quality. PATIENTS AND METHODS Two investigators searched MEDLINE for pediatric and adult bone and soft tissue sarcoma RCTs published between January 1988 and December 2008. The quality of each report was assessed by using a 15-point overall reporting quality score based on 15 items from the revised Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement (overall quality score [OQS] range, 0 to 15 points). Concealment of allocation, appropriate blinding, and analysis according to intention-to-treat principle were assessed separately because of their crucial methodologic importance by using a 3-point key methodologic index score (MIS; range, 0 to 3). RESULTS We retrieved 72 relevant RCTs that included 16,029 patients. The median OQS was 9.5. Allocation concealment, blinding, and analysis by intent to treat were reported only in 21 (29%), nine (12.5%), and 23 (32%) of the 72 RCTs, respectively. The median MIS was 1 with a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 2. On multivariate analysis, publication after 1996 and high impact factor remained independent and significant predictors of improved OQS. The sole variable associated with improved MIS was the publication of chemotherapy-only trials. CONCLUSION Although the overall quality of sarcoma RCTs reporting has improved over time, reporting of key methodologic issues remains poor. This may lead to biased interpretation of sarcoma trial results.

Trabectedin in combination with doxorubicin for first-line treatment of advanced uterine or soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma (LMS-02): a non-randomised, multicentre, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND Metastatic leiomyosarcomas of uterine or soft-tissue origin have poor prognosis and moderate chemosensitivity. Trabectedin has shown activity in pretreated leiomyosarcoma. We did a single-group, multicentre, phase 2 trial (LMS-02) to assess the effect of first-line doxorubicin and trabectedin combination on disease control and survival. METHODS Adults (18 years to physiological age ≤70 years) with measurable metastatic or unresectable uterine leiomyosarcoma or soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma who had not received any previous chemotherapy were enrolled at 19 centres in France. Treatment consisted of 60 mg/m(2) intravenous doxorubicin followed by 1·1 mg/m(2) trabectedin in a 3 h intravenous infusion on day 1, both by the central venous route, and 6 mg subcutaneous pegfilgrastim on day 2, repeated every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. Surgery for residual disease was permitted. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving disease control, defined as complete or partial response or stable disease. Stratification was done by anatomical site and analyses were per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02131480. FINDINGS Between July 28, 2010, and May 10, 2013, 109 patients were enrolled and treated, of whom 108 were assessable for response: 47 in the uterine leiomyosarcoma group and 61 in the soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma group. 32 (68%) patients in the uterine leiomyosarcoma group and 45 (74%) in the soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma group received all six cycles of treatment. Of 47 patients with uterine leiomyosarcoma, 28 (59·6%, 95% CI 44·3-73·6) achieved a partial response and 13 (27·7%, 15·6-42·6) stable disease; 41 (87·2%, 74·3-95·2) patients achieved disease control. Of 61 patients with soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma, two (3·3%, 95% CI 0·4-11·7) achieved a complete response, 22 (36·1%, 25·0-50·8) had a partial response, and 32 (52·5%, 40·8-67·3) had stable disease; 56 (91·8%, 81·9-97·3) of patients achieved disease control. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-associated adverse events were neutropenia (84 [78%] of 108 patients), increased alanine aminotransferase concentration (42 [39%]), thrombocytopenia (40 [37%]), anaemia (29 [27%]), febrile neutropenia (26 [24%]), and fatigue (21 [19%]). INTERPRETATION Despite expected but manageable toxic effects, these results support the activity of doxorubicin plus trabectedin as first-line treatment for uterine leiomyosarcoma and soft-tissue leiomyosarcoma. This combination should be developed further in a phase 3 trial against the present standard of care. FUNDING Pharmamar and Amgen.

Use of PD-1 Targeting, Macrophage Infiltration, and IDO Pathway Activation in Sarcomas: A Phase 2 Clinical Trial

Importance There is a strong rationale for treating sarcomas with immunotherapy. Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) targeting in combination with metronomic chemotherapy in sarcomas. Design, Setting, and Participants This was an open-label, multicenter, phase 2 study of 4 cohorts of patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma (STS), including leiomyosarcoma (LMS), undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS), other sarcomas (others), and gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). All patients received 50 mg twice daily cyclophosphamide 1 week on and 1 week off and 200 mg of intravenous pembrolizumab every 3 weeks. Intervention or Exposure Pembrolizumab in combination with metronomic cyclophosphamide. Main Outcomes and Measures There was a dual primary end point, encompassing both the nonprogression and objective responses at 6 months per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) v1.1 for LMS, UPS, and others and 6-month nonprogression for GIST. An objective response rate of 20% and/or a 6-month nonprogression rate of 60% were determined as reasonable objectives for treatment with meaningful effect. Correlative studies of immune biomarkers were planned from patient tumor and plasma samples. Results Between June 2015 and July 2016, 57 patients were included (median [range] age, 59.5 [18.5-84.0] years; 24 women [42%]); 50 patients were assessable for the efficacy end point. Three patients experienced tumor shrinkage, resulting in a partial response in a single solitary fibrous tumor. The 6-month nonprogression rates were 0%, 0%, 14.3% (95% CI, 1.8%-42.8%) for LMS, UPS, and others, respectively, and 11.1% (95% CI, 2.8%-48.3%) for GIST. The most frequent adverse events were grade 1 or 2 fatigue, diarrhea, and anemia. The only patient who experienced partial response was the only one with strong programmed cell death 1 ligand 1–positive staining in immune cell. Strong infiltration by macrophage expressing the inhibitory enzyme indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) was observed in the majority of cases. Moreover, a significant increase in the kynurenine to tryptophan ratio was observed in patient plasma samples during the study treatment. Conclusions and Relevance We found that PD-1 inhibition has limited activity in selected STS and GIST. This may be explained by an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment resulting from macrophage infiltration and IDO1 pathway activation. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02406781

Pazopanib plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours resistant to imatinib and sunitinib (PAZOGIST): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) are the most common mesenchymal neoplasms of the gastrointestinal tract. Imatinib followed by sunitinib and regorafenib is the standard sequence of treatment for advanced disease. Pazopanib is effective in soft tissue sarcomas but has never been assessed in advanced GIST in a randomised trial. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pazopanib in patients with previously treated advanced GIST. METHODS In this randomised, open-label phase 2 study, we enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years) with advanced GIST resistant to imatinib and sunitinib from 12 comprehensive cancer centres or university hospitals in France and randomly assigned them 1:1 using an interactive web-based centralised platform to 800 mg oral pazopanib once daily in 4-week cycles plus best supportive care or best supportive care alone. Randomisation was stratified by the number of previous treatment regimens (2 vs ≥3); no-one was masked to treatment group allocation. Upon disease progression, patients in the best supportive care group were allowed to switch to pazopanib as compassionate treatment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, analysed by intention-to-treat. All randomised participants who received at least one dose of pazopanib were included in the safety analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01323400. FINDINGS Between April 12, 2011, and Dec 9, 2013, 81 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to pazopanib plus best supportive care (n=40) or best supportive care alone (n=41). The median follow-up was 26·4 months (IQR 22·0-37·8) in the pazopanib plus best supportive care group and 28·9 months (22·0-35·2) in the best supportive care group. 4-month investigator-assessed progression-free survival was 45·2% (95% CI 29·1-60·0) in the pazopanib plus best supportive care group versus 17·6% (7·8-30·8) in the best supportive care group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·59, 95% CI 0·37-0·96; p=0·029). Median progression-free survival was 3·4 months (95% CI 2·4-5·6) with pazopanib plus best supportive care and 2·3 months (2·1-3·3) with best supportive care alone (HR 0·59 [0·37-0·96], p=0·03). 36 (88%) of the patients originally assigned to the best supportive care group switched to pazopanib following investigator-assessed disease progression; these patients had a median progression-free survival from pazopanib initiation of 3·5 months (95% CI 2·2-5·2). 55 (72%) of the 76 pazopanib-treated patients had pazopanib-related grade 3 or worse adverse events, the most common of which was hypertension (15 [38%] in the pazopanib plus best supportive care group and 13 [36%] in the best supportive care group). 20 (26%) patients had pazopanib-related serious adverse events (14 [35%] in the pazopanib plus best supportive care group and six [17%] in the best supportive care group), including pulmonary embolism in eight (9%) patients (five [13%] in the pazopanib plus best supportive care group and three [7%] in the best supportive care group). Three pazopanib-related deaths occurred (two pulmonary embolisms [one in each group] and one hepatic cytolysis [in the best supportive care group]). Three adverse event-related but not pazopanib-related deaths occurred in the best supportive care group after switch to pazopanib; these deaths were from hyperammonaemic encephalopathy, pneumopathy, and respiratory failure. INTERPRETATION Pazopanib plus best supportive care improves progression-free survival compared with best supportive care alone in patients with advanced GIST resistant to imatinib and sunitinib, with a toxicity profile similar to that reported for other sarcomas. This trial provides reference outcome data for future studies of targeted inhibitors in the third-line setting for these patients. FUNDING GlaxoSmithKline, French National Cancer Institute, EuroSARC (FP7-278742), Centre Léon Bérard.

Doxorubicin plus evofosfamide versus doxorubicin alone in locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (TH CR-406/SARC021): An international, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Evofosfamide is a hypoxia-activated prodrug of bromo-isophosphoramide mustard. We aimed to assess the benefit of adding evofosfamide to doxorubicin as first-line therapy for advanced soft-tissue sarcomas. METHODS We did this international, open-label, randomised, phase 3, multicentre trial (TH CR-406/SARC021) at 81 academic or community investigational sites in 13 countries. Eligible patients were aged 15 years or older with a diagnosis of an advanced unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, of intermediate or high grade, for which no standard curative therapy was available, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive doxorubicin alone (75 mg/m2 via bolus injection administered over 5-20 min or continuous intravenous infusion for 6-96 h on day 1 of every 21-day cycle for up to six cycles) or doxorubicin (given via the same dose procedure) plus evofosfamide (300 mg/m2 intravenously for 30-60 min on days 1 and 8 of every 21-day cycle for up to six cycles). After six cycles of treatment, patients in the single-drug doxorubicin group were followed up expectantly whereas patients with stable or responsive disease in the combination group were allowed to continue with evofosfamide monotherapy until documented disease progression. A web-based central randomisation with block sizes of two and four was stratified by extent of disease, doxorubicin administration method, and previous systemic therapy. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in all patients who received any amount of study drug. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01440088. FINDINGS Between Sept 26, 2011, and Jan 22, 2014, 640 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (317 to doxorubicin plus evofosfamide and 323 to doxorubicin alone), all of whom were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The overall survival endpoint was not reached (hazard ratio 1·06, 95% CI 0·88-1·29; p=0·527), with a median overall survival of 18·4 months (95% CI 15·6-22·1) with doxorubicin plus evofosfamide versus 19·0 months (16·2-22·4) with doxorubicin alone. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in both groups were haematological, including anaemia (150 [48%] of 313 patients in the doxorubicin plus evofosfamide group vs 65 [21%] of 308 in the doxorubicin group), neutropenia (47 [15%] vs 92 [30%]), febrile neutropenia (57 [18%] vs 34 [11%]), leucopenia (22 [7%] vs 17 [6%]), decreased neutrophil count (31 [10%] vs 41 [13%]), and decreased white blood cell count (39 [13%] vs 33 [11%]). Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia was more common in the combination group (45 [14%]) than in the doxorubicin alone group (four [1%]), as was grade 3-4 stomatitis (26 [8%] vs seven [2%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 145 (46%) of 313 patients in the combination group and 99 (32%) of 308 in the doxorubicin alone group. Five (2%) patients died from treatment-related causes in the combination group (sepsis [n=2], septic shock [n=1], congestive cardiac failure [n=1], and unknown cause [n=1]) versus one (<1%) patient in the doxorubicin alone group (lactic acidosis [n=1]). INTERPRETATION The addition of evofosfamide to doxorubicin as first-line therapy did not improve overall survival compared with single-drug doxorubicin in patients with locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas and so this combination cannot be recommended in this setting. FUNDING Threshold Pharmaceuticals.

Tazemetostat, an EZH2 inhibitor, in relapsed or refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma and advanced solid tumours: a first-in-human, open-label, phase 1 study

BACKGROUND Activating enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2) mutations or aberrations of the switch/sucrose non-fermentable (SWI/SNF) complex (eg, mutations or deletions of the subunits INI1 or SMARCA4) can lead to aberrant histone methylation, oncogenic transformation, and a proliferative dependency on EZH2 activity. In this first-in-human study, we aimed to investigate the safety, clinical activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of tazemetostat, a first-in-class selective inhibitor of EZH2. METHODS We did an open-label, multicentre, dose-escalation, phase 1 study using a 3 + 3 design with planned cohort expansion at the two highest doses below the maximally tolerated dose. The study was done at two centres in France: Institut Gustave Roussy (Villejuif, Val de Marne) and Institut Bergonié (Bordeaux, Gironde). Eligible patients had relapsed or refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma or an advanced solid tumour and were older than 18 years, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate end-organ function. Tazemetostat was administered orally from 100 mg twice daily to 1600 mg twice daily in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was to establish the maximum tolerated dose or recommended phase 2 dose of tazemetostat, as determined by dose-limiting toxicities, laboratory values, and other safety or pharmacokinetic measures in cycle one according to local investigator assessment. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of tazemetostat; antitumour activity was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01897571. The phase 1 part of the study is complete, and phase 2 is ongoing. FINDINGS Between June 13, 2013, and Sept 21, 2016, 64 patients (21 with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and 43 with advanced solid tumours) received doses of tazemetostat. The most common treatment-related adverse events, regardless of attribution, were asthenia (21 [33%] of 64 treatment-related events), anaemia (nine [14%]), anorexia (four [6%]), muscle spasms (nine [14%]), nausea (13 [20%]), and vomiting (six [9%]), usually grade 1 or 2 in severity. A single dose-limiting toxicity of grade 4 thrombocytopenia was identified at the highest dose of 1600 mg twice daily. No treatment-related deaths occurred; seven (11%) patients had non-treatment-related deaths (one at 200 mg twice daily, four at 400 mg twice daily, and two at 1600 mg twice daily). The recommended phase 2 dose was determined to be 800 mg twice daily. Durable objective responses, including complete responses, were observed in eight (38%) of 21 patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma and two (5%) of 43 patients with solid tumours. INTERPRETATION Tazemetostat showed a favourable safety profile and antitumour activity in patients with refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma and advanced solid tumours, including epithelioid sarcoma. Further clinical investigation of tazemetostat monotherapy is ongoing in phase 2 studies in adults and a phase 1 study for children, which are currently enrolling patients who have B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma and INI1-negative or SMARCA4-negative tumours. FUNDING Epizyme and Eisai.

Prise en charge des sarcomes des tissus mous avancés : quelle chimiothérapie après échappement aux anthracyclines ?

Doxorubicin monotherapy is the standard first-line treatment in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcomas. Ifosfamide still remains the standard 2nd line treatment after doxorubicin-failure. However, recent data have demonstrated that histological subtypes differ in their sensitivity to cytotoxic drugs. Therefore, gemcitabine should be considered as the best option after doxorubicin failure in leiomyosarcoma patients. Trabectedine should be used preferentially in myxoid liposarcomas and leiomyosarcomas patients whereas paclitaxel should be considered as a first or second-line treatment of choice in angiosarcoma patients. Further studies are needed in order to identify predictive factors of clinical benefit in advanced soft-tissue sarcoma patients treated with cytotoxic agents in combination or not with targeted therapies.