High-Dose Chemotherapy and Blood Autologous Stem-Cell Rescue Compared With Standard Chemotherapy in Localized High-Risk Ewing Sarcoma: Results of Euro-E.W.I.N.G.99 and Ewing-2008
Status Publisher Language English Country United States Media print-electronic
Document type Journal Article
Grant support
15958
Cancer Research UK - United Kingdom
PubMed
30188789
PubMed Central
PMC6209090
DOI
10.1200/jco.2018.78.2516
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
Purpose For over 30 years, the place of consolidation high-dose chemotherapy in Ewing sarcoma (ES) has been controversial. A randomized study was conducted to determine whether consolidation high-dose chemotherapy improved survival in patients with localized ES at high risk for relapse. Methods Randomization between busulfan and melphalan (BuMel) or standard chemotherapy (vincristine, dactinomycin, and ifosfamide [VAI], seven courses) was offered to patients if they were younger than 50 years of age with poor histologic response (≥ 10% viable cells) after receiving vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide (six courses); or had a tumor volume at diagnosis ≥ 200 mL if unresected, or initially resected, or resected after radiotherapy. A 15% improvement in 3-year event-free survival (EFS) was sought (hazard ratio [HR], 0.60). Results Between 2000 and 2015, 240 patients classified as high risk (median age, 17.1 years) were randomly assigned to VAI (n = 118) or BuMel (n = 122). Seventy-eight percent entered the trial because of poor histologic response after chemotherapy alone. Median follow-up was 7.8 years. In an intent-to-treat analysis, the risk of event was significantly decreased by BuMel compared with VAI: HR, 0.64 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.95; P = .026); 3- and 8-year EFS were, respectively, 69.0% (95% CI, 60.2% to 76.6%) versus 56.7% (95% CI, 47.6% to 65.4%) and 60.7% (95% CI, 51.1% to 69.6%) versus 47.1% (95% CI, 37.7% to 56.8%). Overall survival (OS) also favored BuMel: HR, 0.63 (95% CI, 0.41 to 0.95; P = .028); 3- and 8-year OS were, respectively, 78.0% (95% CI, 69.6% to 84.5%) versus 72.2% (95% CI, 63.3% to 79.6%) and 64.5% (95% CI, 54.4% to 73.5%) versus 55.6% (95% CI, 45.8% to 65.1%). Results were consistent in the sensitivity analysis. Two patients died as a result of BuMel-related toxicity, one after standard chemotherapy. Significantly more BuMel patients experienced severe acute toxicities from this course of chemotherapy compared with multiple VAI courses. Conclusion BuMel improved EFS and OS when given after vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide induction in localized ES with predefined high-risk factors. For this group of patients, BuMel may be an important addition to the standard of care.
3072 PubMed
See more in PubMed
Le Deley M-C, Paulussen M, Lewis I, et al. : Cyclophosphamide compared with ifosfamide in consolidation treatment of standard-risk Ewing sarcoma: Results of the randomized noninferiority Euro-EWING99-R1 trial. J Clin Oncol 32:2440-2448, 2014 PubMed
Womer RB, West DC, Krailo MD, et al: Randomized controlled trial of interval-compressed chemotherapy for the treatment of localized Ewing sarcoma: A report from the Children’s Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 30:4148-4154, 2012 [Erratum: J Clin Oncol 33:814, 2015] PubMed PMC
Paulussen M, Craft AW, Lewis I, et al. : Results of the EICESS-92 Study: Two randomized trials of Ewing’s sarcoma treatment--Cyclophosphamide compared with ifosfamide in standard-risk patients and assessment of benefit of etoposide added to standard treatment in high-risk patients. J Clin Oncol 26:4385-4393, 2008 PubMed
Bacci G, Forni C, Longhi A, et al: Long-term outcome for patients with non-metastatic Ewing’s sarcoma treated with adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapies. 402 patients treated at Rizzoli between 1972 and 1992. Eur J Cancer40:73-83, 2004. PubMed
Cotterill SJ, Ahrens S, Paulussen M, et al. : Prognostic factors in Ewing’s tumor of bone: Analysis of 975 patients from the European Intergroup Cooperative Ewing’s Sarcoma Study Group. J Clin Oncol 18:3108-3114, 2000 PubMed
Göbel V, Jürgens H, Etspüler G, et al. : Prognostic significance of tumor volume in localized Ewing’s sarcoma of bone in children and adolescents. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 113:187-191, 1987 PubMed
Marina N, Granowetter L, Grier HE, et al: Age, tumor characteristics, and treatment regimen as event predictors in Ewing: A Children’s Oncology Group report. Sarcoma 2015:927123, 2015. PubMed PMC
Oberlin O, Deley MC, Bui BN, et al. : Prognostic factors in localized Ewing’s tumours and peripheral neuroectodermal tumours: The third study of the French Society of Paediatric Oncology (EW88 study). Br J Cancer 85:1646-1654, 2001 PubMed PMC
Paulussen M, Ahrens S, Dunst J, et al. : Localized Ewing tumor of bone: Final results of the cooperative Ewing’s Sarcoma Study CESS 86. J Clin Oncol 19:1818-1829, 2001 PubMed
Bacci G, Ferrari S, Bertoni F, et al. : Prognostic factors in nonmetastatic Ewing’s sarcoma of bone treated with adjuvant chemotherapy: Analysis of 359 patients at the Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli. J Clin Oncol 18:4-11, 2000 PubMed
Le Deley MC, Ahrens S, Paulussen M, et al. : Histological response is the main prognostic factor of survival in localised Ewing tumor treated with chemotherapy alone before surgery. International Society of Pediatric Oncology (SIOP). Brisbane. Pediatr Blood Cancer 85:1646-1654, 2001
Cornbleet MA, Corringham RE, Prentice HG, et al. : Treatment of Ewing’s sarcoma with high-dose melphalan and autologous bone marrow transplantation. Cancer Treat Rep 65:241-244, 1981 PubMed
Hartmann O, Benhamou E, Beaujean F, et al. : High-dose busulfan and cyclophosphamide with autologous bone marrow transplantation support in advanced malignancies in children: A phase II study. J Clin Oncol 4:1804-1810, 1986 PubMed
Hartmann O, Oberlin O, Beaujean F, et al: Role of high-dose chemotherapy followed by bone marrow autograft in the treatment of metastatic Ewing’s sarcoma in children [in French]. Bull Cancer 77:181-187, 1990. PubMed
Burdach S, Jürgens H, Peters C, et al. : Myeloablative radiochemotherapy and hematopoietic stem-cell rescue in poor-prognosis Ewing’s sarcoma. J Clin Oncol 11:1482-1488, 1993 PubMed
Ladenstein R, Lasset C, Pinkerton R, et al: Impact of megatherapy in children with high-risk Ewing’s tumours in complete remission: A report from the EBMT Solid Tumour Registry. Bone Marrow Transplant 15:697-705, 1995 [Erratum: Bone Marrow Transplant 15:697-705, 1995] PubMed
Atra A, Whelan JS, Calvagna V, et al. : High-dose busulphan/melphalan with autologous stem cell rescue in Ewing’s sarcoma. Bone Marrow Transplant 20:843-846, 1997 PubMed
Ladenstein R, Hartmann O, Pinkerton R, et al: A multivariate and matched pair analysis on high-risk Ewing tumor (ET) patients treated by megatherapy (MGT) and stem cell reinfusion (SCR) in Europe. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 18:555, 1999 (abstr)
Ferrari S, Sundby Hall K, Luksch R, et al. : Nonmetastatic Ewing family tumors: High-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue in poor responder patients. Results of the Italian Sarcoma Group/Scandinavian Sarcoma Group III protocol. Ann Oncol 22:1221-1227, 2011 PubMed
Gaspar N, Rey A, Bérard PM, et al: Risk adapted chemotherapy for localised Ewing’s sarcoma of bone: The French EW93 study. Eur J Cancer 48:1376-1385, 2012. PubMed
Juergens C, Weston C, Lewis I, et al. : Safety assessment of intensive induction with vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide (VIDE) in the treatment of Ewing tumors in the EURO-E.W.I.N.G. 99 clinical trial. Pediatr Blood Cancer 47:22-29, 2006 PubMed
Ladenstein R, Pötschger U, Le Deley MC, et al. : Primary disseminated multifocal Ewing sarcoma: Results of the Euro-EWING 99 trial. J Clin Oncol 28:3284-3291, 2010 PubMed
Toxicity of high-dose chemotherapy (busulfan-melphalan) followed by radiation therapy (RT) in Ewing’s axial tumours: Results of the French study. in International Society of Paediatric Oncology (SIOP). Pediatr Blood Cancer 49:555, 2007 (abstr)
Strauss SJ, McTiernan A, Driver D, et al. : Single center experience of a new intensive induction therapy for Ewing’s family of tumors: Feasibility, toxicity, and stem cell mobilization properties. J Clin Oncol 21:2974-2981, 2003 PubMed
Bearman SI, Anderson GL, Mori M, et al. : Venoocclusive disease of the liver: Development of a model for predicting fatal outcome after marrow transplantation. J Clin Oncol 11:1729-1736, 1993 PubMed
RTOG Foundation: RTOG/EORTC Late Radiation Morbidity Scoring Schema. https://www.rtog.org/ResearchAssociates/AdverseEventReporting/RTOGEORTCLateRadiationMorbidityScoringSchema.aspx.
Freedman LS: Tables of the number of patients required in clinical trials using the logrank test. Stat Med 1:121-129, 1982 PubMed
Lan KG, DeMets DL: Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials. Biometrika 70:659-663, 1983
O’Brien PC, Fleming TR: A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics 35:549-556, 1979 PubMed
McTiernan AM, Cassoni AM, Driver D, et al: Improving outcomes after relapse in Ewing’s sarcoma: Analysis of 114 patients from a single institution. Sarcoma 2006:83548, 2006. PubMed PMC
Wassmer G: Planning and analyzing adaptive group sequential survival trials. Biom J 48:714-729, 2006 PubMed
Kalbfleisch J, Prentice R: The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data (ed 2). New York, NY, Wiley, 2002.
Fine JP, Gray R: A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc 94:496-509, 1999
Cherny NI, Sullivan R, Dafni U, et al. : A standardised, generic, validated approach to stratify the magnitude of clinical benefit that can be anticipated from anti-cancer therapies: The European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Ann Oncol 26:1547-1573, 2015 PubMed
Gaspar N, Hawkins DS, Dirksen U, et al. : Ewing sarcoma: Current management and future approaches through collaboration. J Clin Oncol 33:3036-3046, 2015 PubMed
Luksch R, Tienghi A, Hall KS, et al. : Primary metastatic Ewing’s family tumors: Results of the Italian Sarcoma Group and Scandinavian Sarcoma Group ISG/SSG IV Study including myeloablative chemotherapy and total-lung irradiation. Ann Oncol 23:2970-2976, 2012 PubMed
Whelan JS, Burcombe RJ, Janinis J, et al. : A systematic review of the role of pulmonary irradiation in the management of primary bone tumours. Ann Oncol 13:23-30, 2002 PubMed
Razek A, Perez CA, Tefft M, et al. : Intergroup Ewing’s Sarcoma Study: Local control related to radiation dose, volume, and site of primary lesion in Ewing’s sarcoma. Cancer 46:516-521, 1980 PubMed
Barker LM, Pendergrass TW, Sanders JE, et al. : Survival after recurrence of Ewing’s sarcoma family of tumors. J Clin Oncol 23:4354-4362, 2005 PubMed
Rasper M, Jabar S, Ranft A, et al. : The value of high-dose chemotherapy in patients with first relapsed Ewing sarcoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer 61:1382-1386, 2014 PubMed
Lin DY, Wei L-J, Ying Z: Checking the Cox model with cumulative sums of martingale-based residuals. Biometrika 80:557-572, 1993
Factors Influencing the Outcome of Patients with Primary Ewing Sarcoma of the Sacrum
Effect of Radiotherapy Dose on Outcome in Nonmetastatic Ewing Sarcoma
Analysis of rare driving events in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia
