Search

Ingrid M E Desar,1 Anastasia Constantinidou,2 Suzanne E J Kaal,1 Robin L Jones,2 Winette T A van der Graaf,1,2 1Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; 2The Institute of Cancer Research and the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK Abstract: Soft-tissue sarcomas (STS) are a heterogeneous group of rare solid tumors of mesenchymal origin. This paper reviews the current status of systemic treatment in advanced and metastatic soft tissue sarcomas, with an emphasis on trabectedin. Trabectedin is a unique type of chemotherapeutic agent with multiple potential mechanisms of action. We discuss the putative mechanisms, as well as the toxicity and administration schedules of trabectedin, followed by its efficacy in first-line systemic therapy and beyond first-line systemic therapy. Keywords: soft-tissue sarcoma, trabectedin, chemotherapy

Background. Sunitinib induces partial responses in 47% of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, the achievement of complete responses remains scarce and all patients will eventually develop progressive disease. Recombinant interleukin-21 (rIL-21) is a novel cytokine, which is believed to deliver sustained cellular anti-tumor response and the combination of both agents may work synergistically. Material and method. From July 2007 to July 2008 in this phase I trial nine therapy-naive patients with metastatic RCC in five European centers were enrolled. Patients with either good or intermediate risk according to Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) were eligible without restrictions to histology subtype nor measurable disease. Patients were treated with increasing doses of rIL-21 administered subcutaneously (s.c.) in combination with sunitinib 50 mg once daily (OD) orally at the '4 weeks on/2 weeks off' schedule. Dose-escalation was applied by a conventional '3+3 design'. Planned dose levels (DL) for rIL-21 were 3, 10, 30 and 100 μg/kg s.c. The primary endpoint was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose (RD). Secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics of sunitinib and rIL-21, and the induction of rIL-21 antibodies. Results. At 10 μg/kg two dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) occurred in four patients, consisting of grade 4 neutropenia and grade 3 thrombocytopenia. The MTD was 3 μg/kg rIL-21 combined with sunitinib 50 mg OD at the '4 weeks on/2 weeks off' schedule. Frequent occurring adverse events were injection site reaction, stomatitis, fatigue and dysgeusia. Conclusions. The combination of sunitinib 50 mg at the '4 weeks on/2 weeks off' schedule and 10 μg/kg IL-21 was not tolerated due to hematological DLTs. The dose level of 3 μg/kg rIL-21 was considered too low to be therapeutically relevant for further evaluation and therefore the study was discontinued. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with gastro-intestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) undergoing tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy are monitored with regular computed tomography (CT) scans, exposing patients to cumulative radiation. This exploratory study aimed to evaluate circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing to monitor treatment response and compare changes in ctDNA levels with RECIST 1.1 and total tumor volume measurements. Between 2014 and 2021, six patients with KIT proto-oncogene, receptor tyrosine kinase (KIT) exon-11-mutated GIST from whom long-term plasma samples were collected prospectively were included in the study. ctDNA levels of relevant plasma samples were determined using the KIT exon 11 digital droplet PCR drop-off assay. Tumor volume measurements were performed using a semi-automated approach. In total, 94 of 130 clinically relevant ctDNA samples were analyzed. Upon successful treatment response, ctDNA became undetectable in all patients. At progressive disease, ctDNA was detectable in five out of six patients. Higher levels of ctDNA correlated with larger tumor volumes. Undetectable ctDNA at the time of progressive disease on imaging was consistent with lower tumor volumes compared to those with detectable ctDNA. In summary, ctDNA levels seem to correlate with total tumor volume at the time of progressive disease. Our exploratory study shows promise for including ctDNA testing in treatment follow-up., (© 2024 The Authors. Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies.)

Background: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) - performing dose adjustments based on measured drug levels and established pharmacokinetic (PK) targets - could optimise treatment with drugs that show large interpatient variability in exposure. We evaluated the feasibility of TDM for multiple oral targeted therapies. Here we report on drugs for which routine TDM is not feasible., Methods: We evaluated drug cohorts from the Dutch Pharmacology Oncology Group - TDM study. Based on PK levels taken at pre-specified time points, PK-guided interventions were performed. Feasibility of TDM was evaluated, and based on the success and practicability of TDM, cohorts could be closed., Results: For 10 out of 24 cohorts TDM was not feasible and inclusion was closed. A high incidence of adverse events resulted in closing the cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib cohort. The enzalutamide and erlotinib cohorts were closed because almost all PK levels were above target. Other, non-pharmacological reasons led to closing the palbociclib, olaparib and tamoxifen cohort., Conclusions: Although TDM could help personalising treatment for many drugs, the above-mentioned reasons can influence its feasibility, usefulness and clinical applicability. Therefore, routine TDM is not advised for cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, enzalutamide, erlotinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib. Nonetheless, TDM remains valuable for individual clinical decisions., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aims: Sunitinib exhibits considerable interindividual variability in exposure. While the target total plasma concentration of sunitinib and its active metabolite is 50-87.5 ng/mL for the intermittent dosing schedule, ~10-21% of patients experience higher exposures (>87.5 ng/mL), correlated with an increased risk for toxicity. Previous research identified single nucleotide variants (SNVs) in genes from the sunitinib pharmacokinetic pathway to be associated with efficacy and toxicity. However, significant interindividual variability in exposure remains unexplained. Our aim was to identify genetic variants associated with supratherapeutic exposure of sunitinib., Methods: This was a genome-wide association study. Cases were identified during routine therapeutic drug monitoring and consisted of patients with dose-normalized sunitinib plasma concentrations >87.5 ng/mL (intermittent dosing) or >75 ng/mL (continuous dosing). Controls were sampled from the historical cohort EuroTARGET who tolerated the standard dose of 50 mg in an intermittent schedule. SNVs were tested for an association with sunitinib exposure. A P-value ≤5 × 10 -8 was considered significant and a P-value between 5 × 10 -8 and 5 × 10 -6 was considered suggestive., Results: Sixty-nine cases and 345 controls were included for association analysis. One SNV (rs6923761), located on the gene glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor, was significantly associated with increased sunitinib exposure (P = 7.86 × 10 -19 ). Twelve SNVs were suggestive for an association with sunitinib exposure (P ≤ 5 × 10 -6 )., Conclusions: While rs6923671 is associated with high sunitinib exposure, the underlying mechanism is not yet clarified and warrants further investigation. We could not confirm the earlier found associations between SNVs in candidate genes involved in the pharmacokinetic pathway of sunitinib and its efficacy and toxicity., (© 2024 The Author(s). British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.)

Introduction and Objective: Pazopanib is registered for metastatic renal cell carcinoma and soft-tissue sarcoma (STS). Its variable pharmacokinetic (PK) characteristics and narrow therapeutic range provide a strong rationale for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Prior studies have defined target levels of drug exposure (≥ 20.5 mg/L) linked to prolonged progression-free survival (PFS), but the added value of using TDM remains unclear. This study investigates the effect of TDM of pazopanib in patients with STS on survival outcomes and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and evaluates the feasibility of TDM-guided dosing., Methods: A TDM-guided cohort was compared to a non-TDM-guided cohort for PFS, overall survival (OS) and DLTs. PK samples were available from all patients, though not acted upon in the non-TDM-guided cohort. We evaluated the feasibility of TDM by comparing the proportion of underdosed patients in our TDM cohort with data from previous publications., Results: A total of 122 STS patients were included in the TDM-guided cohort (n = 95) and non-TDM-guided cohort (n = 27). The average exposure in the overall population was 30.5 mg/L and was similar in both groups. Median PFS and OS did not differ between the TDM-guided cohort and non-TDM-guided cohort (respectively 5.5 vs 4.4 months, p = 0.3, and 12.6 vs 10.1 months, p = 0.8). Slightly more patients in the non-TDM-guided cohort experienced DLTs (54%) compared to the TDM-guided cohort (44%). The proportion of underdosed patients (13.3%) was halved compared to historical data (26.7%)., Conclusion: TDM reduced the proportion of patients with subtherapeutic exposure levels by ~ 50%. Nonetheless, the added value of TDM for achieving target trough levels of ≥ 20.5 mg/L for pazopanib on survival outcomes could not be confirmed in STS patients., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Sunitinib is an oral anticancer drug approved for the treatment of among others gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Previous analyses demonstrated an exposure-response relationship at the standard dose, and minimum target levels of drug exposure have been defined above which better treatment outcomes are observed. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) could be used as a tool to optimize the individual dose, aiming at sunitinib trough concentrations ≥37.5 ng/ml for continuous dosing. Nonetheless, data on the added value of TDM-guided dosing on clinical endpoints are currently lacking. Therefore, we evaluate the effect of TDM in patients with advanced and metastatic GIST treated with sunitinib in terms of efficacy and toxicity., Patients and Methods: A TDM-guided cohort was compared to a non-TDM-guided cohort in terms of median progression-free survival (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS). Also, mPFS between patients with and without dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) was compared. Patients in the prospective cohort were included in two studies on TDM-guided dosing (the DPOG-TDM study and TUNE study). The retrospective cohort consisted of patients from the Dutch GIST Registry who did not receive TDM-guided dosing., Results: In total, 51 and 106 patients were included in the TDM-guided cohort and non-TDM-guided cohort, respectively. No statistical difference in mPFS was observed between these two cohorts (39.4 versus 46.9 weeks, respectively; P = 0.52). Patients who experienced sunitinib-induced DLTs had longer mPFS compared to those who did not (51.9 versus 28.9 weeks, respectively; P = 0.002)., Conclusions: Our results do not support the routine use of TDM-guided dose optimization of sunitinib in patients with advanced/metastatic GIST to improve survival., Competing Interests: Disclosure RHJM reports research funding paid to the institute from Astellas, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Cristal Therapeutics, Novartis, Pamgene, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and Servier, all outside the submitted work. WTAvdG reports institutional research fees paid to the institute from Lilly and advisory compensation from Springworks, PTC Therapeutics and Agenus, all outside the submitted work. NS reports research grants paid to the institute from Abbvie, Actuate Therapeutics, Amgen, Array, Ascendis Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, BridgeBio, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cantargia, CellCentric, Cogent Biosciences, Cresecendo Biologics, Cytovation, Deciphera, Dragonfly, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, IDRx, Immunocore, Incyte, InteRNA, Janssen, Kinnate Biopharma, Kling Biotherapeutics, Luszana, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merus, Molecular Partners, Navire Pharma, Novartis, Numab Therapeutics, Pfizer, Relay Pharmaceuticals, Revolution Medicin, Roche, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Taiho and Takeda, all outside the submitted work. NS provided consultation or attended advisory boards for Boehringer Ingelheim, Cogent Biosciences, Ellipses Pharma, Incyte and Luszana. NPvE reports research funding paid to the institute from Astellas and Ipsen, all outside the submitted work. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This study aims to (1) explore the prevalence of patient-reported financial difficulties among GIST patients, differentiating between those currently undergoing tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment and those who are not; (2) investigate associations between financial difficulties and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, work, cancer-related concerns, anxiety and depression and (3) study the impact of financial difficulties on health-related quality of life., Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among Dutch GIST patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2018, who were invited to complete a one-time survey between September 2020 and June 2021. Patients completed nine items of the EORTC item bank regarding financial difficulties, seven work-related questions, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Cancer Worry Scale and EORTC QLQ-C30., Results: In total, 328 GIST patients participated (response rate 63.0%), of which 110 (33.8%) were on TKI treatment. Patients currently treated with TKIs reported significantly more financial difficulties compared to patients not on TKIs (17.3% vs 8.7%, p = 0.03). The odds of experiencing financial difficulties was 18.9 (95% CI 1.7-214.7, p = 0.02) times higher in patients who were less able to work due to their GIST diagnosis. Patients who experienced financial difficulties had significantly lower global quality of life and functioning, and more frequently reported psychological symptoms as compared to patients who did not report financial difficulties., Conclusion: Even in a country where the costs of TKIs and follow-up care are covered by health insurance, financial difficulties can be present in GIST patients, especially in patients on TKI treatment, and may negatively influence the quality of life., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Pazopanib is known to cause liver toxicity. A relationship between pazopanib exposure and alanine transaminase elevations has been described in clinical trials. This study investigated the relation between pazopanib exposure and liver toxicity in real-world patients and evaluated the management of pazopanib-induced liver toxicity in routine care., Methods: A retrospective observational cohort study was performed in patients treated with pazopanib in whom pazopanib exposure was measured. The percentage of patients with and without liver toxicity during treatment with pazopanib was calculated as well as the average pazopanib exposure in both groups. Furthermore, the management of patients with liver toxicity was evaluated., Results: Liver toxicity was observed in 25 out of the 133 patients included (19%). Pazopanib exposure was comparable in patients with or without liver toxicity (27.7 mg/L versus 28.1 mg/L). Seven patients permanently discontinued pazopanib after the occurrence of liver toxicity. Of the remaining 18 patients, continuation or restart of pazopanib after liver toxicity was successful in 16 patients and half of these patients were able to safely continue pazopanib at the same dose as prior to liver toxicity for the remaining duration of treatment., Conclusion: Our study did not demonstrate a clear relationship between pazopanib exposure and the occurrence of pazopanib-induced liver toxicity. Half of the patients were able to safely continue or restart pazopanib treatment after liver toxicity and received the same dose as prior to drug withdrawal. Successful interventions to address pazopanib-induced toxicity in the clinic led to an algorithm for the management of pazopanib-induced liver toxicity., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: This study compares the characteristics, referral and treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) patients treated in reference and non-reference centers in the Netherlands., Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study on patients diagnosed between 2016 and 2019, utilises data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch Nationwide Pathology Database. Patients were categorized into two groups: patients diagnosed in or referred to reference centers and patients diagnosed in non-reference centers without referral., Results: This study included 1,550 GIST patients with a median age of 67.0 in reference and 68.0 years in non-reference centers. Eighty-seven per cent of patients were diagnosed in non-reference centers, of which 36.5% (493/1,352) were referred to a reference center. Referral rates were higher for high-risk (62.2% [74/119]) and metastatic patients (67.2% [90/134]). Mutation analysis was performed in 96.9% and 87.6% of these cases in reference and in non-reference centers (p < 0.01), respectively. Systemic therapy was given in reference centers versus non-reference in 89.5% versus 82.0% (p < 0.01) of high-risk and in 94.1% versus 65.9% (p < 0.01) of metastatic patients, respectively. The proportion of positive resection margins and tumor rupture did not differ between reference and non-reference centers. Median OS was not reached., Conclusion: A substantial amount of metastatic GIST patients in non-reference centers did not receive systemic treatment. This might be due to valid reasons. However, optimisation of the referral strategy of GIST patients in the Netherlands could benefit patients. Further research is needed to explore reasons for not starting systemic treatment in metastatic GIST patients.

Background: While the effectiveness of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) seems similar in older patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) compared with younger patients, toxicities in older patients treated with TKIs more often lead to discontinuation of treatment., Objective: To better understand the age-related pharmacology and pharmacodynamic differences in patients with GIST treated with TKIs, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate TKI dosing patterns in older patients with GIST, while the secondary aims were to evaluate differences in imatinib trough plasma concentrations between age groups and to compare the overall survival (OS) in patients with and without dose reductions in all treatment lines in a palliative setting., Methods: Patients (18 years of age or older) with histologically proven GIST diagnosed between January 2009 and June 2021 and treated with one or more lines of TKIs were selected from the Dutch GIST Registry (DGR) database. Age groups were divided into younger patients (age <70 years) and older patients (age ≥70 years). All imatinib trough plasma concentrations of blood withdrawals taken from initiation of imatinib until a maximum of 1 year of treatment with imatinib were collected. Reasons for first adjustment of treatment were classified as adverse event, dose modification, progressive disease and other reasons. The next treatment steps after first adjustment of treatment were defined as dose escalation, dose reduction, dose interruption, or end of treatment. The association of dose reduction and OS was analyzed using the landmark approach., Results: Overall, 871 patients were included in this study, including 577 younger patients and 294 older patients. Older patients more often had an adverse event as the reason for first adjustment of treatment with both imatinib (45.6%; p < 0.001) and sunitinib (58.6%; p = 0.224) compared with younger patients (19.5% and 42.7%, respectively). Adjustment of imatinib and sunitinib after starting on a standard dose because of an adverse event most often resulted in dose reduction in both age groups. Median trough plasma concentrations of all samples taken within the first year after initiation of imatinib were higher in older patients (1228 ng/mL, interquartile range [IQR] 959-1687) compared with younger patients (1035 ng/mL [IQR 773-1377]; p < 0.001). No significant differences were seen between OS in patients with or without dose reduction in all treatment lines (imatinib: p = 0.270; sunitinib: p = 0.547; and regorafenib: p = 0.784)., Conclusion: Older patients showed higher imatinib trough plasma concentrations compared with younger patients and also had earlier and more often adverse events as the reason for first adjustment of treatment with imatinib followed by dose reduction. However, in a landmark analysis, patients with imatinib dose reductions had no poorer outcomes compared with patients not requiring a dose reduction., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Background: This study aims to (1) investigate the prevalence of anxiety, depression and severe fear of cancer recurrence or progression in gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) patients treated in a curative or palliative setting, (2) compare their prevalence with a norm population, (3) identify factors associated with anxiety, depression and severe fear, and (4) study the impact of these psychological symptoms on health-related quality of life (HRQoL)., Methods: In a cross-sectional study, GIST patients completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Cancer Worry Scale, and EORTC QLQ-C30., Results: Of the 328 patients, 15% reported anxiety, 13% depression, and 43% had severe fear. Anxiety and depression levels were comparable between the norm population and patients in the curative setting, but significantly higher for patients in the palliative setting. Having other psychological symptoms was associated with anxiety, while current TKI treatment and anxiety were associated with depression. Severe fear was associated with age, female sex, palliative treatment setting, anxiety, and GIST-related concerns., Conclusion: GIST patients treated in a palliative setting are more prone to experience psychological symptoms, which can significantly impair their HRQoL. These symptoms deserve more attention in clinical practice, in which regular screening can be helpful, and appropriate interventions should be offered., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Aims: With the rising number of oral targeted oncolytics and growing awareness of the benefits of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) within the field of oncology, it is expected that the requests for quantifying concentrations of these drugs will increase. It is important to (cross-)validate available assays and ensure its quality, as results may lead to altered dosing recommendations. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the performance of laboratories measuring concentrations of targeted oral oncolytics in a one-time international quality control (QC) programme., Methods: Participating laboratories received a set of plasma samples containing low, medium and high concentrations of imatinib, sunitinib, desethylsunitinib, pazopanib, cabozantinib, olaparib, enzalutamide, desmethylenzalutamide and abiraterone, with the request to report their results back within five weeks after shipment. Accuracy was defined acceptable if measurements where within 85%-115% from the weighed-in reference concentrations. Besides descriptive statistics, an exploratory ANOVA was performed., Results: Seventeen laboratories from six countries reported 243 results. Overall, 80.7% of all measurements were within the predefined range of acceptable accuracy. Laboratories performed best in quantifying imatinib and poorest in quantifying desethylsunitinib (median absolute inaccuracy respectively 4.0% (interquartile range (IQR) 1.8%-6.5%) and 15.5% (IQR 8.8%-34.9%)). The poorest performance of desethylsunitinib might be caused by using the stable-isotope-labelled sunitinib instead of desethylsunitinib as an internal standard, or due to the light-induced cis(Z)/trans(E) isomerization of (desethyl)sunitinib. Overall, drug substance and performing laboratory seemed to influence the absolute inaccuracy (F = 16.4; p < 0.001 and F = 35.5; p < 0.001, respectively)., Conclusion: Considering this is the first evaluation of an international QC programme for oral targeted oncolytics, an impressive high percentage of measurements were within the predefined range of accuracy. Cross-validation of assays that are used for dose optimization of oncolytics will secure the performance and will protect patients from incorrect advices., (© 2023 The Authors. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.)

All patients treated with anticancer agents should receive the most effective anti-emetic regimen. Anti-emetic guidelines provide recommendations but do not take into account possible drug-drug interactions between anti-emetics and anticancer drugs. This study determines the clinical relevance of the potential drug-drug interaction of the neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, aprepitant, on the pharmacokinetics of etoposide. Aprepitant is a moderate CYP3A4 inhibitor and may increase the systemic exposure of etoposide which is partly metabolized by cytochrome P450 enzyme 3A4 (CYP3A4). In this prospective observational study, the pharmacokinetics of etoposide with and without concomitant use of aprepitant was determined in 12 patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for testicular cancer. The geometric mean (95% confidence interval (CI)) area under the plasma concentration-time curve 0-24 hour (AUC 0-24h ) of etoposide with aprepitant was 86.2 (79.7-93.2) mg/L*hour vs. 83.7 (75.8-92.4) mg/L*hour without aprepitant. Geometric mean ratios (90% CIs) of AUC 0-24h and maximum plasma concentration (C max ) for etoposide with and without aprepitant were 1.03 (0.96-1.10) and 0.96 (0.89-1.03), respectively. This study confirms the absence of a clinically relevant interaction between etoposide and aprepitant. Both drugs can be safely combined without affecting etoposide exposure., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Importance: New strategies targeting waste are required to improve financial and ecologic sustainability of expensive therapies, such as oral anticancer drugs, that frequently remain unused by patients. Redispensing unused oral anticancer drugs seems to be a promising strategy when drug quality is guaranteed., Objectives: To determine the waste reduction and net cost savings attained by redispensing oral anticancer drugs that go unused by patients compared with the standard practice of disposal., Design, Settings, and Participants: The ROAD study was a prospective single-group intervention conducted in the outpatient pharmacies of 4 hospitals in the Netherlands from February 1, 2021, to February 1, 2023, with 12-month follow-up of each patient. Patients with cancer and who had a prescription for an oral anticancer drug that could be stored at room temperature were included. Of 2426 eligible patients, 602 did not consent and 601 did not respond. Data analyses were performed from August 25, 2022, to April 19, 2023., Intervention: Participants received oral anticancer drugs for use at home in special packaging (ie, sealed packaging with time-temperature indicator), to be returned to the pharmacy should these remain unused. The pharmacy ensured quality of returned drugs based on authenticity, appearance, remaining shelf life and adequate storage temperature. Drugs fulfilling quality requirements were redispensed to other patients., Main Outcome and Measure: Total waste reduction and mean net annual cost savings per patient compared with the standard practice of disposal. Optimization of cost savings was explored by introducing variations in the quality assurance procedure and patient population. All analyses used the average exchange rate for 2021 €1 = US $1.18., Results: Of 1223 patients with cancer who consented, 1071 participated (median [IQR] age, 70 [62-75] years; 622 [58.1%] were male). In all, 171 patients (16.0%; 95% CI, 13.8%-18.3%) returned 335 unused oral anticancer drug packages. Of the returned drugs, 228 packages were redispensed, which reduced waste by 68.1% (95% CI, 67.7%-68.5%) compared with the standard practice (disposal). Redispensing unused oral anticancer drugs comprised 2.4% (95% CI, 2.2%-2.5%) of total drug costs, providing mean net annual cost savings of US $680 (95% CI, $524-$837) up to $1591 (95% CI, $1226-$2002) per participant., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this multicenter intervention study indicate that redispensing unused oral anticancer drugs is associated with waste reduction and cost savings, which in turn may improve the affordability and sustainability of cancer treatment., Trial Registration: World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Identifier: NL9208.

Background: There are two main coping styles regarding information seeking under medical threat; monitoring (information-seeking) and blunting (information-avoiding). The aim of this study is to (1) determine factors associated with a monitoring or blunting coping style in gastro-intestinal stromal tumour (GIST) patients and (2) investigate its association with psychological distress, cancer-related concerns, health-related quality of life and satisfaction with healthcare., Methods: In a cross-sectional study, Dutch GIST patients completed the shortened version of the Threatening Medical Situations Inventory to determine their coping style, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Cancer Worry Scale, EORTC QLQ-C30 and part of the EORTC QLQ-INFO25., Results: A total of 307 patients were classified as blunters ( n  = 175, 57%) or monitors ( n  = 132, 43%). Coping style was not associated with tumour or treatment variables, but being a female (OR 2.5; 95%CI 1.5-4.1; p = <.001) and higher educated (OR 5.5; 95%CI 2.5-11.9, p = <.001) were associated with higher odds of being a monitor. Monitors scored significantly lower on emotional functioning ( mean  = 86.8 vs mean  = 90.9, p =.044), which is considered a trivial difference, more often experienced severe fear of cancer recurrence or progression (53.0% vs 37.7%, p =.007), and had more concerns about dying from GIST in the future (60.6% vs 47.4%, p =.025). Compared to blunters, monitors were less satisfied with the received healthcare and information, and would have liked to receive more information., Conclusion: GIST patients with a monitoring coping style experience a higher emotional burden. Additionally, monitors exhibit a greater need for information. Although this need for information could potentially result in fears and concerns, recognising it may also create an opening for tailored communication and information.

Background: Personalized dosing based on measurement of individual drug levels and adjusting the dose accordingly can improve efficacy and decrease unnecessary toxicity of oncological treatment. For imatinib, sunitinib, and pazopanib, this therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)-guided dosing is, however, not routinely used, despite accumulating evidence favoring individualized dosing. Therefore, we aimed to identify and quantify (potential) barriers and facilitators in TDM-guided dosing for imatinib, sunitinib, and pazopanib., Methods: We performed a mixed methods study among all stakeholders involved: patients, healthcare professionals (HCPs), pharmaceutical companies, and health insurance companies. During the first qualitative part of this study, we performed semi-structured individual interviews and one focus group interview to identify all (potential) barriers and facilitators, and during the second quantitative part of this study, we used a web-based survey to quantify these findings. The interviews addressed the six domains of the implementation of change model of Grol and Wensing: (1) the innovation itself; (2) the HCP; (3) the patient; (4) social context; (5) organizational context; and (6) finances, law, and governance., Results: In the qualitative study, we interviewed 20 patients, 18 HCPs and 10 representatives of pharmaceutical and health insurance companies and identified 72 barriers and 90 facilitators. In the quantitative study, the survey was responded by 66 HCPs and 58 patients. Important barriers were on the domain of the HCP, such as a lack of experience with TDM (36.4%), on the domain of the patient, such as lack of awareness of TDM (39.7%), and the processing time for measurement and interpretation of the TDM result (40.9%) (organizational domain). Important facilitators were education of HCPs (95.5%), education of patients (87.9%) and facilitating an overview of when and where TDM measurements are being performed (86.4%)., Conclusion: We identified and quantified important barriers and facilitators for the implementation of TDM-guided dosing for imatinib, sunitinib, and pazopanib. Based on our results, the implementation strategy should mainly focus on educating both HCPs and patients and on the organizational aspect of TDM., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The added value of local treatment in selected metastatic GIST patients is unclear. This study aims to provide insight into the usefulness of local treatment in metastatic GIST by use of a survey study and retrospective analyses in a clinical database., Methods: A survey study was conducted among clinical specialists to select most relevant characteristics of metastatic GIST patients considered for local treatment, defined as elective surgery or ablation. Patients were selected from the Dutch GIST Registry. A multivariate Cox-regression model for overall survival since time of diagnosis of metastatic disease was estimated with local treatment as a time-dependent variable. An additional model was estimated to assess prognostic factors since local treatment., Results: The survey's response rate was 14/16. Performance status, response to TKIs, location of active disease, number of lesions, mutation status, and time between primary diagnosis and metastases, were regarded the 6 most important characteristics. Of 457 included patients, 123 underwent local treatment, which was associated with better survival after diagnosis of metastases (HR = 0.558, 95%CI = 0.336-0.928). Progressive disease during systemic treatment (HR = 3.885, 95%CI = 1.195-12.627) and disease confined to the liver (HR = 0.269, 95%CI = 0.082-0.880) were associated with worse and better survival after local treatment, respectively., Conclusion: Local treatment is associated with better survival in selected patients with metastatic GIST. Locally treated patients with response to TKIs and disease confined to the liver have good clinical outcome. These results might be considered for tailoring treatment, but should be interpreted with care because only specific patients are provided with local treatment in this retrospective study., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is an extremely rare vascular sarcoma with variable aggressive clinical behavior. In this retrospective study, we aimed to investigate prognostic factors based on clinicopathologic findings in a molecularly/immunohistochemically confirmed nationwide multicenter cohort of 57 EHE cases. Patients had unifocal disease ( n = 29), multifocal disease ( n = 5), lymph node metastasis ( n = 8) and/or distant metastasis ( n = 15) at the time of diagnosis. The overall survival rate was 71.4% at 1 year and 50.7% at 5 years. Survival did not correlate with sex, age or histopathological parameters. No survival differences were observed between multifocal and metastatic disease, suggesting that multifocality represents early metastases and treatment options are limited in comparison to unifocal disease. In unifocal tumors, survival could be predicted using the risk stratification model of Shibayama et al., dividing the cases into low- ( n = 4), intermediate- ( n = 15) and high- ( n = 3) risk groups. No clinical or histopathological parameters were associated with progressive unifocal disease course. Lymph node metastases at the time of diagnosis occurred in 14.0% of the cases and were mainly associated with tumor localization in the head and neck area, proposing lymph node dissection. In conclusion, our results demonstrate the aggressive behavior of EHE, emphasize the prognostic value of a previously described risk stratification model and may provide new insights regarding tumor focality, therapeutic strategies and prognosis.

Imatinib plasma trough concentrations are associated with efficacy for patients treated for advanced or metastatic KIT-positive gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs). This relationship has not been studied for patients treated in the neoadjuvant setting, let alone its correlation with tumour drug concentrations. In this exploratory study we aimed to determine the correlation between plasma and tumour imatinib concentrations in the neoadjuvant setting, investigate tumour imatinib distribution patterns within GISTs, and analyse its correlation with pathological response. Imatinib concentrations were measured in both plasma and in three regions of the resected primary tumour: the core, middle part, and periphery. Twenty-four tumour samples derived from the primary tumours of eight patients were included in the analyses. Imatinib tumour concentrations were higher compared to plasma concentrations. No correlation was observed between plasma and tumour concentrations. Interpatient variability in tumour concentrations was high compared to interindividual variability in plasma concentrations. Although imatinib accumulates in tumour tissue, no distribution pattern of imatinib in tumour tissue could be identified. There was no correlation between imatinib concentrations in tumour tissue and pathological treatment response.

To improve local control, neoadjuvant radiotherapy (nRT) followed by surgery is the standard of care in myxofibrosarcoma (MFS) because of its infiltrative growth pattern. Nevertheless, local recurrence rates are high. Data on prognostic factors for poor clinical outcomes are lacking. This retrospective study thus investigates the prognostic relevance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics before and after nRT in 40 MFS patients, as well as their association with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). A vascular pedicle, defined as extra-tumoral vessels at the tumor periphery, was observed in 12 patients (30.0%) pre-nRT and remained present post-nRT in all cases. Patients with a vascular pedicle had worse DFS (HR 5.85; 95% CI 1.56-21.90; p = 0.009) and OS (HR 9.58; 95% CI 1.91-48.00; p = 0.006). An infiltrative growth pattern, referred to as a tail sign, was observed in 22 patients (55.0%) pre-nRT and in 19 patients (47.5%) post-nRT, and was associated with worse DFS post-nRT (HR 6.99; 95% CI 1.39-35.35; p = 0.019). The percentage of tumor necrosis estimated by MRI was increased post-nRT, but was not associated with survival outcomes. The presence of a tail sign or vascular pedicle on MRI could support the identification of patients at risk for poor clinical outcomes after nRT.

Introduction: Nowadays nearly every patient with cancer is discussed in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) to determine an optimal treatment plan. The growth in the number of patients to be discussed is unsustainable. Streamlining and use of computerised clinical decision support systems (CCDSSs) are two major ways to restructure MDTMs. Streamlining is the process of selecting the patients who need to be discussed and in which type of MDTM. Using CCDSSs, patient data is automatically loaded into the minutes and a guideline-based treatment proposal is generated. We aimed to identify the pros and cons of streamlining and CCDSSs., Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with Dutch MDTM participants. With purposive sampling we maximised variation in participants' characteristics. Interview data were thematically analysed., Results: Thirty-five interviews were analysed. All interviewees agreed on the need to change the current MDTM workflow. Streamlining suggestions were thematised based on standard and complex cases and the location of the MDTM (i.e. local, regional or nationwide). Interviewees suggested easing the pressure on MDTMs by discussing standard cases briefly, not at all, or outside the MDTM with only two to three specialists. Complex cases should be discussed in tumour-type-specific regional MDTMs and highly complex cases by regional/nationwide expert teams. Categorizing patients as standard or complex was found to be the greatest challenge of streamlining. CCDSSs were recognised as promising, although none of the interviewees had made use of them. The assumed advantage was their capacity to generate protocolised treatment proposals based on automatically uploaded patient data, to unify treatment proposals and to facilitate research. However, they were thought to limit the freedom to deviate from the treatment advice., Conclusion: To make oncological MDTMs sustainable, methods of streamlining should be developed and introduced. Physicians still have doubts about the value of CCDSSs., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Walraven, Verhoeven, van der Hoeven, van der Meulen, Lemmens, Hesselink and Desar.)

Background: Patients with unresectable and metastasized gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) experienced a remarkable improvement of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) after the introduction of imatinib. Our hypothesis is that the outcomes of treatment with imatinib are even better nowadays compared with the registration trials that were performed two decades ago. To study this, we used real-life data from a contemporary registry., Methods: A multicenter, retrospective study was performed by exploring clinical data from a prospective real-life clinical database, the Dutch GIST Registry (DGR). Patients with advanced GIST treated with first-line imatinib were included and PFS (primary outcome) and OS (secondary outcome) were analyzed. Results of our study were compared with published results of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 62005 trial, which marked the first era of imatinib in the treatment of GIST., Results: Overall, 420 of the 435 patients treated with imatinib in the DGR had recorded response evaluation and were included in the analysis. During a median follow-up of 35.0 months (range 2.0-136.0), progression of GIST was eventually observed in 217 patients (51.2%). The DGR cohort showed a longer median PFS (33.0 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] 28.4-37.6) compared with the EORTC 62005 trial (an estimated PFS of 19.5 months). Additionally, the median OS of 68.0 months (95% CI 56.1-80.0) was longer than the exposed median OS (46.8 months) published in the long-term follow-up results of the EORTC 62005 trial (median follow-up duration 10.9 years)., Conclusion: This study provides an update on outcomes of imatinib in the treatment of advanced GIST patients and demonstrates improved clinical outcomes since the first randomized studies of imatinib 2 decades ago. Furthermore, these results represent outcomes in real-world clinical practice and can serve as a reference when evaluating effectiveness of imatinib in patients with advanced GIST., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Performance of clinical trials has led to major therapeutic developments and substantial improvements in the field of medical oncology. To ensure patient's safety, regulatory aspects for proper clinical trial conduct have been increased over the past two decades but seem to cause information overload and ineffective bureaucracy, possibly even impacting patient safety. To put this in perspective, after the implementation of Directive 2001/20/EC in the European Union, a 90 per cent increase in trial launching time, a 25 per cent decrease in patient participation and a 98 per cent rise in administrative trial costs were reported. The time to initiate a clinical trial has increased from a few months to several years in the past three decades. Moreover, there is a serious risk that information overload with relatively unimportant data endangers the decision-making processes and distracts from essential patient safety information. It is now a critical moment in time to improve efficient clinical trial conduct for our future patients diagnosed with cancer. We are convinced that a reduction of the administrative regulations, information overload, and simplification of the procedures for trial conductance may improve patient safety. In this Current Perspective, we give insight in the current regulatory aspects of clinical research, evaluate the practical consequences of these regulations, and propose specific improvements for optimal clinical trial conduct., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Purpose: Waste of oral anticancer drugs (OACDs) causes financial and environmental burdens. This study evaluates the feasibility of an individualized dispensing program to prevent waste of OACDs., Methods: Adult patients were dispensed individualized quantities of niraparib, abiraterone, enzalutamide, ruxolitinib, osimertinib, or imatinib as standard care, during the first 6 months of treatment. The first 50 patients participated in an feasibility evaluation conform five domains of Bowen's Framework. (1) implementation : reach (eligible patients included) and protocol fidelity (executions following protocol) assessed from pharmacy data, (2) acceptability : rated from 1 to 10 and agreement with theoretical framework acceptability domains via a survey among patients and pharmacy technicians, (3) practicality : program's costs, (4) effect : compared with previous practice (full package supply per month), defined as difference in unused OACD unit doses and net cost-savings, and (5) demand : potential scale-up of the program by including more OACDs., Results: Participants' median age was 67 (interquartile range [IQR], 58-71) years, and 76% was male. (1) Implementation : reach and protocol fidelity were 89% and 90%, respectively. (2) Acceptability was high among patients (median, 9; IQR, 8-9) and pharmacy technicians (median, 7; IQR, 6-8). All acceptability domains were agreed on. (3) Practicality : program costs were €4,289. (4) Effect : unused OACD unit doses were reduced by 34%, causing net cost-savings of €693 per discontinued patient. (5) Demand : the program could be scaled up to seven times by including all OACDs., Conclusion: Individualized dispensing for patients prescribed OACDs is feasible for preventing waste in terms of implementation, acceptability, practicality, effect, and demand.

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None.

Angiosarcomas are a heterogeneous group of rare endothelial malignancies with a complex, not completely unravelled biology. They encompass primary (sporadically occurring) angiosarcomas of several origins and secondary angiosarcomas, which often arise due to DNA damaging factors including radiotherapy or ultraviolet light exposure. The optimal treatment of metastatic angiosarcomas is unclear and the prognosis is poor. In order to discover novel treatment strategies for angiosarcomas it is important to take the heterogeneity of these tumors into account. For this reason it is also important to have preclinical models available for the different clinical subtypes. Owing to the rarity of angiosarcomas, models are scarce. So far, only five human cell lines of angiosarcomas (all of the scalp after UV exposure) are available worldwide. In this paper we describe a novel established patient-derived xenograft model of a radiotherapy-induced angiosarcoma of the breast. The tumor was characterized by a MYC amplification, CD31 and ERG immunohistochemical positivity and was further characterized by using next generation sequencing (TruSight Oncology 500) in combination with the R-package XenofilteR to separate mouse from human sequence reads., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Optimal oncological care nowadays requires discussing every patient in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM). The number of patients to be discussed is rising rapidly due to the increasing incidence and prevalence of cancer and the emergence of new multidisciplinary treatment options. This puts MDTMs under considerable time pressure. The aim of this study is therefore to identify the facilitators and barriers with regard to performing an efficient, competent and high-quality MDTM., Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with Dutch medical specialists and residents participating in oncological MDTMs. Purposive sampling was used to maximise variation in participants' professional and demographic characteristics (eg, sex, medical specialist vs resident, specialty, type and location of affiliated hospital). Interview data were systematically analysed according to the principles of thematic content analysis., Results: Sixteen medical specialists and 19 residents were interviewed. All interviewees agreed that attending and preparing MDTMs is time-consuming and indicated the need for optimal execution in order to ensure that MDTMs remain feasible in the near future. Four themes emerged that are relevant to achieving an optimal MDTM: (1) organisational aspects; (2) participants' responsibilities and requirements; (3) competences, behaviour and team dynamics and (4) meeting content. Good organisation, a sound structure and functioning information and communication technology facilitate high-quality MDTMs. Multidisciplinary collaboration and adequate communication are essential competences for participants; a lack thereof and the existence of a hierarchy are hindering factors., Conclusion: Conducting an efficient, competent and high-quality oncological MDTM is facilitated and hindered by many factors. Being aware of these factors provides opportunities for optimising MDTMs, which are under pressure due to the increase in the number of patients to discuss., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To investigate the role of specialised genitourinary multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) in decision-making and identify factors that influence the probability of receiving a treatment plan with curative intent for patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC)., Patients and Methods: Data relating to patients with cT2-4aN0/X-1 M0 urothelial cell carcinoma, diagnosed between November 2017 and October 2019, were selected from the nationwide, population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry ('BlaZIB study'). Curative treatment options were defined as radical cystectomy (RC) with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy, chemoradiation or brachytherapy. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were used to examine the association between MDTM factors and curative treatment advice and how this advice was followed., Results: Of the 2321 patients, 2048 (88.2%) were discussed in a genitourinary MDTM. Advanced age (>80 years) and poorer World Health Organization performance status (score 1-2 vs 0) were associated with no discussion (P < 0.001). Being discussed was associated with undergoing treatment with curative intent (odds ratio [OR] 3.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9-4.9), as was the involvement of a RC hospital (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.09-2.65). Involvement of an academic centre was associated with higher rates of bladder-sparing treatment (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.31-3.21). Patient preference was the main reason for non-adherence to treatment advice., Conclusions: For patients with MIBC, the probability of being discussed in a MDTM was associated with age, performance status and receiving treatment with curative intent, especially if a representative of a RC hospital was present. Future studies should focus on the impact of MDTM advice on survival data., (© 2022 The Authors. BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International.)

Purpose: Watchful waiting (WW) can be considered for patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) with good or intermediate prognosis, especially those with <2 International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium criteria and ≤2 metastatic sites [referred to as watch and wait ("W&W") criteria]. The IMaging PAtients for Cancer drug SelecTion-Renal Cell Carcinoma study objective was to assess the predictive value of [18F]FDG PET/CT and [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab PET/CT for WW duration in patients with mccRCC., Experimental Design: Between February 2015 and March 2018, 48 patients were enrolled, including 40 evaluable patients with good (n = 14) and intermediate (n = 26) prognosis. Baseline contrast-enhanced CT, [18F]FDG and [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab PET/CT were performed. Primary endpoint was the time to disease progression warranting systemic treatment. Maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) were measured using lesions on CT images coregistered to PET/CT. High and low uptake groups were defined on the basis of median geometric mean SUVmax of RECIST-measurable lesions across patients., Results: The median WW time was 16.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 9.0-31.7]. The median WW period was shorter in patients with high [18F]FDG tumor uptake than those with low uptake (9.0 vs. 36.2 months; HR, 5.6; 95% CI: 2.4-14.7; P < 0.001). Patients with high [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab tumor uptake had a median WW period of 9.3 versus 21.3 months with low uptake (HR, 1.7; 95% CI: 0.9-3.3; P = 0.13). Patients with "W&W criteria" had a longer median WW period of 21.3 compared with patients without: 9.3 months (HR, 1.9; 95% CI: 0.9-3.9; Pone-sided = 0.034). Adding [18F]FDG uptake to the "W&W criteria" improved the prediction of WW duration (P < 0.001); whereas [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab did not (P = 0.53)., Conclusions: In patients with good- or intermediate-risk mccRCC, low [18F]FDG uptake is associated with prolonged WW. This study shows the predictive value of the "W&W criteria" for WW duration and shows the potential of [18F]FDG-PET/CT to further improve this., (©2022 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Owing to the rarity and heterogeneity in biology and presentation, there are multiple areas in the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of soft tissue sarcoma (STS), with no, low-level or conflicting evidence., Methods: During the first Consensus Conference on the State of Science in Sarcoma (CSSS), we used a modified Delphi process to identify areas of controversy in the field of sarcoma, to name topics with limited evidence-based data in which a scientific and knowledge gap may remain and a consensus statement will help to guide patient management. We determined scientific questions which need to be addressed in the future in order to generate evidence and to inform physicians and caregivers in daily clinical practice in order to improve the outcomes of patients with sarcoma. We conducted a vote on STS key questions and controversies prior to the CSSS meeting, which took place in May 2022., Results: Sixty-two European sarcoma experts participated in the survey. Sixteen strong consensus (≥95%) items were identified by the experts, as well as 30 items with a ≥75% consensus on diagnostic and therapeutic questions. Ultimately, many controversy topics remained without consensus., Conclusions: In this manuscript, we summarise the voting results and the discussion during the CSSS meeting. Future scientific questions, priorities for clinical trials, registries, quality assurance, and action by stakeholders are proposed. Platforms and partnerships can support innovative approaches to improve management and clinical research in STS., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare following conflicts of interest: CR: Consulting or Advisory Role (Payment to Institution): Bayer (Schweiz) AG, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ipsen, MSD Oncology, Pfizer; Consulting or Advisory Role (Payment to me): Merck (Schweiz) AG; Travel Expenses (Payment to me): PharmaMar; Research Funding (Payment to Institution): Astellas Pharma AG. DA: has received institutional research support from Implantcast GmbH and invited speaker fees from PharmaMar.WGK: served as advisor to Bristol Myers Squibb, unrelated. JYB: grants or research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Deciphera, Glaxo SmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, PharmaMar, and Roche; has an advisory or board member role in Innate Pharma; and receives honorarium from Bayer, Deciphera, Novartis, and Roche. ID: no COI. PD: Honoraria for consultancy or advisory role: Ayala Pharmaceuticals, Deciphera. RH: no COI. JJ: has received travel expenses or honoraria for participation in advisory boards or invited speaker fees from PharmaMar, Pfizer and Belpharma. LHL: Honoraria and compensation for advisory boards: Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Lilly, Eisai, EL Medconsult, Roche; Travel and research grants: Dr. Sennewald Medizintechnik; Travel grants: PharmaMar; Stockownerships: Thermosome (co-founder) CM: no COI. ABM: Trustee Sarcoma UK, no other conflict of interest. TB: reports personal fees from PharmaMar and Deciphera (lecture fee, advisory board) ABM: Trustee Sarcoma UK, no other conflict of interest. RLJ: Receipt of grants/research support: MSD, GSK. Receipt of consultation fees: Adaptimmune, Astex, Athenex, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Blueprint, Clinigen, Eisai, Epizyme, Daichii, Deciphera, Immunedesign, Immunicum, Karma Oncology, Lilly, Merck, Mundipharma, Pharmamar, Springworks. SynOx, Tracon, Up to Date. IJ: No conflicts of interest. PR: has received honoraria for participation in advisory boards for Bayer, Novartis, Roche, Deciphera, Mundibiopharma, PharmaMar, Blueprint Medicines, GSK, Boehringer Ingelheim and invited speaker fees from Clinigen, Deciphera, PharmaMar, Boehringer Ingelheim. JS: Participation in advisory boards or invited speaker fees: PharmaMar, Bayer, Roche, Lilly, Amgen; Travel expenses: PharmaMar, Roche, Lilly, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb; Research funding: PharmaMar, Roche, Eisai. WvdG: research grant funding from Eli Lilly, advisory board participation Springworks, Bayer, PTC Therapeutics – all to the institute. WJvH: received institutional honoraria for participation in advisory board for Belpharma, invited speaker fees from Amgen andreports expert testimony for Sanofi and MSD and personal travel grant from Novartis and institutional research grant from BMS. EW: has received honoraria for participation in advisory boards or invited speaker fees from Bayer, Roche, Deciphera, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, PharmaMar. SH: no COI., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sex differences in cancer have gained attention in recent years. The role of sex as a prognostic factor in gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) has not been well established. The aim of this research was to elucidate potential sex differences in GIST patients and the influence of sex on disease-specific survival (DSS)., Methods: A review of the literature was carried out to obtain an overview of all literature with sex as a covariate on GIST survival analyses. Furthermore, in the Dutch GIST Registry, GIST characteristics between males and females were compared and the influence of sex on DSS was analysed., Results: A total of 118 articles from the review of the literature met our selection criteria; 58% of the articles found no sex difference in survival and 42% did find a sex difference. All differences favoured female patients, although there was substantial overlap of individual patients in the various reported groups. The Dutch GIST Registry cohort consisted of 1425 patients (46% female). Compared with female patients, male patients had larger tumours (mean 9.0 cm versus 7.9 cm) and higher mitotic rates (34.4% versus 28.0% >5 mitoses/5 mm 2 ). GIST in males was more often metastasized at diagnosis (21.3% versus 13.7%) and incurable (38.5% versus 31.0%). Male patients less often received surgery of the primary tumour (71.7% versus 78.9%), but did experience more tumour ruptures (18.2% versus 13.3%). Male patients had a worse DSS than females. This was not statistically significant when corrected for differences in GIST characteristics., Conclusions: In case of sex differences in GIST in the literature, male patients have a worse outcome. In our Dutch GIST cohort a similar finding was made, but sex was shown not to be an independent factor. Male patients more often had aggressive GISTs, with larger tumours, higher mitotic rates, more tumour ruptures, and metastases, which could explain the sex differences in DSS., Competing Interests: Disclosure RM received research grants from Astellas, Bayer, Cristal Therapeutics, PamGene, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Servier. NS provided consultation or attended advisory boards for Boehringer Ingelheim, Ellipses Pharma, Hengrui Europe Therapeutics; NS received research grants for the institute from AB Science, AbbVie, Actuate Therapeutics, ADC Therapeutics, Amgen, Array, Ascendis Pharma, Astex, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, BridgeBio, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cantargia, Celgene, CellCentric, Crescendo, Cytovation, Deciphera, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Genentech, Genmab, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, InteRNA, Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, Kinate, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merus, Molecular Partners, Novartis, Numab, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Servier, Taiho, Takeda (outside the submitted work). WTAvdG received a research grant from Eli Lilly (to the institute); WTAvdG was on advisory boards from SpringWorks, Bayer and PTC Therapeutics (all to the institute); WTAvdG other non-financial interests: president EORTC, board member ECO, Chair Dutch Sarcoma Group, Chair Dutch AYA ‘Young and Cancer’ Care Network, board member (CTOS). All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Angiosarcomas (AS) are extremely rare and aggressive vascular malignancies subdivided in de novo primary AS (pAS) and secondary AS (sAS). We hypothesize that the combination of immunological and genomic profiles significantly differs between primary and secondary AS, with potential impact on treatment strategies and a role for immunotherapy. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes were analyzed using multiplex immunohistochemistry from 79 pAS and 178 sAS. Median cell density was significantly higher in sAS for CD3+ T-cells (p < 0.001), CD8+ cytotoxic T-cells (p = 0.033), CD4+ T-helper cells (p < 0.001) and FoxP3+ T-regulatory cells (p < 0.001). CD20+ B-cell density was comparable (p = 0.417). Comprehensive genomic profiling was performed in 25 pAS and 25 sAS. A (likely) pathogenic mutation was detected in 80% of pAS vs. 88% of sAS (p = 0.702). Amplifications were found in 15% of pAS vs. 84% of sAS (p < 0.001). DNA damage response (DDR) pathway mutations (p = 0.021) and MYC amplifications (p < 0.001) were predominantly seen in sAS. In conclusion we observed a clear and clinical relevant distinction in immune infiltration and genomic profiles between pAS and sAS. The T-cell infiltrated tumor microenvironment and frequent DDR gene mutations, especially in sAS, warrant clinical trials with immunotherapy.

Background: The prognosis of patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) has improved greatly after the introduction of imatinib. However, primary or secondary resistance to imatinib occurs in the majority of patients. Sunitinib is the standard second line treatment in exon-9 mutated GIST., Objective: We compared the clinical outcomes of sunitinib with imatinib dose escalation in patients with progressive advanced non-KIT exon 9 mutated GIST after failure of first line imatinib., Patients and Methods: A retrospective study was performed, retrieving data from a real-life database (Dutch GIST Registry) including patients with GIST treated with sunitinib or imatinib dose escalation after failure on first line imatinib 400 mg daily. Primary outcome measures were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: In total, 110 patients were included, 72 (65.5%) patients were treated with sunitinib (group A) and 38 (34.5%) received an imatinib dose escalation (group B). Important prognostic features at baseline, such as tumor size, stage at diagnosis, mitotic count and localization were equally distributed in both groups. No significant difference (p = 0.88) between median PFS in group A [8.7 months (95% CI 5.6-11.3)] and group B [5.6 months, (95% CI 2.6-8.7)] was observed. Moreover, the OS was similar between group A and group B; 63.2 months and 63.4 months, respectively., Conclusion: This study represents a proper sample size cohort containing detailed data on mutational status of patients with advanced GIST. We illustrated that imatinib dose escalation could serve as a good alternative for sunitinib as second-line treatment in patients with a non-KIT exon 9 mutation., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Importance: Treatment options for patients with unresectable and/or metastatic dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS) are limited. New drugs are required., Objective: To assess whether cabazitaxel demonstrated sufficient antitumor activity in patients with metastatic or inoperable locally advanced DDLPS to justify further investigation in a phase 3 setting., Design, Setting, and Participants: This international multicenter, open-label single-arm phase 2 trial was conducted at 10 institutions in 4 European countries from March 2015 to March 2019. Eligible patients had to have metastatic or locally advanced histologically proven DDLPS with evidence of disease progression within the past 6 months and had to have received no more than 1 previous line of chemotherapy., Interventions: After mandatory central review of tumor blocks, if the DDLPS diagnosis was confirmed, patients started treatment within 72 hours after registration. Cabazitaxel was administered at a dose of 25 mg/m2 IV infusion over 1 hour every 21 days until intolerance, progression, or withdrawal of consent., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 12 weeks per RECIST 1.1. Based on a Simon 2-stage design, at least 4 of 17 (stage 1) and 11 of 37 (stage 2) eligible and evaluable patients who were progression free at 12 weeks were needed. The final analysis report was completed on November 17, 2021., Results: Forty patients were registered, with 2 patients being ineligible. The number of cycles ranged from 1 to 30, with a median of 5; 26 patients (65%) received at least 4 cycles of cabazitaxel. Progression-free survival at 12 weeks was 55%, achieving the primary study end point. At a median follow-up of 21.6 months, median PFS was 6 months and median OS 21 months. Response rate (RR) was 8% with 1 clinical response (CR) and 2 partial responses (PR). Twenty-three (60.5%) patients had a stable disease (SD). Disease control (PR+SD) was achieved in 26 patients (68%)., Conclusions and Relevance: This nonrandomized phase 2 clinical trial met its primary end point, with 21 of 38 patients (55%) being progression free at 12 weeks. These results suggest important activity of cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic or inoperable locally advanced DDLPS. The drug is worth being further studied in these tumors in a phase 3 setting.

Background: Oral targeted therapies show a high pharmacokinetic (PK) interpatient variability. Even though exposure has been positively correlated with efficacy for many of these drugs, these are still dosed using a one-size-fits-all approach. Consequently, individuals have a high probability to be either underexposed or overexposed, potentially leading to suboptimal outcomes. Therapeutic drug monitoring, which is personalized dosing based on measured systemic drug concentrations, could address these problems., Patients and Methods: Patients were enrolled in this prospective multicenter study (www.trialregister.nl; NL6695) if they started treatment with one of the 24 participating oral targeted therapies. Primary outcome was to halve the proportion of underexposed patients, compared with historical data. PK sampling was carried out after 4, 8 and 12 weeks, and every 12 weeks thereafter. In case of C min below the predefined target and manageable toxicity, a pharmacokinetically guided intervention was proposed (i.e. checking compliance and drug-drug interactions, concomitant intake with food, splitting intake moments or dose increments)., Results: In total, 600 patients were included of whom 426 patients are assessable for the primary outcome and 552 patients had ≥1 PK sample(s) available and were therefore assessable for the overall analyses. Pharmacokinetically guided dosing reduced the proportion of underexposed patients at the third PK measurement by 39.0% (95% confidence interval 28.0% to 49.0%) compared with historical data. At the third PK measurement, 110 out of 426 patients (25.8%) had a low exposure. In total, 294 patients (53.3%) had ≥1 PK sample(s) below the preset target at a certain time point during treatment. In 166 of these patients (56.5%), pharmacokinetically guided interventions were carried out, which were successful in 113 out of 152 assessable patients (74.3%)., Conclusions: Pharmacokinetically guided dose optimization of oral targeted therapies was feasible in clinical practice and reduced the proportion of underexposed patients considerably., Competing Interests: Disclosure IMED reported funding for investigator-initiated research by Novartis. NPvE reported funding for investigator-initiated research by Janssen-Cilag, and Astellas, and a speaker fee by Bayer (outside the submitted work). RHJM reported funding for investigator-initiated research by Astellas, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Cristal Therapeutics, Novartis, Pamgene, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and Servier (outside the submitted work). NS reported consultation or attendance of advisory boards for AIMM Therapeutics, Boehringer-Ingelheim and Ellipses Pharma; research grants for the institute from AB Science, Abbvie, Actuate Therapeutics, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cantargia, CellCentric, Cytovation, Deciphera, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merus, Molecular Partners, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, Taiho and Takeda (outside the submitted work). All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest. All authors confirm that they had full access to all data in the study and accept responsibility to submit for publication. Data sharing Data from this study can be made available to other researchers in the field upon request and approval by the Dutch Pharmacology Oncology Group and subject to appropriate data transfer agreements. Requests should be directed to SLG and NS., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Patients with cancer are prone to prolongation of the corrected QT interval (QTc) due to the use of anticancer drugs with QTc-prolonging potential in combination with electrolyte imbalances caused by, for example, gastrointestinal side-effects. However, most anticancer drugs were approved with little information on their QTc-prolonging potential and the added risk of torsade de pointes. The absence of this information on the drug label poses a considerable challenge to clinicians regarding the measures that need to be taken to safely start anticancer treatment. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the evidence for the QTc-prolonging properties of 205 anticancer drugs and 14 antiemetic drugs available from drug labels, assessment reports, and published studies. We classify the drugs as low-risk, moderate-risk, or high-risk for QTc prolongation. We also discuss the clinical relevance of these findings and include practical recommendations to guide clinicians to select the drugs with the least QTc-prolonging properties and to adequately monitor susceptible patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests NS has received research grants for the Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Ziekenhuis from AB Science, AbbVie, Actuate Therapeutics, ADC Therapeutics, Amgen, Array, Ascendis Pharma, Astex Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, BridgeBio, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cantargia, Celgene, CellCentric, Crescendo Biologics, Cytovation, Deciphera, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Genentech, Genmab, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, InteRNA Technologies, Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, Kinnate Biopharma, Merck, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merus, Molecular Partners, Novartis, Numab, Pfizer, Laboratoires Pierre Fabre, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Servier, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Takeda, outside of the submitted work. NS also attended advisory boards for Boehringer Ingelheim and Ellipses Pharma. NPvE has received research grants for Radboudumc from Astellas Pharma, Janssen-Cilag, Ipsen, KWF, and ZonMW, and has received payments for Radboudumc from Sanofi, Bayer, and Pfizer. IMED has received a research grant for Radboudumc from EORTC-QLG and has received honoraria for the institute from Zorginstituut Nederland. NAGL has received honoraria from Roche Nederland. KRMF, ELG, EJS, and RJB declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Sorafenib is a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, thyroid carcinoma, and desmoid fibromatosis. As high inter-individual variability exists in exposure, there is a scientific rationale to pursue therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). We investigated the feasibility of TDM in patients on sorafenib and tried to identify sub-groups in whom pharmacokinetically (PK) guided-dosing might be of added value., Methods: We included patients who started on sorafenib (between October 2017 and June 2020) at the recommended dose of 400 mg BID or with a step-up dosing schedule. Plasma trough levels (C trough ) were measured at pre-specified time-points. Increasing the dose was advised if C trough was below the target of 3750 ng/mL and toxicity was manageable., Results: A total of 150 samples from 36 patients were collected. Thirty patients (83 %) had a C trough below the prespecified target concentration at a certain time point during treatment. Toxicity from sorafenib hampered dosing according to target C trough in almost half of the patients. In 11 patients, dosing was adjusted based on C trough . In three patients, this resulted in an adequate C trough without additional toxicity four weeks after the dose increase. In the remaining eight patients, dose adjustment based on C trough did not result in a C trough above the target or caused excessive toxicity., Conclusions: TDM for sorafenib is not of added value in daily clinical practice. In most cases, toxicity restricts the possibility of dose escalations., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement I.M.E.D. reported funding for investigator-initiated research by Novartis. N.S. reported consultation or attendance of advisory boards for AIMM Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Ellipses Pharma; research grants for the institute from AB Science, Abbvie, Actuate Therapeutics, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bayer, Blueprint Medi-cines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cantargia, CellCentric, Cytovation, Deci-phera, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merus, Molec-ular Partners, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, Taiho, and Takeda (outside the sub-mitted work). N.P.v.E. reported funding for investigator-initiated research by Janssen-Cilag, and Astellas, and a speaker fee by Bayer (outside the submitted work). R.H.J.M. reported funding for investigator-initiated research by Astellas, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Cristal Therapeutics, Novartis, Pamgene, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Servier (outside the submitted work). The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The optimal treatment plan for patients with cancer is discussed in multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs). Effective meetings require all participants to have collaboration and communication competences. Participating residents (defined as qualified doctors in training to become a specialist) are expected to develop these competences by observing their supervisors. However, the current generation of medical specialists is not trained to work in multidisciplinary teams; currently, training mainly focuses on medical competences. This study aims to identify barriers and facilitators among residents with respect to learning how to participate competently in MDTMs, and to identify additional training needs regarding their future role in MDTMs, as perceived by residents and specialists., Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with Dutch residents and medical specialists participating in oncological MDTMs. Purposive sampling was used to maximise variation in participants' demographic and professional characteristics (e.g. sex, specialty, training duration, type and location of affiliated hospital). Interview data were systematically analysed according to the principles of thematic content analysis., Results: Nineteen residents and 16 specialists were interviewed. Three themes emerged: 1) awareness of the educational function of MDTMs among specialists and residents; 2) characteristics of MDTMs (e.g. time constraints, MDTM regulations) and 3) team dynamics and behaviour. Learning to participate in MDTMs is facilitated by: specialists and residents acknowledging the educational function of MDTMs beyond their medical content, and supervisors fulfilling their teaching role and setting conditions that enable residents to take a participative role (e.g. being well prepared, sitting in the inner circle, having assigned responsibilities). Barriers to residents' MDTM participation were insufficient guidance by their supervisors, time constraints, regulations hindering their active participation, a hierarchical structure of relations, unfamiliarity with the team and personal characteristics of residents (e.g. lack of confidence and shyness). Interviewees indicated a need for additional training (e.g. simulations) for residents, especially to enhance behavioural and communication skills., Conclusion: Current practice with regard to preparing residents for their future role in MDTMs is hampered by a variety of factors. Most importantly, more awareness of the educational purposes of MDTMs among both residents and medical specialists would allow residents to participate in and learn from oncological MDTMs. Future studies should focus on collaboration competences., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Discussing patients with cancer in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDTM) is customary in cancer care worldwide and requires a significant investment in terms of funding and time. Efficient collaboration and communication between healthcare providers in all the specialisms involved is therefore crucial. However, evidence-based criteria that can guarantee high-quality functioning on the part of MDTMs are lacking. In this systematic review, we examine the factors influencing the MDTMs' efficiency, functioning and quality, and offer recommendations for improvement., Methods: Relevant studies were identified by searching Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases (01-01-1990 to 09-11-2021), using different descriptions of 'MDTM' and 'neoplasm' as search terms. Inclusion criteria were: quality of MDTM, functioning of MDTM, framework and execution of MDTM, decision-making process, education, patient advocacy, patient involvement and evaluation tools. Full text assessment was performed by two individual authors and checked by a third author., Results: Seventy-four articles met the inclusion criteria and five themes were identified: 1) MDTM characteristics and logistics, 2) team culture, 3) decision making, 4) education, and 5) evaluation and data collection. The quality of MDTMs improves when the meeting is scheduled, structured, prepared and attended by all core members, guided by a qualified chairperson and supported by an administrator. An appropriate amount of time per case needs to be established and streamlining of cases (i.e. discussing a predefined selection of cases rather than discussing every case) might be a way to achieve this. Patient centeredness contributes to correct diagnosis and decision making. While physicians are cautious about patients participating in their own MDTM, the majority of patients report feeling better informed without experiencing increased anxiety. Attendance at MDTMs results in closer working relationships between physicians and provides some medico-legal protection. To ensure well-functioning MDTMs in the future, junior physicians should play a prominent role in the decision-making process. Several evaluation tools have been developed to assess the functioning of MDTMs., Conclusions: MDTMs would benefit from a more structured meeting, attendance of core members and especially the attending physician, streamlining of cases and structured evaluation. Patient centeredness, personal competences of MDTM participants and education are not given sufficient attention., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Treatment with the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) imatinib in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) causes symptoms that could negatively impact health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Treatment-related symptoms are usually clinician-reported and little is known about patient reports. We used survey and online patient forum data to investigate (1) prevalence of patient-reported symptoms; (2) coverage of symptoms mentioned on the forum by existing HRQoL questionnaires; and (3) priorities of prevalent symptoms in HRQoL assessment., Methods: In the cross-sectional population-based survey study, Dutch GIST patients completed items from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and Symptom-Based Questionnaire (SBQ). In the forum study, machine learning algorithms were used to extract TKI side-effects from English messages on an international online forum for GIST patients. Prevalence of symptoms related to imatinib treatment in both sources was calculated and exploratively compared., Results: Fatigue and muscle pain or cramps were reported most frequently. Seven out of 10 most reported symptoms (i.e. fatigue, muscle pain or cramps, facial swelling, joint pain, skin problems, diarrhoea, and oedema) overlapped between the two sources. Alopecia was frequently mentioned on the forum, but not in the survey. Four out of 10 most reported symptoms on the online forum are covered by the EORTC QLQ-C30. The EORTC-SBQ and EORTC Item Library cover 9 and 10 symptoms, respectively., Conclusion: This first overview of patient-reported imatinib-related symptoms from two data sources helps to determine coverage of items in existing questionnaires, and prioritize HRQoL issues. Combining cancer-generic instruments with treatment-specific item lists will improve future HRQoL assessment in care and research in GIST patients using TKI., (© 2022. The Author(s).)