3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Neoadjuvant Systemic Treatment of Primary Angiosarcoma

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Angiosarcoma is an extremely rare and aggressive malignancy. Standard of care of localized tumors includes surgery ± radiation. Despite this multimodal treatment, >50% of the angiosarcoma patients develop local or distant recurrent disease. The role of neoadjuvant systemic therapy is still controversial and we therefore performed a systematic review of the literature to define the role of neoadjuvant systemic therapy based on available evidence. We focused on the effects of neoadjuvant systemic therapy on: 1. The success of surgical resection and 2. the long-term survival. All articles published before October 2019 on Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Cochrane library and Scopus were evaluated. Eighteen case reports and six retrospective cohort studies were included. There were no randomized controlled trials. This literature showed a beneficial role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on downsizing of the tumor resulting in an improvement of the resection margins, especially in patients with cardiac or cutaneous angiosarcoma. However, no definitive conclusions on survival can be drawn based on the available literature lacking any prospective randomized studies in this setting. We advise that neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be considered, since this could lead to less mutilating resections and a higher rate of free resection margins. An international angiosarcoma registry could help to develop guidelines for this rare disease.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Angiosarcoma.

          Angiosarcomas are rare soft-tissue sarcomas of endothelial cell origin that have a poor prognosis. They can arise anywhere in the body, most commonly presenting as cutaneous disease in elderly white men, involving the head and neck and particularly the scalp. They can be caused by therapeutic radiation or chronic lymphoedema and hence secondary breast angiosarcomas are an important subgroup. Recent work has sought to establish the molecular biology of angiosarcomas and identify specific targets for treatment. Interest is now focused on trials of vascular-targeted drugs, which are showing promise in the control of angiosarcomas. In this review we discuss angiosarcoma and its current management, with a focus on clinical trials investigating the treatment of advanced disease. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A randomized, controlled trial of oral propranolol in infantile hemangioma.

            Oral propranolol has been used to treat complicated infantile hemangiomas, although data from randomized, controlled trials to inform its use are limited.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              RECIST 1.1 - Standardisation and disease-specific adaptations: Perspectives from the RECIST Working Group.

              Radiologic imaging of disease sites plays a pivotal role in the management of patients with cancer. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST), introduced in 2000, and modified in 2009, has become the de facto standard for assessment of response in solid tumours in patients on clinical trials. The RECIST Working Group considers the ability of the global oncology community to implement and adopt updates to RECIST in a timely manner to be critical. Updates to RECIST must be tested, validated and implemented in a standardised, methodical manner in response to therapeutic and imaging technology advances as well as experience gained by users. This was the case with the development of RECIST 1.1, where an expanded data warehouse was developed to test and validate modifications. Similar initiatives are ongoing, testing RECIST in the evaluation of response to non-cytotoxic agents, immunotherapies, as well as in specific diseases. The RECIST Working Group has previously outlined the level of evidence considered necessary to formally and fully validate new imaging markers as an appropriate end-point for clinical trials. Achieving the optimal level of evidence desired is a difficult feat for phase III trials; this involves a meta-analysis of multiple prospective, randomised multicentre clinical trials. The rationale for modifications should also be considered; the modifications may be proposed to improve surrogacy, to provide a more mechanistic imaging technique, or be designed to improve reproducibility of the imaging biomarker. Here, we present the commonly described modifications of RECIST, each of which is associated with different levels of evidence and validation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cancers (Basel)
                Cancers (Basel)
                cancers
                Cancers
                MDPI
                2072-6694
                12 August 2020
                August 2020
                : 12
                : 8
                : 2251
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; n.ijzerman@ 123456nki.nl (N.S.I.); w.vd.graaf@ 123456nki.nl (W.T.A.v.d.G.); j.kerst@ 123456nki.nl (J.M.K.); n.steeghs@ 123456nki.nl (N.S.)
                [2 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Radboudumc, Geert Grooteplein 8, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                [4 ]Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Y.Schrage@ 123456nki.nl (Y.S.); w.v.houdt@ 123456nki.nl (W.J.v.H.)
                [5 ]Department of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands; j.beijnen@ 123456nki.nl
                [6 ]Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 99, 3584 CGUtrecht, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: k.heinhuis@ 123456nki.nl ; Tel.: +31-205126077
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7473-6606
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7549-3338
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0118-561X
                Article
                cancers-12-02251
                10.3390/cancers12082251
                7464310
                32806524
                4663608e-d266-4e86-a282-f35ddd4af9db
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 10 July 2020
                : 07 August 2020
                Categories
                Review

                sarcomas,angiosarcoma,neoadjuvant treatment,neoadjuvant therapy,outcome

                Comments

                Comment on this article