Pediatric hospitalist Patrick Conway, MD, has been named president and chief executive officer of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina. Dr. Conway will take over for the retiring Brad Wilson on Oct. 1.

Dr. Conway is currently the deputy administrator for Innovation and Quality, and the director of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Previously, he was CMO at CMS, having served both the Obama and Trump administrations.

Hossam Hafez, MD, recently claimed the role of chief of Hospitalist Service with Health Quest Medical Practice (LaGrangeville, N.Y.). Dr. Hafez will be based out of Health Quest’s Vassar Brothers Medical Center in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., coordinating care in that hospital and throughout the Health Quest system.

Dr. Hafez has served full-time hospitalist stints with MidMichigan Health’s Physician Hospitalist Group, as well as with RiteMed Urgent Care. A native of Egypt, Dr. Hafez is fluent in both English and Arabic.
 

Caldwell UNC Healthcare (Lenoir, N.C.) has promoted David Lowry, MD, to chief medical officer as of Aug. 1, 2017.

Dr. Lowry, a longtime hospitalist and veteran in hospital medicine in general, will lead the building’s hospitalist program, support the chief of staff, and provide direct patient care, as well. He will serve as physician advisor for Caldwell’s Clinical Documentation, Utilization Review, Respiratory Care, and Rehabilitation departments.

Dr. Lowry boasts more than 25 years experience in hospital medicine and led in the creation of Caldwell’s hospitalist program. Since joining Caldwell, he has held leadership positions including chief of medicine. He received the hospital’s Donald D. McNeill Jr. Award for Outstanding Physician Leadership in 2014, as voted by his peers.
 

Joahd Toure, MD, recently was hired by Adirondack Health (Saranac Lake, N.Y.) as its new chief medical officer. He started his new position in late June 2017.

Longtime employee Emily Chapman, MD, has been promoted to chief medical officer and vice president of medical affairs at Children’s Minnesota Hospital (Minneapolis). The former vice CMO took on her new role on July 5, 2017.

Mark Sockell, MD, is the new chief medical officer at Meritage Medical Network in Novato, Calif. Meritage is a physician-run network that includes more than 700 board-certified physicians in both primary care and specialist fields.

Dr. Sockell has been a member of Meritage’s Board of Directors since 2014, and he specializes in risk adjustment and quality measures. His career has focused on medical education, headed by a stint as director of medical education at St. Mary’s Medical Center (San Francisco). There, he created and ran the inpatient hospitalist program.
 

Business Moves

Hammond-Henry Hospital (Geneseo, Ill.) recently announced the creation of a hospitalist program, utilizing the facility’s own emergency room physicians. Hammond-Henry will staff one emergency room doctor available for rounds outside of their ER work throughout the day.

The center’s hospitalist program will be led by medical director Kevin Jeffries, MD, who also will serve as one of the hospital’s ER physicians/hospitalists.
 

Avera Queen of Peace Hospital (Mitchell, S.D.) started its own hospitalist program on Aug. 1, 2017, launching with the goal of improving patient experience within the building. Avera’s hospitalists will be on-site for 12 hours each day, assisting specialists and working with patients who do not have a local primary care physician.

Queen of Peace is the regional referral center for an 11-county area, part of Avera Health System’s 330 facilities across North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska.
 

Pediatric hospitalist Patrick Conway, MD, has been named president and chief executive officer of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina. Dr. Conway will take over for the retiring Brad Wilson on Oct. 1.

Dr. Conway is currently the deputy administrator for Innovation and Quality, and the director of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Previously, he was CMO at CMS, having served both the Obama and Trump administrations.

Hossam Hafez, MD, recently claimed the role of chief of Hospitalist Service with Health Quest Medical Practice (LaGrangeville, N.Y.). Dr. Hafez will be based out of Health Quest’s Vassar Brothers Medical Center in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., coordinating care in that hospital and throughout the Health Quest system.

Dr. Hafez has served full-time hospitalist stints with MidMichigan Health’s Physician Hospitalist Group, as well as with RiteMed Urgent Care. A native of Egypt, Dr. Hafez is fluent in both English and Arabic.
 

Caldwell UNC Healthcare (Lenoir, N.C.) has promoted David Lowry, MD, to chief medical officer as of Aug. 1, 2017.

Dr. Lowry, a longtime hospitalist and veteran in hospital medicine in general, will lead the building’s hospitalist program, support the chief of staff, and provide direct patient care, as well. He will serve as physician advisor for Caldwell’s Clinical Documentation, Utilization Review, Respiratory Care, and Rehabilitation departments.

Dr. Lowry boasts more than 25 years experience in hospital medicine and led in the creation of Caldwell’s hospitalist program. Since joining Caldwell, he has held leadership positions including chief of medicine. He received the hospital’s Donald D. McNeill Jr. Award for Outstanding Physician Leadership in 2014, as voted by his peers.
 

Joahd Toure, MD, recently was hired by Adirondack Health (Saranac Lake, N.Y.) as its new chief medical officer. He started his new position in late June 2017.

Longtime employee Emily Chapman, MD, has been promoted to chief medical officer and vice president of medical affairs at Children’s Minnesota Hospital (Minneapolis). The former vice CMO took on her new role on July 5, 2017.

Mark Sockell, MD, is the new chief medical officer at Meritage Medical Network in Novato, Calif. Meritage is a physician-run network that includes more than 700 board-certified physicians in both primary care and specialist fields.

Dr. Sockell has been a member of Meritage’s Board of Directors since 2014, and he specializes in risk adjustment and quality measures. His career has focused on medical education, headed by a stint as director of medical education at St. Mary’s Medical Center (San Francisco). There, he created and ran the inpatient hospitalist program.
 

Business Moves

Hammond-Henry Hospital (Geneseo, Ill.) recently announced the creation of a hospitalist program, utilizing the facility’s own emergency room physicians. Hammond-Henry will staff one emergency room doctor available for rounds outside of their ER work throughout the day.

The center’s hospitalist program will be led by medical director Kevin Jeffries, MD, who also will serve as one of the hospital’s ER physicians/hospitalists.
 

Avera Queen of Peace Hospital (Mitchell, S.D.) started its own hospitalist program on Aug. 1, 2017, launching with the goal of improving patient experience within the building. Avera’s hospitalists will be on-site for 12 hours each day, assisting specialists and working with patients who do not have a local primary care physician.

Queen of Peace is the regional referral center for an 11-county area, part of Avera Health System’s 330 facilities across North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska.
 

Pediatric hospitalist Patrick Conway, MD, has been named president and chief executive officer of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina. Dr. Conway will take over for the retiring Brad Wilson on Oct. 1.

Dr. Conway is currently the deputy administrator for Innovation and Quality, and the director of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Previously, he was CMO at CMS, having served both the Obama and Trump administrations.

Hossam Hafez, MD, recently claimed the role of chief of Hospitalist Service with Health Quest Medical Practice (LaGrangeville, N.Y.). Dr. Hafez will be based out of Health Quest’s Vassar Brothers Medical Center in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., coordinating care in that hospital and throughout the Health Quest system.

Dr. Hafez has served full-time hospitalist stints with MidMichigan Health’s Physician Hospitalist Group, as well as with RiteMed Urgent Care. A native of Egypt, Dr. Hafez is fluent in both English and Arabic.
 

Caldwell UNC Healthcare (Lenoir, N.C.) has promoted David Lowry, MD, to chief medical officer as of Aug. 1, 2017.

Dr. Lowry, a longtime hospitalist and veteran in hospital medicine in general, will lead the building’s hospitalist program, support the chief of staff, and provide direct patient care, as well. He will serve as physician advisor for Caldwell’s Clinical Documentation, Utilization Review, Respiratory Care, and Rehabilitation departments.

Dr. Lowry boasts more than 25 years experience in hospital medicine and led in the creation of Caldwell’s hospitalist program. Since joining Caldwell, he has held leadership positions including chief of medicine. He received the hospital’s Donald D. McNeill Jr. Award for Outstanding Physician Leadership in 2014, as voted by his peers.
 

Joahd Toure, MD, recently was hired by Adirondack Health (Saranac Lake, N.Y.) as its new chief medical officer. He started his new position in late June 2017.

Longtime employee Emily Chapman, MD, has been promoted to chief medical officer and vice president of medical affairs at Children’s Minnesota Hospital (Minneapolis). The former vice CMO took on her new role on July 5, 2017.

Mark Sockell, MD, is the new chief medical officer at Meritage Medical Network in Novato, Calif. Meritage is a physician-run network that includes more than 700 board-certified physicians in both primary care and specialist fields.

Dr. Sockell has been a member of Meritage’s Board of Directors since 2014, and he specializes in risk adjustment and quality measures. His career has focused on medical education, headed by a stint as director of medical education at St. Mary’s Medical Center (San Francisco). There, he created and ran the inpatient hospitalist program.
 

Business Moves

Hammond-Henry Hospital (Geneseo, Ill.) recently announced the creation of a hospitalist program, utilizing the facility’s own emergency room physicians. Hammond-Henry will staff one emergency room doctor available for rounds outside of their ER work throughout the day.

The center’s hospitalist program will be led by medical director Kevin Jeffries, MD, who also will serve as one of the hospital’s ER physicians/hospitalists.
 

Avera Queen of Peace Hospital (Mitchell, S.D.) started its own hospitalist program on Aug. 1, 2017, launching with the goal of improving patient experience within the building. Avera’s hospitalists will be on-site for 12 hours each day, assisting specialists and working with patients who do not have a local primary care physician.

Queen of Peace is the regional referral center for an 11-county area, part of Avera Health System’s 330 facilities across North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska.
 

Having failed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, Congress is now working on a tax overhaul. But it turns out the tax bills in the House and Senate also aim to reshape health care.

Here are five big ways the tax bill could affect health policy:

1. Repeal the requirement for most people to have health insurance or pay a tax penalty

Republicans tried and failed to end the so-called individual mandate this year when they attempted to advance their health overhaul legislation. Now the idea is back, at least in the Senate’s version of the tax bill. The measure would not technically remove the requirement for people to have insurance, but it would eliminate the fine people would face if they choose to remain uninsured.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that dropping the requirement would result in 13 million fewer people having insurance over 10 years.

It also estimates that premiums would rise 10% more per year than they would without this change. That is because healthier people would be most likely to drop insurance in the absence of a fine, so insurers would have to raise premiums to compensate for a sicker group of customers. Those consumers, in turn, would be left with fewer affordable choices, according to the CBO.

State insurance officials are concerned that insurers will drop out of the individual market entirely if there is no requirement for healthy people to sign up, but they still have to sell to people who know they will need medical care.

Ironically, the states most likely to see this kind of insurance-market disruption are those that are reliably Republican. An analysis by the Los Angeles Times suggested that the states with the fewest insurers and the highest premiums – including Alaska, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, and Wyoming – would be the ones left with either no coverage options or options too expensive for most consumers in the individual market.
 

2. Repeal the medical expense deduction

The House-passed tax bill, although not the Senate’s, would eliminate taxpayers’ ability to deduct medical expenses that exceed 10% of their adjusted gross income.

The medical expense deduction is not widely used – just under 9 million tax filers took it on their 2015 tax returns, according to the Internal Revenue Service. But those who do use it generally have very high medical expenses, often for a disabled child, a serious chronic illness, or expensive long-term care not covered by health insurance.

Among those most vehemently against getting rid of the deduction is the senior advocacy group AARP. Eliminating the deduction, the group said in a statement, “amounts to a health tax on millions of Americans with high medical costs – especially middle income seniors.”
 

3. Trigger major cuts to the Medicare program

The tax bill includes no specific Medicare changes, but budget analysts point out that passing it in its current form would trigger another law to kick in. That measure requires cuts to federal programs if the federal budget deficit is increased.

Because the tax bills in both the House and Senate would add an additional $1.5 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years, both would result in automatic cuts under the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (PAYGO). According to the CBO, if Congress passes the tax bill and does not waive the PAYGO law, federal officials “would be required to issue a sequestration order within 15 days of the end of the session of Congress to reduce spending in fiscal year 2018 by the resultant total of $136 billion.”

Cuts to Medicare are limited under the PAYGO law, so the Medicare reduction would be limited to 4% of program spending, which is roughly $25 billion of that total. Cuts of a similar size would be required in future years. Most of that would likely come from payments to providers.
 

4. Change tax treatment for graduate students and those paying back student loans

The House bill, though not the Senate’s, would for the first time require graduate students to pay tax on the value of tuition that universities do not require them to pay.

Currently, graduate students in many fields, including science, often are paid a small stipend for teaching while they pursue advanced degrees. Many are technically charged tuition, but it is “waived” as long as they are working for the university.

The House tax bill would eliminate that waiver and require them to pay taxes on the full value of the tuition they don’t have to pay, which would result in many students with fairly low incomes seeing very large tax bills.

At the same time, the House tax bill would eliminate the deduction for interest paid on student loans. This would disproportionately affect young doctors.

According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, 75% of the medical school class of 2017 graduated with student loan debt, with nearly half owing $200,000 or more.
 

5. Change or eliminate the tax credit for rare disease drug development

Congress created the so-called Orphan Drug Credit in 1983, as part of a package of incentives intended to entice drugmakers to study and develop drugs to treat rare diseases, defined as those affecting fewer than 200,000 people. With such a small potential market, it does not otherwise make financial sense for the companies to spend the millions of dollars necessary to develop treatments for such ailments.

To date, about 500 drugs have come to market using the incentives, although in some cases drugmakers have manipulated the credit for extra financial gain.

The House tax bill would eliminate the tax credit; the Senate bill would scale it back. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), chairman of the tax-writing Finance Committee, is one of the original sponsors of the orphan drug law.

The drug industry has been relatively quiet about the potential loss of the credit, but the National Organization for Rare Disorders called the change “wholly unacceptable” and said it “would directly result in 33% fewer orphan drugs coming to market.”
 

Kaiser Health News is a nonprofit news service covering health issues. It is an editorially independent program of the Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

Having failed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, Congress is now working on a tax overhaul. But it turns out the tax bills in the House and Senate also aim to reshape health care.

Here are five big ways the tax bill could affect health policy:

1. Repeal the requirement for most people to have health insurance or pay a tax penalty

Republicans tried and failed to end the so-called individual mandate this year when they attempted to advance their health overhaul legislation. Now the idea is back, at least in the Senate’s version of the tax bill. The measure would not technically remove the requirement for people to have insurance, but it would eliminate the fine people would face if they choose to remain uninsured.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that dropping the requirement would result in 13 million fewer people having insurance over 10 years.

It also estimates that premiums would rise 10% more per year than they would without this change. That is because healthier people would be most likely to drop insurance in the absence of a fine, so insurers would have to raise premiums to compensate for a sicker group of customers. Those consumers, in turn, would be left with fewer affordable choices, according to the CBO.

State insurance officials are concerned that insurers will drop out of the individual market entirely if there is no requirement for healthy people to sign up, but they still have to sell to people who know they will need medical care.

Ironically, the states most likely to see this kind of insurance-market disruption are those that are reliably Republican. An analysis by the Los Angeles Times suggested that the states with the fewest insurers and the highest premiums – including Alaska, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, and Wyoming – would be the ones left with either no coverage options or options too expensive for most consumers in the individual market.
 

2. Repeal the medical expense deduction

The House-passed tax bill, although not the Senate’s, would eliminate taxpayers’ ability to deduct medical expenses that exceed 10% of their adjusted gross income.

The medical expense deduction is not widely used – just under 9 million tax filers took it on their 2015 tax returns, according to the Internal Revenue Service. But those who do use it generally have very high medical expenses, often for a disabled child, a serious chronic illness, or expensive long-term care not covered by health insurance.

Among those most vehemently against getting rid of the deduction is the senior advocacy group AARP. Eliminating the deduction, the group said in a statement, “amounts to a health tax on millions of Americans with high medical costs – especially middle income seniors.”
 

3. Trigger major cuts to the Medicare program

The tax bill includes no specific Medicare changes, but budget analysts point out that passing it in its current form would trigger another law to kick in. That measure requires cuts to federal programs if the federal budget deficit is increased.

Because the tax bills in both the House and Senate would add an additional $1.5 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years, both would result in automatic cuts under the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (PAYGO). According to the CBO, if Congress passes the tax bill and does not waive the PAYGO law, federal officials “would be required to issue a sequestration order within 15 days of the end of the session of Congress to reduce spending in fiscal year 2018 by the resultant total of $136 billion.”

Cuts to Medicare are limited under the PAYGO law, so the Medicare reduction would be limited to 4% of program spending, which is roughly $25 billion of that total. Cuts of a similar size would be required in future years. Most of that would likely come from payments to providers.
 

4. Change tax treatment for graduate students and those paying back student loans

The House bill, though not the Senate’s, would for the first time require graduate students to pay tax on the value of tuition that universities do not require them to pay.

Currently, graduate students in many fields, including science, often are paid a small stipend for teaching while they pursue advanced degrees. Many are technically charged tuition, but it is “waived” as long as they are working for the university.

The House tax bill would eliminate that waiver and require them to pay taxes on the full value of the tuition they don’t have to pay, which would result in many students with fairly low incomes seeing very large tax bills.

At the same time, the House tax bill would eliminate the deduction for interest paid on student loans. This would disproportionately affect young doctors.

According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, 75% of the medical school class of 2017 graduated with student loan debt, with nearly half owing $200,000 or more.
 

5. Change or eliminate the tax credit for rare disease drug development

Congress created the so-called Orphan Drug Credit in 1983, as part of a package of incentives intended to entice drugmakers to study and develop drugs to treat rare diseases, defined as those affecting fewer than 200,000 people. With such a small potential market, it does not otherwise make financial sense for the companies to spend the millions of dollars necessary to develop treatments for such ailments.

To date, about 500 drugs have come to market using the incentives, although in some cases drugmakers have manipulated the credit for extra financial gain.

The House tax bill would eliminate the tax credit; the Senate bill would scale it back. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), chairman of the tax-writing Finance Committee, is one of the original sponsors of the orphan drug law.

The drug industry has been relatively quiet about the potential loss of the credit, but the National Organization for Rare Disorders called the change “wholly unacceptable” and said it “would directly result in 33% fewer orphan drugs coming to market.”
 

Kaiser Health News is a nonprofit news service covering health issues. It is an editorially independent program of the Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

Having failed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, Congress is now working on a tax overhaul. But it turns out the tax bills in the House and Senate also aim to reshape health care.

Here are five big ways the tax bill could affect health policy:

1. Repeal the requirement for most people to have health insurance or pay a tax penalty

Republicans tried and failed to end the so-called individual mandate this year when they attempted to advance their health overhaul legislation. Now the idea is back, at least in the Senate’s version of the tax bill. The measure would not technically remove the requirement for people to have insurance, but it would eliminate the fine people would face if they choose to remain uninsured.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that dropping the requirement would result in 13 million fewer people having insurance over 10 years.

It also estimates that premiums would rise 10% more per year than they would without this change. That is because healthier people would be most likely to drop insurance in the absence of a fine, so insurers would have to raise premiums to compensate for a sicker group of customers. Those consumers, in turn, would be left with fewer affordable choices, according to the CBO.

State insurance officials are concerned that insurers will drop out of the individual market entirely if there is no requirement for healthy people to sign up, but they still have to sell to people who know they will need medical care.

Ironically, the states most likely to see this kind of insurance-market disruption are those that are reliably Republican. An analysis by the Los Angeles Times suggested that the states with the fewest insurers and the highest premiums – including Alaska, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, and Wyoming – would be the ones left with either no coverage options or options too expensive for most consumers in the individual market.
 

2. Repeal the medical expense deduction

The House-passed tax bill, although not the Senate’s, would eliminate taxpayers’ ability to deduct medical expenses that exceed 10% of their adjusted gross income.

The medical expense deduction is not widely used – just under 9 million tax filers took it on their 2015 tax returns, according to the Internal Revenue Service. But those who do use it generally have very high medical expenses, often for a disabled child, a serious chronic illness, or expensive long-term care not covered by health insurance.

Among those most vehemently against getting rid of the deduction is the senior advocacy group AARP. Eliminating the deduction, the group said in a statement, “amounts to a health tax on millions of Americans with high medical costs – especially middle income seniors.”
 

3. Trigger major cuts to the Medicare program

The tax bill includes no specific Medicare changes, but budget analysts point out that passing it in its current form would trigger another law to kick in. That measure requires cuts to federal programs if the federal budget deficit is increased.

Because the tax bills in both the House and Senate would add an additional $1.5 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years, both would result in automatic cuts under the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (PAYGO). According to the CBO, if Congress passes the tax bill and does not waive the PAYGO law, federal officials “would be required to issue a sequestration order within 15 days of the end of the session of Congress to reduce spending in fiscal year 2018 by the resultant total of $136 billion.”

Cuts to Medicare are limited under the PAYGO law, so the Medicare reduction would be limited to 4% of program spending, which is roughly $25 billion of that total. Cuts of a similar size would be required in future years. Most of that would likely come from payments to providers.
 

4. Change tax treatment for graduate students and those paying back student loans

The House bill, though not the Senate’s, would for the first time require graduate students to pay tax on the value of tuition that universities do not require them to pay.

Currently, graduate students in many fields, including science, often are paid a small stipend for teaching while they pursue advanced degrees. Many are technically charged tuition, but it is “waived” as long as they are working for the university.

The House tax bill would eliminate that waiver and require them to pay taxes on the full value of the tuition they don’t have to pay, which would result in many students with fairly low incomes seeing very large tax bills.

At the same time, the House tax bill would eliminate the deduction for interest paid on student loans. This would disproportionately affect young doctors.

According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, 75% of the medical school class of 2017 graduated with student loan debt, with nearly half owing $200,000 or more.
 

5. Change or eliminate the tax credit for rare disease drug development

Congress created the so-called Orphan Drug Credit in 1983, as part of a package of incentives intended to entice drugmakers to study and develop drugs to treat rare diseases, defined as those affecting fewer than 200,000 people. With such a small potential market, it does not otherwise make financial sense for the companies to spend the millions of dollars necessary to develop treatments for such ailments.

To date, about 500 drugs have come to market using the incentives, although in some cases drugmakers have manipulated the credit for extra financial gain.

The House tax bill would eliminate the tax credit; the Senate bill would scale it back. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), chairman of the tax-writing Finance Committee, is one of the original sponsors of the orphan drug law.

The drug industry has been relatively quiet about the potential loss of the credit, but the National Organization for Rare Disorders called the change “wholly unacceptable” and said it “would directly result in 33% fewer orphan drugs coming to market.”
 

Kaiser Health News is a nonprofit news service covering health issues. It is an editorially independent program of the Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

The Sarcoma Journal — Official Journal of the Sarcoma Foundation of America™ represents a new and exciting initiative in professional education. We invite you to share in the excitement surrounding the launch of a medical journal designed to be your most authoritative and comprehensive source of scientific information on the diagnosis and treatment of sarcomas and sarcoma sub-types.

On behalf of myself, our editorial board, and editorial staff, I welcome you to this journal as we explore new treatment paradigms for this disease, translational research that bridges the bench and the clinic, and a broad range of science to encompass the many facets of sarcoma. In my opinion, the startup of this publication could not come at a better time.

As cancer specialists and allied health care professionals who attend regular meetings of your peers, including ASCO and CTOS, we have seen a dramatic shift in management within the last few years. In many ways we are at a threshold of a new era in sarcoma management, and the spectrum of treatment is expanding across subspecialties, promising more effective strategies for our patients that are based on an improved understanding of disease biology. We need a resource to maintain and clarify our focus on this disease as research opens new avenues for us to consider in the management of patients with sarcoma.

When I was approached to serve as Editor-in-Chief of The Sarcoma Journal by the Sarcoma Foundation of America, I began to recruit an esteemed group of colleagues whose knowledge, worldwide reputation as thought leaders, and dedicated work as researchers would reflect our commitment toward finding a cure for sarcoma. Many of the colleagues who will join me on the Editorial Advisory Board have long-standing affiliations with the Sarcoma Foundation of America and its comprehensive program of sarcoma research, patient support and education and advocacy. As you explore the first issue of the journal, you will discover how our editorial content is an extension of this three-tiered approach. The SFA program is characterized by a multi-dimensional and uniquely coordinated outreach program of videos and webinars, websites (a new journal website is launching as well) a sarcoma-specific clinical trials database, newsletters and related materials— all aimed ultimately at finding a cure for this disease. This professional journal complements and extends the SFA’s mission.

Although The Sarcoma Journal has a position within the SFA umbrella, my focus is foremost on ensuring that The Sarcoma Journal contains the most accurate, relevant and up to date information available. I urge you to explore our highly informative and relevant sarcoma-specific content—including original reports, review articles, a Journal Club, expert opinion, meeting reports, and patient advocacy that encapsulates the latest findings from the bench with implications for the bedside.

Whether it is discussing the latest findings in advanced sarcoma sub-types or implications of genetics as a prognostic factor, you will find the information in this journal, reliably analyzed by our team of experts who are leading sarcoma clinicians and investigators. All of the content we provide is presented in a thought-provoking, lively and peer-reviewed format; we welcome your comments and suggestions to keep us on the forefront of patient care as we cover a rapidly evolving landscape of new information in the treatment of sarcomas and frame it within a context directly applicable to enhancing the quality of patient care.

The Sarcoma Journal — Official Journal of the Sarcoma Foundation of America™ represents a new and exciting initiative in professional education. We invite you to share in the excitement surrounding the launch of a medical journal designed to be your most authoritative and comprehensive source of scientific information on the diagnosis and treatment of sarcomas and sarcoma sub-types.

On behalf of myself, our editorial board, and editorial staff, I welcome you to this journal as we explore new treatment paradigms for this disease, translational research that bridges the bench and the clinic, and a broad range of science to encompass the many facets of sarcoma. In my opinion, the startup of this publication could not come at a better time.

As cancer specialists and allied health care professionals who attend regular meetings of your peers, including ASCO and CTOS, we have seen a dramatic shift in management within the last few years. In many ways we are at a threshold of a new era in sarcoma management, and the spectrum of treatment is expanding across subspecialties, promising more effective strategies for our patients that are based on an improved understanding of disease biology. We need a resource to maintain and clarify our focus on this disease as research opens new avenues for us to consider in the management of patients with sarcoma.

When I was approached to serve as Editor-in-Chief of The Sarcoma Journal by the Sarcoma Foundation of America, I began to recruit an esteemed group of colleagues whose knowledge, worldwide reputation as thought leaders, and dedicated work as researchers would reflect our commitment toward finding a cure for sarcoma. Many of the colleagues who will join me on the Editorial Advisory Board have long-standing affiliations with the Sarcoma Foundation of America and its comprehensive program of sarcoma research, patient support and education and advocacy. As you explore the first issue of the journal, you will discover how our editorial content is an extension of this three-tiered approach. The SFA program is characterized by a multi-dimensional and uniquely coordinated outreach program of videos and webinars, websites (a new journal website is launching as well) a sarcoma-specific clinical trials database, newsletters and related materials— all aimed ultimately at finding a cure for this disease. This professional journal complements and extends the SFA’s mission.

Although The Sarcoma Journal has a position within the SFA umbrella, my focus is foremost on ensuring that The Sarcoma Journal contains the most accurate, relevant and up to date information available. I urge you to explore our highly informative and relevant sarcoma-specific content—including original reports, review articles, a Journal Club, expert opinion, meeting reports, and patient advocacy that encapsulates the latest findings from the bench with implications for the bedside.

Whether it is discussing the latest findings in advanced sarcoma sub-types or implications of genetics as a prognostic factor, you will find the information in this journal, reliably analyzed by our team of experts who are leading sarcoma clinicians and investigators. All of the content we provide is presented in a thought-provoking, lively and peer-reviewed format; we welcome your comments and suggestions to keep us on the forefront of patient care as we cover a rapidly evolving landscape of new information in the treatment of sarcomas and frame it within a context directly applicable to enhancing the quality of patient care.

The Sarcoma Journal — Official Journal of the Sarcoma Foundation of America™ represents a new and exciting initiative in professional education. We invite you to share in the excitement surrounding the launch of a medical journal designed to be your most authoritative and comprehensive source of scientific information on the diagnosis and treatment of sarcomas and sarcoma sub-types.

On behalf of myself, our editorial board, and editorial staff, I welcome you to this journal as we explore new treatment paradigms for this disease, translational research that bridges the bench and the clinic, and a broad range of science to encompass the many facets of sarcoma. In my opinion, the startup of this publication could not come at a better time.

As cancer specialists and allied health care professionals who attend regular meetings of your peers, including ASCO and CTOS, we have seen a dramatic shift in management within the last few years. In many ways we are at a threshold of a new era in sarcoma management, and the spectrum of treatment is expanding across subspecialties, promising more effective strategies for our patients that are based on an improved understanding of disease biology. We need a resource to maintain and clarify our focus on this disease as research opens new avenues for us to consider in the management of patients with sarcoma.

When I was approached to serve as Editor-in-Chief of The Sarcoma Journal by the Sarcoma Foundation of America, I began to recruit an esteemed group of colleagues whose knowledge, worldwide reputation as thought leaders, and dedicated work as researchers would reflect our commitment toward finding a cure for sarcoma. Many of the colleagues who will join me on the Editorial Advisory Board have long-standing affiliations with the Sarcoma Foundation of America and its comprehensive program of sarcoma research, patient support and education and advocacy. As you explore the first issue of the journal, you will discover how our editorial content is an extension of this three-tiered approach. The SFA program is characterized by a multi-dimensional and uniquely coordinated outreach program of videos and webinars, websites (a new journal website is launching as well) a sarcoma-specific clinical trials database, newsletters and related materials— all aimed ultimately at finding a cure for this disease. This professional journal complements and extends the SFA’s mission.

Although The Sarcoma Journal has a position within the SFA umbrella, my focus is foremost on ensuring that The Sarcoma Journal contains the most accurate, relevant and up to date information available. I urge you to explore our highly informative and relevant sarcoma-specific content—including original reports, review articles, a Journal Club, expert opinion, meeting reports, and patient advocacy that encapsulates the latest findings from the bench with implications for the bedside.

Whether it is discussing the latest findings in advanced sarcoma sub-types or implications of genetics as a prognostic factor, you will find the information in this journal, reliably analyzed by our team of experts who are leading sarcoma clinicians and investigators. All of the content we provide is presented in a thought-provoking, lively and peer-reviewed format; we welcome your comments and suggestions to keep us on the forefront of patient care as we cover a rapidly evolving landscape of new information in the treatment of sarcomas and frame it within a context directly applicable to enhancing the quality of patient care.

Pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma (PSC) is a rare histological subtype that has an aggressive course with average survival of 11-13 months.¹ In clinical practice, the possible presentations of this rare cancer are not widely known, resulting in a misdiagnosis. That is what happened with our patient, who presented with necrotizing cavitary lung lesion and soft tissue necrotizing lymphadenitis. The clinical picture was reminiscent of tuberculosis or granulomatosis with polyangiitis and was further confounded by negative computed-tomography (CT)-guided biopsy and bronchoscopy findings, which added to the delay in diagnosis. With the currently available knowledge, the diagnosis of PSC depends largely on evaluation of the surgically resected specimen, which in most cases is avoided until there is a high suspicion of PSC. Biopsy is not useful due to extensive necrosis, as will be seen in our case. Consequently, most of the data in the literature is based on case series of autopsy specimen, and the clinical characteristics of PSC remain unclear. The rarity of PSC has prevented its characterization in literature. We report here a rare presentation of PSC with necrotizing lung lesion, to add to the paucity of the current data.

Case presentation and summary

A 58-year-old homeless man presented to the Upstate University Hospital, Syracuse, New York, with a 25-pound weight loss during the previous month and associated productive cough and hemoptysis for a week and a painful mass in the nape of his neck. He denied any fever, chest pain, sick contacts, or joint pain. He had a history of about 40 pack-years of smoking, and his brother had recently been diagnosed with lung cancer. A tender fluctuant mass was detected in the nape of his neck on examination (Figure 1).

The patient had presented 9 months earlier with persistent cough and hemoptysis, and at that visit was found to have a cavitary lesion in the right lung measuring 2 cm (0.8 in). He had undergone a computed-tomograpghy (CT)-guided biopsy of the lesion, which had shown acute and chronic inflammation with fibrosis, and he had negative bronchoscopy findings. The patient tested negative for tuberculosis during the first visit but he left the hospital against the medical advice of the physicians and he was lost to follow-up until his re-presentation.

On physical examination at his re-presentation, the patient seemed cachectic, with a blood pressure of 94/62 mm of Hg. The mass in the nape of his neck was about 3 cm (1.2 in) long, with erythema of the surrounding skin (Figure 1). Bronchial breath sounds were heard in the right upper lobe of the lung, likely due to the underlying cavitary lesion (Figure 2B). Relevant lab findings included a negative HIV test and repeat AFB (acid-fast bacilli) sputum cultures. A CT-guided biopsy with contrast of the thorax showed an interval increase in the size of the cavitary lesion in the patient’s right upper lobe, now measuring about 10 cm (4 in). Also seen were multiple nodules elsewhere in both lungs, with the largest measuring 8 mm (0.3 in). A CT scan of the neck showed 3 cm cystic mass within the posterior subcutaneous soft tissue of the C3 level, confirming the examination finding of the neck mass (Figure 2A) with peripheral enhancement and surrounding infiltrative changes, likely abscess or malignant lymph node versus necrotic infection. He underwent bronchoscopy, which again failed to reveal any endobronchial lesions. Bronchoalveolar lavage was sent for microbiological analysis, including AFB and fungus, but came back negative. Transbronchial biopsy cytology revealed fragments of tumor composed of large pleomorphic cells without glandular or squamous differentiation, within large areas of necrosis (Figure 3). Immunohistochemical studies showed strong reactivity with cytokeratin CAM5.2 (Figure 4), weak and focal reactivity with cytokeratin AE1/AE3 (Figure 5), and lack of reactivity with CD20, CD3, CD30, S-100, MART-1, TTF-1 and p63, all findings consistent with sarcomatoid carcinoma.

The patient underwent fine-needle aspiration and drainage of the neck lesion and the culture grew mixed organisms The results of a bone scan, which was done within a week, showed multiple foci of uptake in the ribs and cervical spine. Given the patient’s advanced disease, he was started on palliative radiotherapy with radiosensitizing chemotherapy with carboplatin (target AUC 6) and paclitaxel (135 mg/m2 over 24 hours). His symptoms of hemoptysis improved transiently after the first cycle, but he became hypotensive and drowsy during the second cycle of therapy, and the family decided to make the patient comfort care and withdraw all further treatment. He was discharged to hospice.

Discussion

PSC is a rare variant of non-small-cell carcinoma lung cancer, accounting for up to 0.4% of lung malignancy.1  It was

recently subtyped by the World Health Organization as a non-small cell lung carcinoma with certain amount of differentiation resembling sarcoma or containing elements of sarcoma.^2-4  It is not known why both elements co-exist in the tumor, but Franks and colleagues some theories have been postulated in the literature, including possible origin from a single, aberrant stem cell with progenies differentiating in two separate pathways.³

Sarcomatoid carcinoma consists of spectrum of tumors including pleomorphic carcinoma, spindle cell carcinoma, giant cell carcinoma, carcinosarcoma, and blastoma.3,4 It usually shows male preponderance, and association with smoking.3  The diagnosis commonly occurs in the sixth decade of life, except for pulmonary blastoma, which is more common in the fourth decade andnwith equal gender distribution.⁴

The presenting symptoms can be variable and nonspecific, but predominantly include chest pain, cough, hemoptysis, and/or weight loss.⁵  Radiologically, pulmonary sarcomatoid cancer presenting as a necrotizing cavitary lesion in the lung is a rare finding, seldom reported in the past.^6,7  The presentation in our case, with necrotizing lymphadenitis, was reminiscent of an infectious or autoimmune etiology such as tuberculosis or granulomatosis with polyangiitis. The presence of extensive necrosis in the lesion and the characteristic heterogeneity of the tumor had resulted in inconclusive biopsy findings during the previous presentation. In clinical practice, there is over-reliance on biopsy findings to make the distinction between cancer and other mimicking conditions. This is especially true for rare tumors such as PSC, which often results in misdiagnosis and a delay in administering the proper treatment. Transbronchial biopsy in cases such as the present case, carries little benefit because the diagnosis depends on the site from which the biopsy is taken and whether the biopsied tissue is representative of the entire mass. The diagnosis can be suspected based on the clinical and radiological findings but confirmation requires a surgical resection to delineate the accurate cytology and architecture.5,6,8 Huang and colleagues showed a misdiagnosis rate of PSC of >70% preoperatively.4 Resective surgery is feasible only in patients with high index of suspicion for a malignancy, which in most cases requires previous confirmation with a biopsy. The rarity of this cancer, its unusual presentations, and the lack of specific testing preclude early diagnosis and timely treatment of this fatal condition.

Initial treatment options for localized or with limited spread disease is resective surgery. The role of chemo- or radiation therapy is not known, but they have not previously shown promising results,6,8 except in some cases when they are used as postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy4 or in bulky, locally invasive tumors.1 The recurrence rate after surgery is very high, resulting in a poor 5-year survival rate.1,8 Experimental therapies, such as antibodies that target epidermal growth factor receptor mutations, have not shown much success either.8 In conclusion, the outlook for patients with PSC with the current available knowledge and treatment protocols, is dismal.

Most of the current knowledge and data in the literature is based on cases from autopsy or early-stage surgical resections rather than on patients with advanced cancer.5 Moreover, the role of surgical resection in PSC is questionable, given the high recurrence rate. Subsequently, the clinical and pathological manifestations have yet to be well characterized.⁴ There has been advance with the publication of more studies recently. Cytokeratin markers such as CAM 5.2 and AE1/AE3 are commonly useful to support the diagnosis when suspected.³ Other markers, including the carcinoembryonic antigen, CD15, and thyroid transcription factor-1 may be variably positive, based on the differentiation of the cancer. Other exciting prospects in the study of PSC include the suggestion of a modified vimentin histologic score for better characterization of the cancer and the discovery of high plateletderived growth factor receptor beta immunohistochemistry expression in PSC as a potential target for future therapy.

Conclusion

Pulmonary sarcomatoid lung cancer can present with a predominant necrotizing picture that mimics diseases such as tuberculosis. In such case, transbronchial biopsy carries little benefit because the diagnosis depends on whether the biopsied tissue is representative of the entire mass, often confounded by the extensive necrosis. More data is needed to determine prognostic factors and appropriate therapeutic strategies. TSJ

Correspondence

Gaurang Nandkishor Vaidya, MD

References

1. Martin LW, Correa AM, Ordonez NG, et al. Sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung: a predictor of poor prognosis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;84(3):973-980.

2. Brambilla E, Travis WD, Colby TV, Corrin B, Shimosato Y. The new World Health Organization classification of lung tumours. Eur Respir J. 2001;18(6):1059-1068.

3. Franks TJ, Galvin JR. Sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung: histologic criteria and common lesions in the differential diagnosis. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(1):49-54.

4. Huang SY, Shen SJ, Li XY. Pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma: a clinicopathologic study and prognostic analysis of 51 cases. http://wjso. biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1477-7819-11-252. Published 2013. Accessed March 12, 2017.

5. Travis WD. Sarcomatoid neoplasms of the lung and pleura. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(11):1645-1658.

6. Pelosi G, Sonzogni A, De Pas T, et al. Review article: pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinomas: a practical overview. Int J Surg Pathol. 2010;18(2):103-120.

7. Chang YL, Lee YC, Shih JY, Wu CT. Pulmonary pleomorphic (spindle) cell carcinoma: peculiar clinicopathologic manifestations different from ordinary non-small cell carcinoma. Lung Cancer. 2001;34(1):91-97.

8. Park JS, Lee Y, Han J, et al. Clinicopathologic outcomes of curative resection for sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung. Oncology. 2011;81(3-4):206-213.

Pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma (PSC) is a rare histological subtype that has an aggressive course with average survival of 11-13 months.¹ In clinical practice, the possible presentations of this rare cancer are not widely known, resulting in a misdiagnosis. That is what happened with our patient, who presented with necrotizing cavitary lung lesion and soft tissue necrotizing lymphadenitis. The clinical picture was reminiscent of tuberculosis or granulomatosis with polyangiitis and was further confounded by negative computed-tomography (CT)-guided biopsy and bronchoscopy findings, which added to the delay in diagnosis. With the currently available knowledge, the diagnosis of PSC depends largely on evaluation of the surgically resected specimen, which in most cases is avoided until there is a high suspicion of PSC. Biopsy is not useful due to extensive necrosis, as will be seen in our case. Consequently, most of the data in the literature is based on case series of autopsy specimen, and the clinical characteristics of PSC remain unclear. The rarity of PSC has prevented its characterization in literature. We report here a rare presentation of PSC with necrotizing lung lesion, to add to the paucity of the current data.

Case presentation and summary

A 58-year-old homeless man presented to the Upstate University Hospital, Syracuse, New York, with a 25-pound weight loss during the previous month and associated productive cough and hemoptysis for a week and a painful mass in the nape of his neck. He denied any fever, chest pain, sick contacts, or joint pain. He had a history of about 40 pack-years of smoking, and his brother had recently been diagnosed with lung cancer. A tender fluctuant mass was detected in the nape of his neck on examination (Figure 1).

The patient had presented 9 months earlier with persistent cough and hemoptysis, and at that visit was found to have a cavitary lesion in the right lung measuring 2 cm (0.8 in). He had undergone a computed-tomograpghy (CT)-guided biopsy of the lesion, which had shown acute and chronic inflammation with fibrosis, and he had negative bronchoscopy findings. The patient tested negative for tuberculosis during the first visit but he left the hospital against the medical advice of the physicians and he was lost to follow-up until his re-presentation.

On physical examination at his re-presentation, the patient seemed cachectic, with a blood pressure of 94/62 mm of Hg. The mass in the nape of his neck was about 3 cm (1.2 in) long, with erythema of the surrounding skin (Figure 1). Bronchial breath sounds were heard in the right upper lobe of the lung, likely due to the underlying cavitary lesion (Figure 2B). Relevant lab findings included a negative HIV test and repeat AFB (acid-fast bacilli) sputum cultures. A CT-guided biopsy with contrast of the thorax showed an interval increase in the size of the cavitary lesion in the patient’s right upper lobe, now measuring about 10 cm (4 in). Also seen were multiple nodules elsewhere in both lungs, with the largest measuring 8 mm (0.3 in). A CT scan of the neck showed 3 cm cystic mass within the posterior subcutaneous soft tissue of the C3 level, confirming the examination finding of the neck mass (Figure 2A) with peripheral enhancement and surrounding infiltrative changes, likely abscess or malignant lymph node versus necrotic infection. He underwent bronchoscopy, which again failed to reveal any endobronchial lesions. Bronchoalveolar lavage was sent for microbiological analysis, including AFB and fungus, but came back negative. Transbronchial biopsy cytology revealed fragments of tumor composed of large pleomorphic cells without glandular or squamous differentiation, within large areas of necrosis (Figure 3). Immunohistochemical studies showed strong reactivity with cytokeratin CAM5.2 (Figure 4), weak and focal reactivity with cytokeratin AE1/AE3 (Figure 5), and lack of reactivity with CD20, CD3, CD30, S-100, MART-1, TTF-1 and p63, all findings consistent with sarcomatoid carcinoma.

The patient underwent fine-needle aspiration and drainage of the neck lesion and the culture grew mixed organisms The results of a bone scan, which was done within a week, showed multiple foci of uptake in the ribs and cervical spine. Given the patient’s advanced disease, he was started on palliative radiotherapy with radiosensitizing chemotherapy with carboplatin (target AUC 6) and paclitaxel (135 mg/m2 over 24 hours). His symptoms of hemoptysis improved transiently after the first cycle, but he became hypotensive and drowsy during the second cycle of therapy, and the family decided to make the patient comfort care and withdraw all further treatment. He was discharged to hospice.

Discussion

PSC is a rare variant of non-small-cell carcinoma lung cancer, accounting for up to 0.4% of lung malignancy.1  It was

recently subtyped by the World Health Organization as a non-small cell lung carcinoma with certain amount of differentiation resembling sarcoma or containing elements of sarcoma.^2-4  It is not known why both elements co-exist in the tumor, but Franks and colleagues some theories have been postulated in the literature, including possible origin from a single, aberrant stem cell with progenies differentiating in two separate pathways.³

Sarcomatoid carcinoma consists of spectrum of tumors including pleomorphic carcinoma, spindle cell carcinoma, giant cell carcinoma, carcinosarcoma, and blastoma.3,4 It usually shows male preponderance, and association with smoking.3  The diagnosis commonly occurs in the sixth decade of life, except for pulmonary blastoma, which is more common in the fourth decade andnwith equal gender distribution.⁴

The presenting symptoms can be variable and nonspecific, but predominantly include chest pain, cough, hemoptysis, and/or weight loss.⁵  Radiologically, pulmonary sarcomatoid cancer presenting as a necrotizing cavitary lesion in the lung is a rare finding, seldom reported in the past.^6,7  The presentation in our case, with necrotizing lymphadenitis, was reminiscent of an infectious or autoimmune etiology such as tuberculosis or granulomatosis with polyangiitis. The presence of extensive necrosis in the lesion and the characteristic heterogeneity of the tumor had resulted in inconclusive biopsy findings during the previous presentation. In clinical practice, there is over-reliance on biopsy findings to make the distinction between cancer and other mimicking conditions. This is especially true for rare tumors such as PSC, which often results in misdiagnosis and a delay in administering the proper treatment. Transbronchial biopsy in cases such as the present case, carries little benefit because the diagnosis depends on the site from which the biopsy is taken and whether the biopsied tissue is representative of the entire mass. The diagnosis can be suspected based on the clinical and radiological findings but confirmation requires a surgical resection to delineate the accurate cytology and architecture.5,6,8 Huang and colleagues showed a misdiagnosis rate of PSC of >70% preoperatively.4 Resective surgery is feasible only in patients with high index of suspicion for a malignancy, which in most cases requires previous confirmation with a biopsy. The rarity of this cancer, its unusual presentations, and the lack of specific testing preclude early diagnosis and timely treatment of this fatal condition.

Initial treatment options for localized or with limited spread disease is resective surgery. The role of chemo- or radiation therapy is not known, but they have not previously shown promising results,6,8 except in some cases when they are used as postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy4 or in bulky, locally invasive tumors.1 The recurrence rate after surgery is very high, resulting in a poor 5-year survival rate.1,8 Experimental therapies, such as antibodies that target epidermal growth factor receptor mutations, have not shown much success either.8 In conclusion, the outlook for patients with PSC with the current available knowledge and treatment protocols, is dismal.

Most of the current knowledge and data in the literature is based on cases from autopsy or early-stage surgical resections rather than on patients with advanced cancer.5 Moreover, the role of surgical resection in PSC is questionable, given the high recurrence rate. Subsequently, the clinical and pathological manifestations have yet to be well characterized.⁴ There has been advance with the publication of more studies recently. Cytokeratin markers such as CAM 5.2 and AE1/AE3 are commonly useful to support the diagnosis when suspected.³ Other markers, including the carcinoembryonic antigen, CD15, and thyroid transcription factor-1 may be variably positive, based on the differentiation of the cancer. Other exciting prospects in the study of PSC include the suggestion of a modified vimentin histologic score for better characterization of the cancer and the discovery of high plateletderived growth factor receptor beta immunohistochemistry expression in PSC as a potential target for future therapy.

Conclusion

Pulmonary sarcomatoid lung cancer can present with a predominant necrotizing picture that mimics diseases such as tuberculosis. In such case, transbronchial biopsy carries little benefit because the diagnosis depends on whether the biopsied tissue is representative of the entire mass, often confounded by the extensive necrosis. More data is needed to determine prognostic factors and appropriate therapeutic strategies. TSJ

Correspondence

Gaurang Nandkishor Vaidya, MD

References

1. Martin LW, Correa AM, Ordonez NG, et al. Sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung: a predictor of poor prognosis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;84(3):973-980.

2. Brambilla E, Travis WD, Colby TV, Corrin B, Shimosato Y. The new World Health Organization classification of lung tumours. Eur Respir J. 2001;18(6):1059-1068.

3. Franks TJ, Galvin JR. Sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung: histologic criteria and common lesions in the differential diagnosis. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(1):49-54.

4. Huang SY, Shen SJ, Li XY. Pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma: a clinicopathologic study and prognostic analysis of 51 cases. http://wjso. biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1477-7819-11-252. Published 2013. Accessed March 12, 2017.

5. Travis WD. Sarcomatoid neoplasms of the lung and pleura. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(11):1645-1658.

6. Pelosi G, Sonzogni A, De Pas T, et al. Review article: pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinomas: a practical overview. Int J Surg Pathol. 2010;18(2):103-120.

7. Chang YL, Lee YC, Shih JY, Wu CT. Pulmonary pleomorphic (spindle) cell carcinoma: peculiar clinicopathologic manifestations different from ordinary non-small cell carcinoma. Lung Cancer. 2001;34(1):91-97.

8. Park JS, Lee Y, Han J, et al. Clinicopathologic outcomes of curative resection for sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung. Oncology. 2011;81(3-4):206-213.

Pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma (PSC) is a rare histological subtype that has an aggressive course with average survival of 11-13 months.¹ In clinical practice, the possible presentations of this rare cancer are not widely known, resulting in a misdiagnosis. That is what happened with our patient, who presented with necrotizing cavitary lung lesion and soft tissue necrotizing lymphadenitis. The clinical picture was reminiscent of tuberculosis or granulomatosis with polyangiitis and was further confounded by negative computed-tomography (CT)-guided biopsy and bronchoscopy findings, which added to the delay in diagnosis. With the currently available knowledge, the diagnosis of PSC depends largely on evaluation of the surgically resected specimen, which in most cases is avoided until there is a high suspicion of PSC. Biopsy is not useful due to extensive necrosis, as will be seen in our case. Consequently, most of the data in the literature is based on case series of autopsy specimen, and the clinical characteristics of PSC remain unclear. The rarity of PSC has prevented its characterization in literature. We report here a rare presentation of PSC with necrotizing lung lesion, to add to the paucity of the current data.

Case presentation and summary

A 58-year-old homeless man presented to the Upstate University Hospital, Syracuse, New York, with a 25-pound weight loss during the previous month and associated productive cough and hemoptysis for a week and a painful mass in the nape of his neck. He denied any fever, chest pain, sick contacts, or joint pain. He had a history of about 40 pack-years of smoking, and his brother had recently been diagnosed with lung cancer. A tender fluctuant mass was detected in the nape of his neck on examination (Figure 1).

The patient had presented 9 months earlier with persistent cough and hemoptysis, and at that visit was found to have a cavitary lesion in the right lung measuring 2 cm (0.8 in). He had undergone a computed-tomograpghy (CT)-guided biopsy of the lesion, which had shown acute and chronic inflammation with fibrosis, and he had negative bronchoscopy findings. The patient tested negative for tuberculosis during the first visit but he left the hospital against the medical advice of the physicians and he was lost to follow-up until his re-presentation.

On physical examination at his re-presentation, the patient seemed cachectic, with a blood pressure of 94/62 mm of Hg. The mass in the nape of his neck was about 3 cm (1.2 in) long, with erythema of the surrounding skin (Figure 1). Bronchial breath sounds were heard in the right upper lobe of the lung, likely due to the underlying cavitary lesion (Figure 2B). Relevant lab findings included a negative HIV test and repeat AFB (acid-fast bacilli) sputum cultures. A CT-guided biopsy with contrast of the thorax showed an interval increase in the size of the cavitary lesion in the patient’s right upper lobe, now measuring about 10 cm (4 in). Also seen were multiple nodules elsewhere in both lungs, with the largest measuring 8 mm (0.3 in). A CT scan of the neck showed 3 cm cystic mass within the posterior subcutaneous soft tissue of the C3 level, confirming the examination finding of the neck mass (Figure 2A) with peripheral enhancement and surrounding infiltrative changes, likely abscess or malignant lymph node versus necrotic infection. He underwent bronchoscopy, which again failed to reveal any endobronchial lesions. Bronchoalveolar lavage was sent for microbiological analysis, including AFB and fungus, but came back negative. Transbronchial biopsy cytology revealed fragments of tumor composed of large pleomorphic cells without glandular or squamous differentiation, within large areas of necrosis (Figure 3). Immunohistochemical studies showed strong reactivity with cytokeratin CAM5.2 (Figure 4), weak and focal reactivity with cytokeratin AE1/AE3 (Figure 5), and lack of reactivity with CD20, CD3, CD30, S-100, MART-1, TTF-1 and p63, all findings consistent with sarcomatoid carcinoma.

The patient underwent fine-needle aspiration and drainage of the neck lesion and the culture grew mixed organisms The results of a bone scan, which was done within a week, showed multiple foci of uptake in the ribs and cervical spine. Given the patient’s advanced disease, he was started on palliative radiotherapy with radiosensitizing chemotherapy with carboplatin (target AUC 6) and paclitaxel (135 mg/m2 over 24 hours). His symptoms of hemoptysis improved transiently after the first cycle, but he became hypotensive and drowsy during the second cycle of therapy, and the family decided to make the patient comfort care and withdraw all further treatment. He was discharged to hospice.

Discussion

PSC is a rare variant of non-small-cell carcinoma lung cancer, accounting for up to 0.4% of lung malignancy.1  It was

recently subtyped by the World Health Organization as a non-small cell lung carcinoma with certain amount of differentiation resembling sarcoma or containing elements of sarcoma.^2-4  It is not known why both elements co-exist in the tumor, but Franks and colleagues some theories have been postulated in the literature, including possible origin from a single, aberrant stem cell with progenies differentiating in two separate pathways.³

Sarcomatoid carcinoma consists of spectrum of tumors including pleomorphic carcinoma, spindle cell carcinoma, giant cell carcinoma, carcinosarcoma, and blastoma.3,4 It usually shows male preponderance, and association with smoking.3  The diagnosis commonly occurs in the sixth decade of life, except for pulmonary blastoma, which is more common in the fourth decade andnwith equal gender distribution.⁴

The presenting symptoms can be variable and nonspecific, but predominantly include chest pain, cough, hemoptysis, and/or weight loss.⁵  Radiologically, pulmonary sarcomatoid cancer presenting as a necrotizing cavitary lesion in the lung is a rare finding, seldom reported in the past.^6,7  The presentation in our case, with necrotizing lymphadenitis, was reminiscent of an infectious or autoimmune etiology such as tuberculosis or granulomatosis with polyangiitis. The presence of extensive necrosis in the lesion and the characteristic heterogeneity of the tumor had resulted in inconclusive biopsy findings during the previous presentation. In clinical practice, there is over-reliance on biopsy findings to make the distinction between cancer and other mimicking conditions. This is especially true for rare tumors such as PSC, which often results in misdiagnosis and a delay in administering the proper treatment. Transbronchial biopsy in cases such as the present case, carries little benefit because the diagnosis depends on the site from which the biopsy is taken and whether the biopsied tissue is representative of the entire mass. The diagnosis can be suspected based on the clinical and radiological findings but confirmation requires a surgical resection to delineate the accurate cytology and architecture.5,6,8 Huang and colleagues showed a misdiagnosis rate of PSC of >70% preoperatively.4 Resective surgery is feasible only in patients with high index of suspicion for a malignancy, which in most cases requires previous confirmation with a biopsy. The rarity of this cancer, its unusual presentations, and the lack of specific testing preclude early diagnosis and timely treatment of this fatal condition.

Initial treatment options for localized or with limited spread disease is resective surgery. The role of chemo- or radiation therapy is not known, but they have not previously shown promising results,6,8 except in some cases when they are used as postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy4 or in bulky, locally invasive tumors.1 The recurrence rate after surgery is very high, resulting in a poor 5-year survival rate.1,8 Experimental therapies, such as antibodies that target epidermal growth factor receptor mutations, have not shown much success either.8 In conclusion, the outlook for patients with PSC with the current available knowledge and treatment protocols, is dismal.

Most of the current knowledge and data in the literature is based on cases from autopsy or early-stage surgical resections rather than on patients with advanced cancer.5 Moreover, the role of surgical resection in PSC is questionable, given the high recurrence rate. Subsequently, the clinical and pathological manifestations have yet to be well characterized.⁴ There has been advance with the publication of more studies recently. Cytokeratin markers such as CAM 5.2 and AE1/AE3 are commonly useful to support the diagnosis when suspected.³ Other markers, including the carcinoembryonic antigen, CD15, and thyroid transcription factor-1 may be variably positive, based on the differentiation of the cancer. Other exciting prospects in the study of PSC include the suggestion of a modified vimentin histologic score for better characterization of the cancer and the discovery of high plateletderived growth factor receptor beta immunohistochemistry expression in PSC as a potential target for future therapy.

Conclusion

Pulmonary sarcomatoid lung cancer can present with a predominant necrotizing picture that mimics diseases such as tuberculosis. In such case, transbronchial biopsy carries little benefit because the diagnosis depends on whether the biopsied tissue is representative of the entire mass, often confounded by the extensive necrosis. More data is needed to determine prognostic factors and appropriate therapeutic strategies. TSJ

Correspondence

Gaurang Nandkishor Vaidya, MD

References

1. Martin LW, Correa AM, Ordonez NG, et al. Sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung: a predictor of poor prognosis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;84(3):973-980.

2. Brambilla E, Travis WD, Colby TV, Corrin B, Shimosato Y. The new World Health Organization classification of lung tumours. Eur Respir J. 2001;18(6):1059-1068.

3. Franks TJ, Galvin JR. Sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung: histologic criteria and common lesions in the differential diagnosis. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(1):49-54.

4. Huang SY, Shen SJ, Li XY. Pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma: a clinicopathologic study and prognostic analysis of 51 cases. http://wjso. biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1477-7819-11-252. Published 2013. Accessed March 12, 2017.

5. Travis WD. Sarcomatoid neoplasms of the lung and pleura. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(11):1645-1658.

6. Pelosi G, Sonzogni A, De Pas T, et al. Review article: pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinomas: a practical overview. Int J Surg Pathol. 2010;18(2):103-120.

7. Chang YL, Lee YC, Shih JY, Wu CT. Pulmonary pleomorphic (spindle) cell carcinoma: peculiar clinicopathologic manifestations different from ordinary non-small cell carcinoma. Lung Cancer. 2001;34(1):91-97.

8. Park JS, Lee Y, Han J, et al. Clinicopathologic outcomes of curative resection for sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung. Oncology. 2011;81(3-4):206-213.

Kaposi sarcoma is an angioproliferative tumor that is associated with human herpes virus-B (HIV-B). Mucocutaneous disease is the most common site for manifestation of AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma, commonly affecting the lower extremeties, oral mucosa, face, and genitalia. Pleural effusions can occur in 36%-60% of patients with Kaposi sarcoma, and it has been documented that chylothorax is a rare, but plausible presentation in patients with Kaposi sarcoma.¹  We present here a case of bilateral chylothorax in a patient with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma.

Case presentation and summary

A 52-year-old MSM male with AIDS (CD4, <20 mm3 ; viral load, 58 copies/ml) presented to the emergency department with complaints of shortness of breath, productive cough, and diarrhea for 2 days prior to presentation. His medical history also included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, and hyperlipidemia.The patient was not on HAART because of his history of noncompliance. The results of a chest X-ray and computed-tomography (CT) scan showed that the patient had bilateral pleural effusion and a spiculated 14-mm nodule in the left upper lobe.

The patient underwent ultrasound-guided placement of a 12-French left-sided chest catheter, and a milky white fluid was aspirated from the left pleural space. Laboratory analysis of the pleural fluid confirmed an exudate with an elevated triglyceride level of 120 mg/dL (chylous, >110 mg/dL) indicating chylothorax.

On close physical examination, the patient was found to have multiple irregular plaques on the back and lower extremities. As described by dermatology, there was a violaceous indurated plaque on the left axillae, violaceous indurated plaques with superficial scale grouped on the left midlateral back, and hyperpigmented lichenified plaques and papules on bilateral shins, with some with plate-like scale. Two punch biopsies were taken of the skin lesions, which confirmed Kaposi sarcoma, plaque stage from the lesion biopsied on the back, and patch stage from the lesion biopsied in the left axilla. Cytology of the pleural fluid was negative for malignant cells. On review by the radiologist of the CT scan of the chest, there was no indication of gross distention of the thoracic duct. Treatment options were offered to the patient, and the patient was considering options for chemotherapy and home hospice given his advanced disease state at the time of discharge.

Discussion

Chylothorax occurs with a thoracic duct obstruction, which results in leakage of lymphatic fluid into the pleural cavity. The two leading causes of chylothorax are trauma and malignancy, with lymphoma being the most common cause of chylothorax among those with malignancy.²  Chylothorax, however, is a rare but documented complication of Kaposi sarcoma. Marais and colleagues reported the case of a 3-year-old HIV-positive patient with newly diagnosed Kaposi sarcoma who was found to have tumor infiltration in the thoracic duct leading to bilateral chylothorax.3  Maradona and colleagues described a 40-year-old man with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma who was found to have pleural and pericardial Kaposi sarcoma with chylothorax.⁴  Priest and colleagues wrote about a 32-year-old patient with AIDS with biopsy-proven Kaposi sarcoma who required multiple therapeutic thoracenteses for rapidly recurrent left chylothorax effusions.⁵

There are two leading discussions as to the pathophysiology of chylothorax that is related to Kaposi sarcoma: chylothorax developing secondary to metastatic disease or the development of chylothorax secondary to primary Kaposi sarcoma arising from the pleural region.⁶ One case report examined pleural and lung biopsies in a 34-year-old patient with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma that showed immunohistochemical staining that was suggestive of early-stage Kaposi sarcoma of lymphatic endothelial origin. The authors were attempting to illustrate that Kaposi sarcoma may have a stem-cell origin which can differentiate into lymph cells. Kontantinopoulos and colleagues postulated that in situ Kaposi sarcoma can arise from the lymphatic system with a resultant clinical presentation of chylothorax.⁷ The more mainstream thought however, is that chylothorax has been found to develop secondary to metastatic disease. The present case, therefore, illustrates an unusual presentation of cytology negative chylothorax in a patient with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma. TSJ

Correspondence

Rebecca E Neril, MD; Department of Internal Medicine, SBH Health System, Bronx, New York.

Kaposi sarcoma is an angioproliferative tumor that is associated with human herpes virus-B (HIV-B). Mucocutaneous disease is the most common site for manifestation of AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma, commonly affecting the lower extremeties, oral mucosa, face, and genitalia. Pleural effusions can occur in 36%-60% of patients with Kaposi sarcoma, and it has been documented that chylothorax is a rare, but plausible presentation in patients with Kaposi sarcoma.¹  We present here a case of bilateral chylothorax in a patient with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma.

Case presentation and summary

A 52-year-old MSM male with AIDS (CD4, <20 mm3 ; viral load, 58 copies/ml) presented to the emergency department with complaints of shortness of breath, productive cough, and diarrhea for 2 days prior to presentation. His medical history also included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, and hyperlipidemia.The patient was not on HAART because of his history of noncompliance. The results of a chest X-ray and computed-tomography (CT) scan showed that the patient had bilateral pleural effusion and a spiculated 14-mm nodule in the left upper lobe.

The patient underwent ultrasound-guided placement of a 12-French left-sided chest catheter, and a milky white fluid was aspirated from the left pleural space. Laboratory analysis of the pleural fluid confirmed an exudate with an elevated triglyceride level of 120 mg/dL (chylous, >110 mg/dL) indicating chylothorax.

On close physical examination, the patient was found to have multiple irregular plaques on the back and lower extremities. As described by dermatology, there was a violaceous indurated plaque on the left axillae, violaceous indurated plaques with superficial scale grouped on the left midlateral back, and hyperpigmented lichenified plaques and papules on bilateral shins, with some with plate-like scale. Two punch biopsies were taken of the skin lesions, which confirmed Kaposi sarcoma, plaque stage from the lesion biopsied on the back, and patch stage from the lesion biopsied in the left axilla. Cytology of the pleural fluid was negative for malignant cells. On review by the radiologist of the CT scan of the chest, there was no indication of gross distention of the thoracic duct. Treatment options were offered to the patient, and the patient was considering options for chemotherapy and home hospice given his advanced disease state at the time of discharge.

Discussion

Chylothorax occurs with a thoracic duct obstruction, which results in leakage of lymphatic fluid into the pleural cavity. The two leading causes of chylothorax are trauma and malignancy, with lymphoma being the most common cause of chylothorax among those with malignancy.²  Chylothorax, however, is a rare but documented complication of Kaposi sarcoma. Marais and colleagues reported the case of a 3-year-old HIV-positive patient with newly diagnosed Kaposi sarcoma who was found to have tumor infiltration in the thoracic duct leading to bilateral chylothorax.3  Maradona and colleagues described a 40-year-old man with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma who was found to have pleural and pericardial Kaposi sarcoma with chylothorax.⁴  Priest and colleagues wrote about a 32-year-old patient with AIDS with biopsy-proven Kaposi sarcoma who required multiple therapeutic thoracenteses for rapidly recurrent left chylothorax effusions.⁵

There are two leading discussions as to the pathophysiology of chylothorax that is related to Kaposi sarcoma: chylothorax developing secondary to metastatic disease or the development of chylothorax secondary to primary Kaposi sarcoma arising from the pleural region.⁶ One case report examined pleural and lung biopsies in a 34-year-old patient with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma that showed immunohistochemical staining that was suggestive of early-stage Kaposi sarcoma of lymphatic endothelial origin. The authors were attempting to illustrate that Kaposi sarcoma may have a stem-cell origin which can differentiate into lymph cells. Kontantinopoulos and colleagues postulated that in situ Kaposi sarcoma can arise from the lymphatic system with a resultant clinical presentation of chylothorax.⁷ The more mainstream thought however, is that chylothorax has been found to develop secondary to metastatic disease. The present case, therefore, illustrates an unusual presentation of cytology negative chylothorax in a patient with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma. TSJ

Correspondence

Rebecca E Neril, MD; Department of Internal Medicine, SBH Health System, Bronx, New York.

Kaposi sarcoma is an angioproliferative tumor that is associated with human herpes virus-B (HIV-B). Mucocutaneous disease is the most common site for manifestation of AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma, commonly affecting the lower extremeties, oral mucosa, face, and genitalia. Pleural effusions can occur in 36%-60% of patients with Kaposi sarcoma, and it has been documented that chylothorax is a rare, but plausible presentation in patients with Kaposi sarcoma.¹  We present here a case of bilateral chylothorax in a patient with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma.

Case presentation and summary

A 52-year-old MSM male with AIDS (CD4, <20 mm3 ; viral load, 58 copies/ml) presented to the emergency department with complaints of shortness of breath, productive cough, and diarrhea for 2 days prior to presentation. His medical history also included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, and hyperlipidemia.The patient was not on HAART because of his history of noncompliance. The results of a chest X-ray and computed-tomography (CT) scan showed that the patient had bilateral pleural effusion and a spiculated 14-mm nodule in the left upper lobe.

The patient underwent ultrasound-guided placement of a 12-French left-sided chest catheter, and a milky white fluid was aspirated from the left pleural space. Laboratory analysis of the pleural fluid confirmed an exudate with an elevated triglyceride level of 120 mg/dL (chylous, >110 mg/dL) indicating chylothorax.

On close physical examination, the patient was found to have multiple irregular plaques on the back and lower extremities. As described by dermatology, there was a violaceous indurated plaque on the left axillae, violaceous indurated plaques with superficial scale grouped on the left midlateral back, and hyperpigmented lichenified plaques and papules on bilateral shins, with some with plate-like scale. Two punch biopsies were taken of the skin lesions, which confirmed Kaposi sarcoma, plaque stage from the lesion biopsied on the back, and patch stage from the lesion biopsied in the left axilla. Cytology of the pleural fluid was negative for malignant cells. On review by the radiologist of the CT scan of the chest, there was no indication of gross distention of the thoracic duct. Treatment options were offered to the patient, and the patient was considering options for chemotherapy and home hospice given his advanced disease state at the time of discharge.

Discussion

Chylothorax occurs with a thoracic duct obstruction, which results in leakage of lymphatic fluid into the pleural cavity. The two leading causes of chylothorax are trauma and malignancy, with lymphoma being the most common cause of chylothorax among those with malignancy.²  Chylothorax, however, is a rare but documented complication of Kaposi sarcoma. Marais and colleagues reported the case of a 3-year-old HIV-positive patient with newly diagnosed Kaposi sarcoma who was found to have tumor infiltration in the thoracic duct leading to bilateral chylothorax.3  Maradona and colleagues described a 40-year-old man with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma who was found to have pleural and pericardial Kaposi sarcoma with chylothorax.⁴  Priest and colleagues wrote about a 32-year-old patient with AIDS with biopsy-proven Kaposi sarcoma who required multiple therapeutic thoracenteses for rapidly recurrent left chylothorax effusions.⁵

There are two leading discussions as to the pathophysiology of chylothorax that is related to Kaposi sarcoma: chylothorax developing secondary to metastatic disease or the development of chylothorax secondary to primary Kaposi sarcoma arising from the pleural region.⁶ One case report examined pleural and lung biopsies in a 34-year-old patient with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma that showed immunohistochemical staining that was suggestive of early-stage Kaposi sarcoma of lymphatic endothelial origin. The authors were attempting to illustrate that Kaposi sarcoma may have a stem-cell origin which can differentiate into lymph cells. Kontantinopoulos and colleagues postulated that in situ Kaposi sarcoma can arise from the lymphatic system with a resultant clinical presentation of chylothorax.⁷ The more mainstream thought however, is that chylothorax has been found to develop secondary to metastatic disease. The present case, therefore, illustrates an unusual presentation of cytology negative chylothorax in a patient with AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma. TSJ

Correspondence

Rebecca E Neril, MD; Department of Internal Medicine, SBH Health System, Bronx, New York.

The Diagnosis: Fibroblastic Rheumatism

Routine histologic sections stained with hematoxylin and eosin demonstrated a noncircumscribed dermal proliferation of fibroblasts and myofibroblasts with thickened collagen bundles (Figure, A and B). Focally fragmented elastin fibers were noted with Verhoeff elastic tissue stain. Alcian blue stain did not show increased dermal mucin. With the clinical presentation and histologic findings described, we diagnosed the patient with fibroblastic rheumatism (FR). To date, the patient's condition has stabilized overall with skin lesions fading and minimal to no joint pain. Current therapies include adalimumab, mycophenolate mofetil 500 mg 3 times daily, and low-dose prednisone.

Fibroblastic rheumatism is a rare arthropathy with cutaneous findings initially described by Chaouat et al¹ in 1980. Age of onset varies, and the condition also has been observed in pediatric patients.² Fibroblastic rheumatism is characterized by sudden onset of firm, flesh-colored, subcutaneous nodules on periungual and periarticular surfaces.² Neck lesions rarely are described,^2-4 and cordlike plaques previously have not been reported in FR. Typically, patients develop diffusely swollen fingers, palmar thickening, sclerodactyly, and contractures. The eruption may be accompanied by Raynaud phenomenon as well as a progressive symmetric erosive arthropathy.^2,5

The clinical course in FR is variable. The cutaneous findings spontaneously may regress in months to years.^3,4 However, polyarthropathy often is destructive and progresses to disability.³ Response to therapy has been unpredictable, and the following treatments have been tried, generally with poor efficacy: aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, hydroxychloroquine, colchicine, methotrexate, prednisone, infliximab, D-penicillamine, interferon alfa, and intensive physical therapy.^2-4,6 Histologic characteristics may include thickened collagen bundles along with a fibroblastic and myofibroblastic proliferation. Elastic fibers may be decreased or absent.^2,3,5

Clinical and histologic features in FR may mimic other entities; thus, clinical pathological correlation is essential in determining the correct diagnosis. Considerations in the differential diagnoses include multicentric reticulohistiocytosis (MRH), palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis, and scleroderma.

In MRH, a symmetric erosive arthritis of mainly distal interphalangeal joints typically precedes the cutaneous disease. Occurrence of arthritis mutilans is reported in approximately half of patients.⁴ Cutaneous manifestations typically include the presence of coral bead-like papules and nodules over the dorsal aspect of the hands, face, and neck. Unlike FR, MRH has a concomitant autoimmune disease in up to 20% of cases and an associated malignancy in up to 31% of cases, with breast and ovarian carcinomas most common. On histology, MRH is characterized by a nodular infiltrate of histiocytes and multinucleated giant cells with eosinophilic ground-glass cytoplasm.⁴ No notable collagen changes or fibroblastic proliferations typically are present.

Palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis, usually associated with rheumatoid arthritis or connective tissue disease, classically presents as annular plaques and indurated linear bands over the trunk and extremities. However, its clinical presentation is quite variable and may include pink to violaceous urticarialike; livedoid-appearing; or nonspecific papules, plaques, or nodules. Histology in palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis shows a dense dermal neutrophilic infiltrate associated with interstitial histiocytes having a palisading arrangement around degenerated collagen.⁷ No fibroblastic proliferation typically is present.

Scleroderma can be distinguished based on additional clinical and laboratory findings as well as histology showing thickened collagen bundles without fibroblastic proliferation.2 The histologic findings also may suggest inclusion of dermatofibroma or a scar in the differential diagnosis, though the clinical presentation of these entities would not support these diagnoses.  
 
Acknowledgments
We thank the patient for granting permission to share this information. We also thank Sheng Chen, MD, PhD (Lake Success, New York), for his dermatopathological contributions to the case.

The Diagnosis: Fibroblastic Rheumatism

Routine histologic sections stained with hematoxylin and eosin demonstrated a noncircumscribed dermal proliferation of fibroblasts and myofibroblasts with thickened collagen bundles (Figure, A and B). Focally fragmented elastin fibers were noted with Verhoeff elastic tissue stain. Alcian blue stain did not show increased dermal mucin. With the clinical presentation and histologic findings described, we diagnosed the patient with fibroblastic rheumatism (FR). To date, the patient's condition has stabilized overall with skin lesions fading and minimal to no joint pain. Current therapies include adalimumab, mycophenolate mofetil 500 mg 3 times daily, and low-dose prednisone.

Fibroblastic rheumatism is a rare arthropathy with cutaneous findings initially described by Chaouat et al¹ in 1980. Age of onset varies, and the condition also has been observed in pediatric patients.² Fibroblastic rheumatism is characterized by sudden onset of firm, flesh-colored, subcutaneous nodules on periungual and periarticular surfaces.² Neck lesions rarely are described,^2-4 and cordlike plaques previously have not been reported in FR. Typically, patients develop diffusely swollen fingers, palmar thickening, sclerodactyly, and contractures. The eruption may be accompanied by Raynaud phenomenon as well as a progressive symmetric erosive arthropathy.^2,5

The clinical course in FR is variable. The cutaneous findings spontaneously may regress in months to years.^3,4 However, polyarthropathy often is destructive and progresses to disability.³ Response to therapy has been unpredictable, and the following treatments have been tried, generally with poor efficacy: aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, hydroxychloroquine, colchicine, methotrexate, prednisone, infliximab, D-penicillamine, interferon alfa, and intensive physical therapy.^2-4,6 Histologic characteristics may include thickened collagen bundles along with a fibroblastic and myofibroblastic proliferation. Elastic fibers may be decreased or absent.^2,3,5

Clinical and histologic features in FR may mimic other entities; thus, clinical pathological correlation is essential in determining the correct diagnosis. Considerations in the differential diagnoses include multicentric reticulohistiocytosis (MRH), palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis, and scleroderma.

In MRH, a symmetric erosive arthritis of mainly distal interphalangeal joints typically precedes the cutaneous disease. Occurrence of arthritis mutilans is reported in approximately half of patients.⁴ Cutaneous manifestations typically include the presence of coral bead-like papules and nodules over the dorsal aspect of the hands, face, and neck. Unlike FR, MRH has a concomitant autoimmune disease in up to 20% of cases and an associated malignancy in up to 31% of cases, with breast and ovarian carcinomas most common. On histology, MRH is characterized by a nodular infiltrate of histiocytes and multinucleated giant cells with eosinophilic ground-glass cytoplasm.⁴ No notable collagen changes or fibroblastic proliferations typically are present.

Palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis, usually associated with rheumatoid arthritis or connective tissue disease, classically presents as annular plaques and indurated linear bands over the trunk and extremities. However, its clinical presentation is quite variable and may include pink to violaceous urticarialike; livedoid-appearing; or nonspecific papules, plaques, or nodules. Histology in palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis shows a dense dermal neutrophilic infiltrate associated with interstitial histiocytes having a palisading arrangement around degenerated collagen.⁷ No fibroblastic proliferation typically is present.

Scleroderma can be distinguished based on additional clinical and laboratory findings as well as histology showing thickened collagen bundles without fibroblastic proliferation.2 The histologic findings also may suggest inclusion of dermatofibroma or a scar in the differential diagnosis, though the clinical presentation of these entities would not support these diagnoses.  
 
Acknowledgments
We thank the patient for granting permission to share this information. We also thank Sheng Chen, MD, PhD (Lake Success, New York), for his dermatopathological contributions to the case.

The Diagnosis: Fibroblastic Rheumatism

Routine histologic sections stained with hematoxylin and eosin demonstrated a noncircumscribed dermal proliferation of fibroblasts and myofibroblasts with thickened collagen bundles (Figure, A and B). Focally fragmented elastin fibers were noted with Verhoeff elastic tissue stain. Alcian blue stain did not show increased dermal mucin. With the clinical presentation and histologic findings described, we diagnosed the patient with fibroblastic rheumatism (FR). To date, the patient's condition has stabilized overall with skin lesions fading and minimal to no joint pain. Current therapies include adalimumab, mycophenolate mofetil 500 mg 3 times daily, and low-dose prednisone.

Fibroblastic rheumatism is a rare arthropathy with cutaneous findings initially described by Chaouat et al¹ in 1980. Age of onset varies, and the condition also has been observed in pediatric patients.² Fibroblastic rheumatism is characterized by sudden onset of firm, flesh-colored, subcutaneous nodules on periungual and periarticular surfaces.² Neck lesions rarely are described,^2-4 and cordlike plaques previously have not been reported in FR. Typically, patients develop diffusely swollen fingers, palmar thickening, sclerodactyly, and contractures. The eruption may be accompanied by Raynaud phenomenon as well as a progressive symmetric erosive arthropathy.^2,5

The clinical course in FR is variable. The cutaneous findings spontaneously may regress in months to years.^3,4 However, polyarthropathy often is destructive and progresses to disability.³ Response to therapy has been unpredictable, and the following treatments have been tried, generally with poor efficacy: aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, hydroxychloroquine, colchicine, methotrexate, prednisone, infliximab, D-penicillamine, interferon alfa, and intensive physical therapy.^2-4,6 Histologic characteristics may include thickened collagen bundles along with a fibroblastic and myofibroblastic proliferation. Elastic fibers may be decreased or absent.^2,3,5

Clinical and histologic features in FR may mimic other entities; thus, clinical pathological correlation is essential in determining the correct diagnosis. Considerations in the differential diagnoses include multicentric reticulohistiocytosis (MRH), palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis, and scleroderma.

In MRH, a symmetric erosive arthritis of mainly distal interphalangeal joints typically precedes the cutaneous disease. Occurrence of arthritis mutilans is reported in approximately half of patients.⁴ Cutaneous manifestations typically include the presence of coral bead-like papules and nodules over the dorsal aspect of the hands, face, and neck. Unlike FR, MRH has a concomitant autoimmune disease in up to 20% of cases and an associated malignancy in up to 31% of cases, with breast and ovarian carcinomas most common. On histology, MRH is characterized by a nodular infiltrate of histiocytes and multinucleated giant cells with eosinophilic ground-glass cytoplasm.⁴ No notable collagen changes or fibroblastic proliferations typically are present.

Palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis, usually associated with rheumatoid arthritis or connective tissue disease, classically presents as annular plaques and indurated linear bands over the trunk and extremities. However, its clinical presentation is quite variable and may include pink to violaceous urticarialike; livedoid-appearing; or nonspecific papules, plaques, or nodules. Histology in palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis shows a dense dermal neutrophilic infiltrate associated with interstitial histiocytes having a palisading arrangement around degenerated collagen.⁷ No fibroblastic proliferation typically is present.

Scleroderma can be distinguished based on additional clinical and laboratory findings as well as histology showing thickened collagen bundles without fibroblastic proliferation.2 The histologic findings also may suggest inclusion of dermatofibroma or a scar in the differential diagnosis, though the clinical presentation of these entities would not support these diagnoses.  
 
Acknowledgments
We thank the patient for granting permission to share this information. We also thank Sheng Chen, MD, PhD (Lake Success, New York), for his dermatopathological contributions to the case.

Introduction

Soft tissue sarcomas (STSs) are rare adult tumors, with 3.4 new cases per 100,000 persons or 12,310 expected new cases in 2016.¹ Sarcomas are a heterogeneous collection of tumors that affect fat, muscle, nerve, nerve sheath, vascular, and connective tissues. There are more than 50 histological subtypes that comprise this diverse category of tumors. Treatment varies by stage, with limb-sparing surgery representing the mainstay of curative-intent treatment. Radiation and chemotherapy may also be considered depending on the size, grade, and location of the tumor. Survival rates have been stagnant until recently, with a disease-specific survival hovering around 65%.¹ Given the complexity of these cases, all patients ideally should be evaluated and treated by a multidisciplinary team at an institution with extensive experience treating STS.²

Epidemiology and Classification

The most common STS subtypes are gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST), undifferentiate pleomorphic sarcoma (previously referred to as malignant fibrous histiocytoma), liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, synovial sarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, rhabdomyosarcoma, and unclassified sarcoma.³ Liposarcoma is one of the most common subtypes, comprising 20% of all STSs; it is subdivided into well-differentiated/dedifferentiated liposarcomas, myxoid/round cell liposarcomas, and pleomorphic liposarcomas. Well-differentiated liposarcomas tend to occur in the retroperitoneum and limbs, while both myxoid and round cell as well as pleomorphic liposarcomas more commonly originate on the limbs. Histology varies based on subtype and ranges from mature-appearing adipocytes and fibroblasts to undifferentiated cells with minimal lipogenic differentiation.⁴

Leiomyosarcomas are smooth muscle tumors and are usually located in the retroperitoneum, but have also been associated with peripheral soft tissue and vasculature. Typical histology ranges from well-defined areas of spindle-shaped cells to poorly differentiated anaplastic spindle cells.^5,6 Synovial sarcomas are a distinct type of STS that can show epithelial differentiation and account for 5% of adult STSs. The extremities are the most common presenting location (90%).⁷

Rhabdomyosarcomas are skeletal muscle tumors and are further subdivided into embryonal, alveolar, and pleomorphic subtypes. Embryonal histology ranges from primitive mesenchymal-appearing cells to highly differentiated muscle cells. Alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma has the worst prognosis of the subtypes and consists of round cells with high nuclear-to-chromatin ratios that form “glandular-like” or “alveolar” spaces.⁸ Pleomorphic rhabdomyosarcomas are composed of rhabdomyoblasts that can affect many different locations, but most commonly present on the lower extremities.⁹

Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) comprises 5% to 10% of all STSs. These tumors are associated with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1), with 25% to 50% of tumors occurring in NF-1 patients. Additionally, most patients have a truncating lesion in the NF1 gene on chromosome 17.¹⁰ Anghileri et al in their single institution analysis of 205 patients with MPNSTs found the 2 most common presenting sites were the trunk and extremities. Histologically, these tumors have dense fascicles of spindle cells.¹⁰

GISTs are the most common STS of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Previously, GISTs were classified as smooth muscle tumors and were not accounted for in the literature as a separate entity distinct from leiomyomas, leiomyoblastomas, and leiomyosarcomas.¹¹ GISTs are found throughout the GI tract: the most common sites are the stomach (60%) and small intestine (30%). Less common sites include duodenum (4%–5%), esophagus (1%), rectum (1%–2%), and appendix (< 0.2%).¹² GISTs can be spindle cell, epithelioid, or mesenchymal tumors. Immunohistochemically, GISTs are KIT (CD117) positive. Other cell markers that are also commonly positive include CD34 (60%–70%) and smooth muscle actin (SMA) (25%).¹¹ The majority of GISTs (80%) have an activating c-KIT gene mutation. The most common mutation site is exon 11, with less common c-KIT gene mutations also occurring at exon 9 or 13. Not all GISTs have KIT mutations. The second most common mutation is the PDGFRA mutation (5%–10% of GISTs).² A minority of GISTs are negative for both KIT and PDGFRA mutations. These tumors were previously called wild-type, but as the majority have either a succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) loss of function or loss of SDHB protein expression, they are now referred to as SDH-deficient GISTs.² GISTs vary in aggressiveness from incidental to aggressive. Typically, small intestine and rectal GISTs are more aggressive than gastric GISTs. Both size and mitotic rate help to predict the metastatic potential of the tumor. Tumors less than 2 cm in size and having a mitotic rate of less than 5 per 50 high-power fields (hpf) have the lowest risk of metastases, while tumors greater than 5 cm and with more than 5 mitoses per 50 hpf have the highest rates of metastases.¹²

Angiosarcomas are rare tumors comprising 4% of all STSs. Although they can occur in any site, the majority are cutaneous and occur most frequently in the head and neck regions. These tumors are either of vascular or lymphatic origin and are comprised of abnormal, pleomorphic, malignant endothelial cells. The most useful immunohistochemical markers include von Willebrand factor, CD31, and Ulex europaeus agglutinin 1. The majority of these tumors occur sporadically; however, radiation exposure, chronic lymphedema, and certain toxins including vinyl chloride and thorium dioxide are known risk factors.¹³

Undifferentiated sarcomas have no specific features and typically consist of primitive mesenchymal cells.

Clinical Evaluation

›  Case Presentation

Initial Presentation and History

A 55-year-old man presents to his primary care physician with a painless mass in his anterior thigh. The mass has been present for the past 3 months and he believes that it is enlarging. The patient has a history of well-controlled hypertension and hyperlipidemia. His medications include atorvastatin and hydrochlorothiazide. He has no known drug allergies. Family history is notable for diabetes and hypertension. He drinks 4 to 5 alcoholic drinks a week and he is a former smoker. He quit smoking in his 30s and only smoked intermittently prior to quitting. He denies any illicit drug use. He works as a high school principal. Currently, he feels well. His review of systems is otherwise noncontributory.

Physical Examination

On physical exam, he is afebrile with a blood pressure of 132/75 mm Hg, respiratory rate of 10 breaths/min, and oxygen saturation of 99% on room air. He is a well appearing, overweight male. His head and neck exam is unremarkable. Lung exam reveals clear breath sounds, and cardiac exam reveals a regular rate and rhythm. His abdomen is obese, soft, and without hepatosplenomegaly. There is a large, fixed mass on the anterior lateral aspect of his right thigh. He has no appreciable lymphadenopathy. His neurological exam is unremarkable.

• What are risk factors for sarcoma?

There are few known risk factors for sarcoma. Established risks factors include prior radiation therapy, chronic lymphedema, viruses, and genetic cancer syndromes including Li-Fraumeni syndrome, hereditary retinoblastoma, and NF-1. Other environmental exposures include phenoxyacetic acids and chlorophenols.¹⁴ The majority of cases are sporadic, with only a minority of patients having one of these known risk factors.¹⁵ Up to one third of sarcomas have a specific translocation and are driven by fusion oncogenes (Table 1).

• What is the typical presentation for sarcomas?

A painless mass is the most typical presenting symptom. Size at presentation varies based on location, with extremity and head and neck locations typically presenting at smaller sizes than retroperitoneal tumors.¹⁴ Patients may experience pain and numbness as the mass enlarges and impinges on surrounding structures including nerves and vasculature. The vast majority of patients are without systemic symptoms.

• How is sarcoma staged?

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system is the most widely used staging system in the United States. The latest AJCC manual was updated in 2010 to include a 3-tiered grading system where the tumor is classified according to tumor size, lymph node involvement, metastases, and grade at time of diagnosis (Table 2 and Table 3). Additionally, tumor depth in relation to deep fascia is also taken into account, with superficial tumors being assigned a designation of “a” and deep tumors a designation of “b.”

Previously, 2 of the most widely used grading systems were the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma Group (FNCLCC) systems, both 3-tier grading systems. The main components that determine the NCI grade are the tumor’s histologic type and location and the amount of tumor necrosis. The FNCLCC system evaluation focuses on tumor differentiation, mitotic rate, and amount of tumor necrosis. A study that compared the NCI and FNCLCC grading systems found that FNCLCC was a better predictor of mortality and distant metastasis.¹⁶ Previously, the AJCC was a 4-tier grading system, but the 2010 version was updated to the 3-tier FNCLCC grading system. Additionally, the AJCC system has reclassified single lymph node disease as stage III as it confers better survival than metastatic disease.¹⁷ It is important that pathology be evaluated by a sarcoma specialist as disagreements with regard to histologic subtype and grade are common.^18,19

• What are the most important prognostic factors?

Prognostic factors include grade, size, and presence of metastases at presentation. Best survival is associated with low-grade, small tumors with no metastases at time of diagnosis.¹⁴

• What imaging should be considered?

Imaging should be undertaken to help differentiate between benign and malignant lesions. Ideally, it should be undertaken before a biopsy is planned as the imaging can be used to plan biopsy as well as provide invaluable prognostic information. There are several imaging modalities that should be considered during the preliminary work-up and staging of STSs. Conventional imaging includes magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the original tumor site; computed tomography (CT) to evaluate for pulmonary metastases and, depending on location, liver metastases; and in the case of small, low-grade tumors, chest radiography. MRI is considered the test of choice for soft tissue masses and can help delineate benign masses such as hematomas, lipomas, and hemangiomas from sarcomas.²⁰ It is difficult to compare the accuracy of positron emission tomography (PET)/CT to CT and MRI because most studies have evaluated PET/CT in parallel with CT and MRI.²¹ Tateishi et al compared the accuracy of conventional imaging, PET/CT, and PET/CT combined with conventional imaging at determining the TNM staging for 117 patients. They found that conventional imaging correctly classified 77% of patients, PET alone correctly classified 70%, PET/CT correctly classified 83%, and PET/CT combined with conventional imaging correctly staged 87%.²²

• Which subtypes are most likely to metastasize?

Although the vast majority of sarcomas spread hematogenously, 3 have a propensity to spread lymphogenously: epithelioid sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, and clear-cell sarcoma. Additionally, certain subtypes are more likely to metastasize: leiomyosarcomas, synovial sarcomas, neurogenic sarcomas, rhabdomyosarcomas, and epithelioid sarcomas.²³ Sarcomas metastasize to the lungs more frequently than to the liver. The metastatic pattern is defined primarily by sarcoma subtype and site of primary tumor. Sarcomas rarely metastasize to the brain (~1%).

Management

›  Case Continued

The patient undergoes an ultrasound to better visualize the mass. Given the heterogeneous character of the mass, he is referred for an MRI to evaluate the mass and a CT scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis to evaluate for distant metastases. MRI reveals a 5.1 cm × 4.6 cm heterogeneous mass invading the superficial fascia of the rectus femoris muscle. No suspicious lymph nodes or other masses are identified on imaging. The patient next undergoes an image-guided core needle biopsy. Pathology from that procedure is consistent with a stage III, T2bNxMx, grade 3, dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

• What is the best management approach for this patient?

Surgery

Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for STS. Patients with the best prognosis are those who undergo complete resection with negative surgical margins.^24,25 Goal tumor-free margin is 1 to 3 cm.²⁶ Complete resection confers the best long-term survival. Both local and metastatic recurrence is higher in patients with incomplete resection and positive margins.^24,25 In a study that analyzed 2084 localized primary STSs, patients with negative margins had a local recurrence rate of 15% versus a rate of 28% in patients with positive margins. This translated into higher 5-year local recurrence-free survival for patients with negative surgical margins (82%) compared to patients with positive margins (65%).²⁷ Another study similarly found that patients with negative margins at referral to their institution who underwent postoperative radiation had high local control rates of 93% (95% confidence interval [CI] 87% to 97%) at 5, 10, and 15 years.²⁶ Although radiation improves local control, neither preoperative or postoperative radiation has been shown to improve progression-free or overall survival.²⁸ Other factors that are associated with risk of recurrence are tumor location, history of previous recurrence, age of patient, histopathology, tumor grade, and tumor size. Approximately 40% to 50% of patients with high-grade tumors (defined as size > 5 cm, deep location, and high grade) will develop distant metastases.²⁹

Zagars et al found that positive or uncertain resection margin had a relative risk of local recurrence of 2.0 (95% CI 1.3 to 3.1; P = 0.002), and presentation with locally recurrent disease (vs new tumor) had a relative risk of local recurrence of 2.0 (95% CI 1.2 to 3.4; P = 0.013).²⁶ Patients with STS of head and neck and deep trunk have higher recurrence rates than those with superficial trunk and extremity STS. A single-institution retrospective review demonstrated that patients with completely resectable retroperitoneal sarcomas have longer median survival (103 months) compared to patients with incompletely resected abdominal sarcomas (18 months).²⁵Rosenberg and colleagues compared amputation to limb-sparing surgery and radiation.²⁴ Their prospective analysis of 65 patients found no difference in disease-free and overall survival between the 2 treatment groups.The limb-sparing treatment group had higher rates of local recurrence, which was highly correlated with positive surgical margins on pathology.²⁴ Evidence from this and similar studies has resulted in radical amputations being replaced by conservative limb-sparing procedures and radiation therapy. In those found to have positive margins, re-resection is an option for some. Patients who undergo re-resection have higher local control rates than patients with positive margins who do not undergo re-resection. The 5-year control rate for patients who undergo re-resection is 85% (95% CI 80% to 89%) compared to 78% (95% CI 71% to 83%) for those who do not undergo re-resection. Similarly, patients who undergo re-resection have lower rates of metastases at 5, 10, and 15 years as well as higher 5-, 10-, and 15-year disease-free survival rates.²⁶

›  Case Continued

The patient is referred for limb-sparing surgery after presentation at a multidisciplinary tumor board. Prior to undergoing resection of the tumor, he is also referred to radiation-oncology to discuss the risks and benefits of combination radiotherapy and surgery as opposed to surgical resection alone.

• What is the evidence for radiation therapy?

Radiation THERAPY

Radiation therapy is used in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative settings to reduce the risk of local recurrence. There are several options for radiation, including external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), intraoperative radiation, and brachytherapy. A newer strategy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), utilizes 3-dimensional modeling to reduce radiation dosages. Overall there are no differences in overall survival or local recurrence rates between preoperative and postoperative radiation in STS.²⁸

The rationale behind preoperative radiation is that it reduces seeding of tumor cells, especially at the time of surgery.³⁰ Additionally, for EBRT, preoperative radiation has smaller field sizes and lower radiation doses. It can also help to reduce the size of the tumor prior to resection. Intraoperative radiation is often paired with preoperative radiation as a boost dose given only to the area of residual tumor.

Suit et al reviewed patients treated at a single institution with limb-sparing surgery and different radiation strategies. Local control rates between preoperative and postoperative radiation groups were not statistically significant. Local recurrence was linked to grade and size of the tumor in both groups. The authors did note, however, that the preoperative radiation group tended to have larger tumor sizes at baseline compared to the patients who received postoperative radiation.³⁰ A study that compared 190 patients who received preoperative and postoperative EBRT or brachytherapy (primary end point was wound complications, and local control was a secondary end point) showed a trend towards greater local control with preoperative radiation; however, the preoperative radiation group had significantly more wound complications compared to the postoperative radiation group.³¹

Yang et al found that postoperative EBRT decreases rates of local recurrence compared to surgery alone in high-grade extremity sarcomas.³² However, there were no differences in rates of distant metastases and overall survival between the 2 treatment groups. Similarly, in patients with low-grade sarcoma, there were fewer local recurrences in those who received EBRT and surgery as compared to surgery alone.³² Another study that evaluated 164 patients who received either adjuvant brachytherapy or no further therapy after complete resection found that brachytherapy reduced local recurrence in high-grade sarcomas. No difference in local recurrence rates was found in patients with low-grade sarcomas, nor was a significant difference found in the rates of distant metastases and overall survival between the 2 treatment groups.³³ With regards to IMRT, a single institution cohort experience with 41 patients who received IMRT following limb-sparing surgery had similar local control rates when compared to historical controls.³⁴

›  Case Continued

After discussion of the risks and benefits of radiation therapy, the patient opts for preoperative radiation prior to resection of his liposarcoma. He receives 50 Gy of EBRT prior to undergoing resection. Resection results in R1 margin consistent with microscopic disease. He receives 16 Gy of EBRT as a boost after recovery from his resection.²

• What is the evidence for neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for stage I tumors?

Chemotherapy

Localized Sarcoma

For localized sarcoma, limb-sparing resection with or without radiation forms the backbone of treatment. Studies have evaluated chemotherapy in both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, with the vast majority of studies evaluating doxorubicin-based chemotherapy regimens in the adjuvant settings. Due to the rare nature of sarcomas, most studies are not sufficiently powered to detect significant benefit from chemotherapy. Several trials evaluating chemotherapy regimens in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings needed to be terminated prematurely due to inadequate enrollment into the study.^35,36

For stage IA (T1a-Tb, N0, M0, low grade) tumors, no additional therapy is recommended after limb-sparing surgery with appropriate surgical margins. For stage IB (T2a-2b, N0, M0, low grade) tumors with insufficient margins, re-resection and radiation therapy should be considered, while for stage IIA (T1a-1b, N0, M0, G2-3) tumors preoperative or postoperative radiation therapy is recommended.² Studies have not found benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in these low-grade, stage I tumors in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival.³⁷

• At what stage should chemotherapy be considered?

For stage IIb and stage III tumors, surgery and radiation therapy again form the backbone of therapy; however, neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy are also recommended as considerations. Anthracycline-based chemotherapy with either single-agent doxorubicin or doxorubicin and ifosfamide in combination are considered first-line chemotherapy agents in locally advanced STS.^2,29,37

Evidence regarding the efficacy of both neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy regimens in the setting of locally advanced high-grade STS has been mixed. The Sarcoma Meta-analysis Collaboration evaluated 14 trials of doxorubicin-based adjuvant chemotherapy and found a trend towards overall survival in the treatment groups that received chemotherapy.³⁷ All trials included in the meta-analysis compared patients with localized resectable soft-tissue sarcomas who were randomized to either adjuvant chemotherapy or no adjuvant chemotherapy after limb-sparing surgery with or without radiation therapy. None of the individual trials showed a significant benefit, and all trials had large confidence intervals; however, the meta-analysis showed significant benefit in the chemotherapy treatment groups with regard to local recurrence, distant recurrence, and progression-free survival. No significant difference in overall survival was found.³⁷ Pervais et al updated the Sarcoma Meta-analysis Collaboration’s 1997 meta-analysis with the inclusion of 4 new trials that evaluated doxorubicin combined with ifosfamide and found that both patients who received doxorubicin-based regimens or doxorubicin with ifosfamide had significant decreases in distant and overall recurrences. Only the trials that utilized doxorubicin and ifosfamide had an improved overall survival that was statistically significant (hazard ratio 0.56 [95% CI 0.36 to 0.85]; P = 0.01).²⁹ Although no significant heterogeneity was found among the trials included in either meta-analysis, a variety of sarcomas were included in each clinical trial evaluated. Given the extremely small number of each sarcoma subtype present in each trial, subgroup analysis is difficult and prone to inaccuracies. As a result, it is not known if certain histological subtypes are more or less responsive to chemotherapy.^37–39

One randomized controlled trial evaluated neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk sarcomas defined as tumors greater than 8 cm or grade II/III tumors. This study evaluated doxorubicin and ifosfamide and found no significant difference in disease-free and overall survival in the neoadjuvant therapy group compared to the control group.³⁵ There remains controversy in the literature with regards to adjuvant chemotherapy. Many oncologists offer adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with certain stage III subtypes. Examples of subtypes that may be offered adjuvant therapy include myxoid liposarcomas, synovial sarcomas, and leiomyosarcomas.² With regards to how many cycles of chemotherapy should be considered, a noninferiority study compared 3 cycles of epirubicin and ifosfamide to 5 cycles of epirubicin and ifosfamide in patients with high-risk locally advanced adult STSs. Three cycles of preoperative epirubicin and ifosfamide was found to be noninferior to 5 cycles with regards to overall survival.³⁸

• What is this patient’s risk for recurrence?

The patient is at intermediate risk for recurrence. Numerous studies have demonstrated that tumor size, grade, and location are the most important factors to determine risk of recurrence, with larger size, higher grades, and deeper locations being associated with higher risk of recurrence. In an analysis of 1041 patients with STS of the extremities, high grade was the most important risk factor for distant metastases.³⁹ The highest risk of recurrence is within the first 2 years. Given that the patient’s initial tumor was located in the extremity, he is more likely to have a distant metastasis as his site of recurrence; individuals with retroperitoneal tumors and visceral tumors are more likely to recur locally.⁴⁰ For STSs of the extremity, distant metastases determine overall survival, whereas patients with retroperitoneal sarcomas can die from complications of local metastases.⁴¹ Once a patient develops distant metastases, the most important prognostic factor is the size of the tumor, with tumors larger than 10 cm having a relative risk of 1.5 (95% CI 1.0 to 2.0).³⁹

• What are the recommendations for surveillance?

Surveillance recommendations are based on the stage of the sarcoma. Stage I tumors are the least likely to recur either locally or distally. As a result, it is recommended that stage I tumors be followed with history and physical exam every 3 to 6 months for the first 2 to 3 years, and then annually after the first 2 to 3 years. Chest x-rays should be considered every 6 to 12 months.² For stage II–IV tumors, history and physical exam is recommended every 3 to 6 months for the first 2 to 3 years. Chest and distant metastases imaging should also be performed every 3 to 6 months during this time frame. For the next 2 years, history and physical exam and imaging are recommended every 6 months. After the first 4 to 5 years, annual follow-up is recommended.²

A study that followed 141 patients with primary extremity STSs for a median interval of 49 months found that high-grade tumors were most likely to recur during the first 2 years, with 20% of their patients recurring locally and 40% recurring distally. Chest x-rays performed during surveillance follow-up found distant lung metastases in 36 asymptomatic patients and had a positive predictive value of 92%, a negative predictive value of 97%, and a quality-adjusted life-year of $30,000.^40,41 No laboratory testing was found to aid in detection of recurrence.

›  Case Continued

The patient does well for 1 year. With physical therapy, he regains most of the strength and coordination of the lower extremity. He is followed every 3 months with chest x-rays and a MRI of the thigh for the first year. On his fourth follow-up clinic visit, he describes increased dysp-nea on exertion over the previous few weeks and is found to have multiple lung metastases in both lungs on chest x-ray. He undergoes further evaluation for metastases and is not found to have any other metastatic lesions. Bronchoscopy and biopsy of 1 of the lung nodules confirms recurrent dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

• Should this patient undergo metastectomy?

An analysis of 3149 patients with STS treated at Memorial Sloan-Kettering who developed lung metastases found that patients with pulmonary metastases have survival rates of 25%. The most important prognostic factor for survival was complete resection of all metastases.⁴² For stage IV disease, surgery is used only in certain instances. In instances where tumor is more localized or limited, removal of metastases or metastectomy can play a role in management.²

›  Case Continued

Because the patient’s metastases are limited to the lungs, he is referred for metastectomy. He undergoes wedge resection for definitive diagnosis but it is not possible to completely resect all of the metastases. He is thus referred to a medical oncologist to discuss his treatment options.

• What are treatment options for unresectable or metastatic disease?

Metastatic Disease

Unlike local and locally advanced disease, chemotherapy forms the backbone of treatment in stage IV disease. Doxorubicin and olaratumab or doxorubicin and ifosfamide in combination are considered first line in metastatic disease. Response rates for single-agent doxorubicin range from 16% to 27%, while phase 2 and phase 3 studies of doxorubicin and ifosfamide have found response rates ranging from 18% to 36%.⁴³ In addition, the effectiveness of doxorubicin and ifosfamide phase 2 and 3 trials varied. Edmonson et al found a tumor regression rate of 34% for doxorubicin and ifosfamide as compared to 20% for doxorubicin alone.⁴⁴ In comparison, Santoro et al found a response rate of 21.3% for doxorubicin alone and 25.2% for doxorubicin and ifosfamide.⁴⁵ Neither study found increased survival benefit for doxorubicin and ifosfamide when compared to doxorubicin alone. In a Cochrane review evaluating randomized trials that compared doxorubicin and combination chemotherapy regimens, response rates varied from 14% for doxorubicin in combination with streptomycin to 34% for doxorubicin and ifosfamide. Most trials did not show a significant benefit for combination therapies when compared to doxorubicin alone.⁴³ Mean survival with doxorubicin or doxorubicin and ifosfamide is 12 months. High rates of recurrence highlight the need for additional chemotherapy regimens.

The newest approved agent is olaratumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha and prevents receptor activation. A phase 1-b and phase 2 trial evaluated patients with locally advanced and metastatic STS and randomly assigned them to either olaratumab and doxorubicin or doxorubicin alone.⁴⁶ Progression-free survival for olaratumab/doxorubicin was 6.6 months (95% CI 4.1 to 8.3) compared to 4.1 months (95% CI 2.8 to 5.4) for doxorubicin alone. The objective response rate was 18.2% (95% CI 9.8 to 29.6) for olaratumab/doxorubicin compared to 7.5% (95% CI 2.5 to 6.6) for doxorubicin alone. Furthermore, the median overall survival for olaratumab plus doxorubicin was 26.5 months (95% CI 20.9 to 31.7) compared to 14.7 months for doxorubicin alone (95% CI 5.5 to 26.0). Impressively, this improved response was notable across histological types. Furthermore, patients who had previously been treated with more than 1 regimen and those who were treatment naïve had similar response rates.⁴⁶

• What are second-line treatment options?

Doxorubicin has been used in combination with several other agents including dacarbazine (DTIC) as well as DTIC and ifosfamide (MAID). Borden et al evaluated patients with metastatic STS and randomly assigned the patients to either doxorubicin or doxorubicin and DTIC. Combination therapy demonstrated better tumor response than doxorubicin alone: 30% complete or partial response for combination therapy and 18% for doxorubicin alone.⁴⁷ However, Omura et al found similar rates of efficacy between doxorubicin and combination doxorubicin and DTIC in women with recurrent or nonresectable uterine sarcomas.⁴⁸ MAID has never been directly compared in a randomized trial to doxorubicin alone. In a study that compared MAID to doxorubicin and DTIC (AD) in patients with unresectable or metastatic sarcomas, MAID had superior response rates (32% versus 17%), but there was no difference with regards to overall survival (mean survival of 12.5 months).⁴⁹

Several additional regimens have undergone evaluation in metastatic and recurrent STSs. Gemcitabine has been used both as a single agent and as part of combination therapy in many studies. Studies with gemcitabine in combination with either docetaxel or DTIC have been the most efficacious. In a phase 2 trial, patients with metastatic STS were randomly assigned to either gemcitabine alone or gemcitabine and docetaxel. Combination therapy had a higher response rate (16% versus 8%) and longer overall survival (17.9 months versus 11.5 months) than gemcitabine alone.⁵⁰ Furthermore, a phase 2 trial of gemcitabine and docetaxel in patients with unresectable leiomyosarcoma showed an overall response rate of 56%, with 3 complete and 15 partial responses among the 34 patients enrolled in the study.⁵¹ A phase 2 trial randomly assigned patients with unresectable or metastatic STS to either DTIC or combination gemcitabine and DTIC.⁵² Gemcitabine-DTIC had a superior progression-free survival at 3 months (56% [95% CI 43% to 69%]) as compared to DTIC alone (37% [95% CI 23.5% to 50%]). Furthermore, mean progression-free survival and overall survival were improved in the gemcitabine-DTIC group (4.2 months and 16.8 months) as compared to the DTIC group (2.0 months and 8.2 months).⁵² DTIC has a single-agent response rate of 16%, but has been shown to be particularly effective in the setting of leiomyosarcomas.⁴⁹

• Does response to treatment regimens differ by histologic subtype?

The majority of STS trials include many different histologic subtypes. Given the rarity of sarcomas as a whole, many trials have had difficulty recruiting adequate numbers of patients to have sufficient power to definitely determine if the treatment under investigation has clinical benefit. Furthermore, the patients recruited have been heterogeneous with regard to subtype. Many older studies hypothesized that the efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents vary based on histologic subtype; however, for most subtypes the number of individuals included in those trials was too low to evaluate efficacy based on subtype.

Some exceptions exist, however. For example, both gemcitabine-DTIC and gemcitabine-docetaxel have been found to be particularly effective in the treatment of leiomyosarcomas.^50,52 Additionally, a retrospective study found a 51% overall response rate for patients with myxoid liposarcomas treated with trabectedin.⁵³ Studies of patients with angiosarcoma treated with paclitaxel have demonstrated response rates of 43% and 53%.^54,55

• What are the newest approved and investigational agents?

A recently approved agent is trabectedin, a tris tetrahydroisoquinoline alkaloid isolated from ascidians that binds to the minor groove of DNA and causes disruptions in the cell cycle. Samuels et al reported data from a single-arm, open-label expanded access trial that evaluated patients with advanced metastatic sarcomas.⁵⁶ In this study, patients with liposarcomas and leiomyosarcomas had an objective response rate of 6.9% (95% CI 4.8 to 9.6) as compared to a rate of 5.9% (95% CI 4.4 to 7.8) for all assessable patients. Median survival was 11.9 months for all patients, with improved median survivals for liposarcoma and leiomyosarcomas of 16.2 months (95% CI 14.1 to 19.5) compared to 8.4 months (95% CI 7.1 to 10.7 months) for other subtypes.⁵⁶

Schöffski et al evaluated eribulin, a chemotherapeutic agent that affects microtubule dynamics, in a phase 2 trial of patients with progressive or high-grade STS with progression on previous chemotherapy. They found a median progression-free survival of 2.6 months (95% CI 1.7 to 6.2) for adipocytic sarcoma, 2.9 months (95% CI 2.4 to 4.6) for leiomyosarcoma, 2.6 months (95% CI 2.3 to 4.3) for synovial sarcoma, and 2.1 months (95% CI 1.4 to 2.9) for other sarcomas.⁵⁷

Van der Graaf and colleagues randomly assigned patients with metastatic nonadipocytic STS to pazopanib or placebo in a phase 3 trial. Pazopanib is a small-molecule endothelial growth factor inhibitor with activity against vascular endothelial growth factors 1, 2, and 3 as well as platelet-derived growth factors. Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI 3.7 to 4.8) with pazopanib compared to 1.6 months (95% CI 0.9 to 1.8) with placebo.⁵⁸ Adipocytic sarcomas (liposarcomas) were excluded from the trial because phase 2 trials had found a lower rate of progression-free survival (26%) for them compared to other subtypes.

• What are the most common toxicities associated with the approved and investigational chemotherapeutic agents?

Toxicities were seen with each of the regimens studied and were common in the randomized trials, with higher rates of toxicities in the combination chemotherapy regimens. The most common toxicities are myelosuppression, nausea, and vomiting. In the doxorubicin trials, the most common toxicities were myelosuppression, nausea, and vomiting.⁴⁴

Ifosfamide both as an individual agent and in combination with doxorubicin has higher rates and higher grades of toxicity than doxorubicin alone. Myelosuppression is the most common toxicity associated with ifosfamide, and the most commonly affected cell line is leukocytes.⁴⁴ Combination doxorubicin and ifosfamide also had high rates of nausea and vomiting (95%) and alopecia (100%).³⁵Neutropenia is the most common toxicity associated with gemcitabine and dacarbazine, while their most common nonhematologic toxicities are fatigue and nausea.^52,59 Trabectedin’s most common toxicities are nausea (29%), neutropenia (24%), and fatigue (23%). It has also been shown to cause increased alkaline phosphatase (20%) and alanine aminotransferase (19%) levels.⁵⁶ In a phase 2 study of eribulin, 50% of patients had neutropenia, and other toxicities included fatigue, alopecia, nausea, sensory neuropathy, and thrombocytopenia.⁵⁷ Pazopanib is generally well tolerated; the most common toxicities are fatigue (65%), diarrhea (58%), nausea (54%), and hypertension (41%).⁵⁸ Higher rates of neutropenia, mucositis, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and transfusion reactions were seen with olaratumab and doxorubicin compared to doxorubicin alone in phase 1b and 2 studies.⁴⁶

›  Case Continued

Given his poor prognosis with unresectable metastatic undifferentiated liposarcoma, the patient considers a clinical trial prior to undergoing combined therapy with doxorubicin and ifosfamide. He tolerates therapy well with stable disease at 6 months.

Conclusion

STSs are a heterogeneous collection of rare tumors. Low-grade, localized tumors have the best prognosis, and patients who undergo complete resection have the best long-term survival. Due to the rarity of STSs, trials often have limited enrollment, and little progress has been made with regards to treatment and survival rates for metastatic and unresectable disease. All patients should be evaluated and treated at specialized sarcoma centers. This case highlights the need for continued research and clinical trials to improve overall survival of patients with sarcoma. TSJ

CORRESPONDENCE

Ashley Pariser, MD, Resident, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine Chicago, IL. Accepted for publication Jan/Feb 2017; Hosp Phys; Vol. 12, Part1

Introduction

Soft tissue sarcomas (STSs) are rare adult tumors, with 3.4 new cases per 100,000 persons or 12,310 expected new cases in 2016.¹ Sarcomas are a heterogeneous collection of tumors that affect fat, muscle, nerve, nerve sheath, vascular, and connective tissues. There are more than 50 histological subtypes that comprise this diverse category of tumors. Treatment varies by stage, with limb-sparing surgery representing the mainstay of curative-intent treatment. Radiation and chemotherapy may also be considered depending on the size, grade, and location of the tumor. Survival rates have been stagnant until recently, with a disease-specific survival hovering around 65%.¹ Given the complexity of these cases, all patients ideally should be evaluated and treated by a multidisciplinary team at an institution with extensive experience treating STS.²

Epidemiology and Classification

The most common STS subtypes are gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST), undifferentiate pleomorphic sarcoma (previously referred to as malignant fibrous histiocytoma), liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, synovial sarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, rhabdomyosarcoma, and unclassified sarcoma.³ Liposarcoma is one of the most common subtypes, comprising 20% of all STSs; it is subdivided into well-differentiated/dedifferentiated liposarcomas, myxoid/round cell liposarcomas, and pleomorphic liposarcomas. Well-differentiated liposarcomas tend to occur in the retroperitoneum and limbs, while both myxoid and round cell as well as pleomorphic liposarcomas more commonly originate on the limbs. Histology varies based on subtype and ranges from mature-appearing adipocytes and fibroblasts to undifferentiated cells with minimal lipogenic differentiation.⁴

Leiomyosarcomas are smooth muscle tumors and are usually located in the retroperitoneum, but have also been associated with peripheral soft tissue and vasculature. Typical histology ranges from well-defined areas of spindle-shaped cells to poorly differentiated anaplastic spindle cells.^5,6 Synovial sarcomas are a distinct type of STS that can show epithelial differentiation and account for 5% of adult STSs. The extremities are the most common presenting location (90%).⁷

Rhabdomyosarcomas are skeletal muscle tumors and are further subdivided into embryonal, alveolar, and pleomorphic subtypes. Embryonal histology ranges from primitive mesenchymal-appearing cells to highly differentiated muscle cells. Alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma has the worst prognosis of the subtypes and consists of round cells with high nuclear-to-chromatin ratios that form “glandular-like” or “alveolar” spaces.⁸ Pleomorphic rhabdomyosarcomas are composed of rhabdomyoblasts that can affect many different locations, but most commonly present on the lower extremities.⁹

Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) comprises 5% to 10% of all STSs. These tumors are associated with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1), with 25% to 50% of tumors occurring in NF-1 patients. Additionally, most patients have a truncating lesion in the NF1 gene on chromosome 17.¹⁰ Anghileri et al in their single institution analysis of 205 patients with MPNSTs found the 2 most common presenting sites were the trunk and extremities. Histologically, these tumors have dense fascicles of spindle cells.¹⁰

GISTs are the most common STS of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Previously, GISTs were classified as smooth muscle tumors and were not accounted for in the literature as a separate entity distinct from leiomyomas, leiomyoblastomas, and leiomyosarcomas.¹¹ GISTs are found throughout the GI tract: the most common sites are the stomach (60%) and small intestine (30%). Less common sites include duodenum (4%–5%), esophagus (1%), rectum (1%–2%), and appendix (< 0.2%).¹² GISTs can be spindle cell, epithelioid, or mesenchymal tumors. Immunohistochemically, GISTs are KIT (CD117) positive. Other cell markers that are also commonly positive include CD34 (60%–70%) and smooth muscle actin (SMA) (25%).¹¹ The majority of GISTs (80%) have an activating c-KIT gene mutation. The most common mutation site is exon 11, with less common c-KIT gene mutations also occurring at exon 9 or 13. Not all GISTs have KIT mutations. The second most common mutation is the PDGFRA mutation (5%–10% of GISTs).² A minority of GISTs are negative for both KIT and PDGFRA mutations. These tumors were previously called wild-type, but as the majority have either a succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) loss of function or loss of SDHB protein expression, they are now referred to as SDH-deficient GISTs.² GISTs vary in aggressiveness from incidental to aggressive. Typically, small intestine and rectal GISTs are more aggressive than gastric GISTs. Both size and mitotic rate help to predict the metastatic potential of the tumor. Tumors less than 2 cm in size and having a mitotic rate of less than 5 per 50 high-power fields (hpf) have the lowest risk of metastases, while tumors greater than 5 cm and with more than 5 mitoses per 50 hpf have the highest rates of metastases.¹²

Angiosarcomas are rare tumors comprising 4% of all STSs. Although they can occur in any site, the majority are cutaneous and occur most frequently in the head and neck regions. These tumors are either of vascular or lymphatic origin and are comprised of abnormal, pleomorphic, malignant endothelial cells. The most useful immunohistochemical markers include von Willebrand factor, CD31, and Ulex europaeus agglutinin 1. The majority of these tumors occur sporadically; however, radiation exposure, chronic lymphedema, and certain toxins including vinyl chloride and thorium dioxide are known risk factors.¹³

Undifferentiated sarcomas have no specific features and typically consist of primitive mesenchymal cells.

Clinical Evaluation

›  Case Presentation

Initial Presentation and History

A 55-year-old man presents to his primary care physician with a painless mass in his anterior thigh. The mass has been present for the past 3 months and he believes that it is enlarging. The patient has a history of well-controlled hypertension and hyperlipidemia. His medications include atorvastatin and hydrochlorothiazide. He has no known drug allergies. Family history is notable for diabetes and hypertension. He drinks 4 to 5 alcoholic drinks a week and he is a former smoker. He quit smoking in his 30s and only smoked intermittently prior to quitting. He denies any illicit drug use. He works as a high school principal. Currently, he feels well. His review of systems is otherwise noncontributory.

Physical Examination

On physical exam, he is afebrile with a blood pressure of 132/75 mm Hg, respiratory rate of 10 breaths/min, and oxygen saturation of 99% on room air. He is a well appearing, overweight male. His head and neck exam is unremarkable. Lung exam reveals clear breath sounds, and cardiac exam reveals a regular rate and rhythm. His abdomen is obese, soft, and without hepatosplenomegaly. There is a large, fixed mass on the anterior lateral aspect of his right thigh. He has no appreciable lymphadenopathy. His neurological exam is unremarkable.

• What are risk factors for sarcoma?

There are few known risk factors for sarcoma. Established risks factors include prior radiation therapy, chronic lymphedema, viruses, and genetic cancer syndromes including Li-Fraumeni syndrome, hereditary retinoblastoma, and NF-1. Other environmental exposures include phenoxyacetic acids and chlorophenols.¹⁴ The majority of cases are sporadic, with only a minority of patients having one of these known risk factors.¹⁵ Up to one third of sarcomas have a specific translocation and are driven by fusion oncogenes (Table 1).

• What is the typical presentation for sarcomas?

A painless mass is the most typical presenting symptom. Size at presentation varies based on location, with extremity and head and neck locations typically presenting at smaller sizes than retroperitoneal tumors.¹⁴ Patients may experience pain and numbness as the mass enlarges and impinges on surrounding structures including nerves and vasculature. The vast majority of patients are without systemic symptoms.

• How is sarcoma staged?

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system is the most widely used staging system in the United States. The latest AJCC manual was updated in 2010 to include a 3-tiered grading system where the tumor is classified according to tumor size, lymph node involvement, metastases, and grade at time of diagnosis (Table 2 and Table 3). Additionally, tumor depth in relation to deep fascia is also taken into account, with superficial tumors being assigned a designation of “a” and deep tumors a designation of “b.”

Previously, 2 of the most widely used grading systems were the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma Group (FNCLCC) systems, both 3-tier grading systems. The main components that determine the NCI grade are the tumor’s histologic type and location and the amount of tumor necrosis. The FNCLCC system evaluation focuses on tumor differentiation, mitotic rate, and amount of tumor necrosis. A study that compared the NCI and FNCLCC grading systems found that FNCLCC was a better predictor of mortality and distant metastasis.¹⁶ Previously, the AJCC was a 4-tier grading system, but the 2010 version was updated to the 3-tier FNCLCC grading system. Additionally, the AJCC system has reclassified single lymph node disease as stage III as it confers better survival than metastatic disease.¹⁷ It is important that pathology be evaluated by a sarcoma specialist as disagreements with regard to histologic subtype and grade are common.^18,19

• What are the most important prognostic factors?

Prognostic factors include grade, size, and presence of metastases at presentation. Best survival is associated with low-grade, small tumors with no metastases at time of diagnosis.¹⁴

• What imaging should be considered?

Imaging should be undertaken to help differentiate between benign and malignant lesions. Ideally, it should be undertaken before a biopsy is planned as the imaging can be used to plan biopsy as well as provide invaluable prognostic information. There are several imaging modalities that should be considered during the preliminary work-up and staging of STSs. Conventional imaging includes magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the original tumor site; computed tomography (CT) to evaluate for pulmonary metastases and, depending on location, liver metastases; and in the case of small, low-grade tumors, chest radiography. MRI is considered the test of choice for soft tissue masses and can help delineate benign masses such as hematomas, lipomas, and hemangiomas from sarcomas.²⁰ It is difficult to compare the accuracy of positron emission tomography (PET)/CT to CT and MRI because most studies have evaluated PET/CT in parallel with CT and MRI.²¹ Tateishi et al compared the accuracy of conventional imaging, PET/CT, and PET/CT combined with conventional imaging at determining the TNM staging for 117 patients. They found that conventional imaging correctly classified 77% of patients, PET alone correctly classified 70%, PET/CT correctly classified 83%, and PET/CT combined with conventional imaging correctly staged 87%.²²

• Which subtypes are most likely to metastasize?

Although the vast majority of sarcomas spread hematogenously, 3 have a propensity to spread lymphogenously: epithelioid sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, and clear-cell sarcoma. Additionally, certain subtypes are more likely to metastasize: leiomyosarcomas, synovial sarcomas, neurogenic sarcomas, rhabdomyosarcomas, and epithelioid sarcomas.²³ Sarcomas metastasize to the lungs more frequently than to the liver. The metastatic pattern is defined primarily by sarcoma subtype and site of primary tumor. Sarcomas rarely metastasize to the brain (~1%).

Management

›  Case Continued

The patient undergoes an ultrasound to better visualize the mass. Given the heterogeneous character of the mass, he is referred for an MRI to evaluate the mass and a CT scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis to evaluate for distant metastases. MRI reveals a 5.1 cm × 4.6 cm heterogeneous mass invading the superficial fascia of the rectus femoris muscle. No suspicious lymph nodes or other masses are identified on imaging. The patient next undergoes an image-guided core needle biopsy. Pathology from that procedure is consistent with a stage III, T2bNxMx, grade 3, dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

• What is the best management approach for this patient?

Surgery

Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for STS. Patients with the best prognosis are those who undergo complete resection with negative surgical margins.^24,25 Goal tumor-free margin is 1 to 3 cm.²⁶ Complete resection confers the best long-term survival. Both local and metastatic recurrence is higher in patients with incomplete resection and positive margins.^24,25 In a study that analyzed 2084 localized primary STSs, patients with negative margins had a local recurrence rate of 15% versus a rate of 28% in patients with positive margins. This translated into higher 5-year local recurrence-free survival for patients with negative surgical margins (82%) compared to patients with positive margins (65%).²⁷ Another study similarly found that patients with negative margins at referral to their institution who underwent postoperative radiation had high local control rates of 93% (95% confidence interval [CI] 87% to 97%) at 5, 10, and 15 years.²⁶ Although radiation improves local control, neither preoperative or postoperative radiation has been shown to improve progression-free or overall survival.²⁸ Other factors that are associated with risk of recurrence are tumor location, history of previous recurrence, age of patient, histopathology, tumor grade, and tumor size. Approximately 40% to 50% of patients with high-grade tumors (defined as size > 5 cm, deep location, and high grade) will develop distant metastases.²⁹

Zagars et al found that positive or uncertain resection margin had a relative risk of local recurrence of 2.0 (95% CI 1.3 to 3.1; P = 0.002), and presentation with locally recurrent disease (vs new tumor) had a relative risk of local recurrence of 2.0 (95% CI 1.2 to 3.4; P = 0.013).²⁶ Patients with STS of head and neck and deep trunk have higher recurrence rates than those with superficial trunk and extremity STS. A single-institution retrospective review demonstrated that patients with completely resectable retroperitoneal sarcomas have longer median survival (103 months) compared to patients with incompletely resected abdominal sarcomas (18 months).²⁵Rosenberg and colleagues compared amputation to limb-sparing surgery and radiation.²⁴ Their prospective analysis of 65 patients found no difference in disease-free and overall survival between the 2 treatment groups.The limb-sparing treatment group had higher rates of local recurrence, which was highly correlated with positive surgical margins on pathology.²⁴ Evidence from this and similar studies has resulted in radical amputations being replaced by conservative limb-sparing procedures and radiation therapy. In those found to have positive margins, re-resection is an option for some. Patients who undergo re-resection have higher local control rates than patients with positive margins who do not undergo re-resection. The 5-year control rate for patients who undergo re-resection is 85% (95% CI 80% to 89%) compared to 78% (95% CI 71% to 83%) for those who do not undergo re-resection. Similarly, patients who undergo re-resection have lower rates of metastases at 5, 10, and 15 years as well as higher 5-, 10-, and 15-year disease-free survival rates.²⁶

›  Case Continued

The patient is referred for limb-sparing surgery after presentation at a multidisciplinary tumor board. Prior to undergoing resection of the tumor, he is also referred to radiation-oncology to discuss the risks and benefits of combination radiotherapy and surgery as opposed to surgical resection alone.

• What is the evidence for radiation therapy?

Radiation THERAPY

Radiation therapy is used in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative settings to reduce the risk of local recurrence. There are several options for radiation, including external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), intraoperative radiation, and brachytherapy. A newer strategy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), utilizes 3-dimensional modeling to reduce radiation dosages. Overall there are no differences in overall survival or local recurrence rates between preoperative and postoperative radiation in STS.²⁸

The rationale behind preoperative radiation is that it reduces seeding of tumor cells, especially at the time of surgery.³⁰ Additionally, for EBRT, preoperative radiation has smaller field sizes and lower radiation doses. It can also help to reduce the size of the tumor prior to resection. Intraoperative radiation is often paired with preoperative radiation as a boost dose given only to the area of residual tumor.

Suit et al reviewed patients treated at a single institution with limb-sparing surgery and different radiation strategies. Local control rates between preoperative and postoperative radiation groups were not statistically significant. Local recurrence was linked to grade and size of the tumor in both groups. The authors did note, however, that the preoperative radiation group tended to have larger tumor sizes at baseline compared to the patients who received postoperative radiation.³⁰ A study that compared 190 patients who received preoperative and postoperative EBRT or brachytherapy (primary end point was wound complications, and local control was a secondary end point) showed a trend towards greater local control with preoperative radiation; however, the preoperative radiation group had significantly more wound complications compared to the postoperative radiation group.³¹

Yang et al found that postoperative EBRT decreases rates of local recurrence compared to surgery alone in high-grade extremity sarcomas.³² However, there were no differences in rates of distant metastases and overall survival between the 2 treatment groups. Similarly, in patients with low-grade sarcoma, there were fewer local recurrences in those who received EBRT and surgery as compared to surgery alone.³² Another study that evaluated 164 patients who received either adjuvant brachytherapy or no further therapy after complete resection found that brachytherapy reduced local recurrence in high-grade sarcomas. No difference in local recurrence rates was found in patients with low-grade sarcomas, nor was a significant difference found in the rates of distant metastases and overall survival between the 2 treatment groups.³³ With regards to IMRT, a single institution cohort experience with 41 patients who received IMRT following limb-sparing surgery had similar local control rates when compared to historical controls.³⁴

›  Case Continued

After discussion of the risks and benefits of radiation therapy, the patient opts for preoperative radiation prior to resection of his liposarcoma. He receives 50 Gy of EBRT prior to undergoing resection. Resection results in R1 margin consistent with microscopic disease. He receives 16 Gy of EBRT as a boost after recovery from his resection.²

• What is the evidence for neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for stage I tumors?

Chemotherapy

Localized Sarcoma

For localized sarcoma, limb-sparing resection with or without radiation forms the backbone of treatment. Studies have evaluated chemotherapy in both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, with the vast majority of studies evaluating doxorubicin-based chemotherapy regimens in the adjuvant settings. Due to the rare nature of sarcomas, most studies are not sufficiently powered to detect significant benefit from chemotherapy. Several trials evaluating chemotherapy regimens in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings needed to be terminated prematurely due to inadequate enrollment into the study.^35,36

For stage IA (T1a-Tb, N0, M0, low grade) tumors, no additional therapy is recommended after limb-sparing surgery with appropriate surgical margins. For stage IB (T2a-2b, N0, M0, low grade) tumors with insufficient margins, re-resection and radiation therapy should be considered, while for stage IIA (T1a-1b, N0, M0, G2-3) tumors preoperative or postoperative radiation therapy is recommended.² Studies have not found benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in these low-grade, stage I tumors in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival.³⁷

• At what stage should chemotherapy be considered?

For stage IIb and stage III tumors, surgery and radiation therapy again form the backbone of therapy; however, neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy are also recommended as considerations. Anthracycline-based chemotherapy with either single-agent doxorubicin or doxorubicin and ifosfamide in combination are considered first-line chemotherapy agents in locally advanced STS.^2,29,37

Evidence regarding the efficacy of both neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy regimens in the setting of locally advanced high-grade STS has been mixed. The Sarcoma Meta-analysis Collaboration evaluated 14 trials of doxorubicin-based adjuvant chemotherapy and found a trend towards overall survival in the treatment groups that received chemotherapy.³⁷ All trials included in the meta-analysis compared patients with localized resectable soft-tissue sarcomas who were randomized to either adjuvant chemotherapy or no adjuvant chemotherapy after limb-sparing surgery with or without radiation therapy. None of the individual trials showed a significant benefit, and all trials had large confidence intervals; however, the meta-analysis showed significant benefit in the chemotherapy treatment groups with regard to local recurrence, distant recurrence, and progression-free survival. No significant difference in overall survival was found.³⁷ Pervais et al updated the Sarcoma Meta-analysis Collaboration’s 1997 meta-analysis with the inclusion of 4 new trials that evaluated doxorubicin combined with ifosfamide and found that both patients who received doxorubicin-based regimens or doxorubicin with ifosfamide had significant decreases in distant and overall recurrences. Only the trials that utilized doxorubicin and ifosfamide had an improved overall survival that was statistically significant (hazard ratio 0.56 [95% CI 0.36 to 0.85]; P = 0.01).²⁹ Although no significant heterogeneity was found among the trials included in either meta-analysis, a variety of sarcomas were included in each clinical trial evaluated. Given the extremely small number of each sarcoma subtype present in each trial, subgroup analysis is difficult and prone to inaccuracies. As a result, it is not known if certain histological subtypes are more or less responsive to chemotherapy.^37–39

One randomized controlled trial evaluated neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk sarcomas defined as tumors greater than 8 cm or grade II/III tumors. This study evaluated doxorubicin and ifosfamide and found no significant difference in disease-free and overall survival in the neoadjuvant therapy group compared to the control group.³⁵ There remains controversy in the literature with regards to adjuvant chemotherapy. Many oncologists offer adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with certain stage III subtypes. Examples of subtypes that may be offered adjuvant therapy include myxoid liposarcomas, synovial sarcomas, and leiomyosarcomas.² With regards to how many cycles of chemotherapy should be considered, a noninferiority study compared 3 cycles of epirubicin and ifosfamide to 5 cycles of epirubicin and ifosfamide in patients with high-risk locally advanced adult STSs. Three cycles of preoperative epirubicin and ifosfamide was found to be noninferior to 5 cycles with regards to overall survival.³⁸

• What is this patient’s risk for recurrence?

The patient is at intermediate risk for recurrence. Numerous studies have demonstrated that tumor size, grade, and location are the most important factors to determine risk of recurrence, with larger size, higher grades, and deeper locations being associated with higher risk of recurrence. In an analysis of 1041 patients with STS of the extremities, high grade was the most important risk factor for distant metastases.³⁹ The highest risk of recurrence is within the first 2 years. Given that the patient’s initial tumor was located in the extremity, he is more likely to have a distant metastasis as his site of recurrence; individuals with retroperitoneal tumors and visceral tumors are more likely to recur locally.⁴⁰ For STSs of the extremity, distant metastases determine overall survival, whereas patients with retroperitoneal sarcomas can die from complications of local metastases.⁴¹ Once a patient develops distant metastases, the most important prognostic factor is the size of the tumor, with tumors larger than 10 cm having a relative risk of 1.5 (95% CI 1.0 to 2.0).³⁹

• What are the recommendations for surveillance?

Surveillance recommendations are based on the stage of the sarcoma. Stage I tumors are the least likely to recur either locally or distally. As a result, it is recommended that stage I tumors be followed with history and physical exam every 3 to 6 months for the first 2 to 3 years, and then annually after the first 2 to 3 years. Chest x-rays should be considered every 6 to 12 months.² For stage II–IV tumors, history and physical exam is recommended every 3 to 6 months for the first 2 to 3 years. Chest and distant metastases imaging should also be performed every 3 to 6 months during this time frame. For the next 2 years, history and physical exam and imaging are recommended every 6 months. After the first 4 to 5 years, annual follow-up is recommended.²

A study that followed 141 patients with primary extremity STSs for a median interval of 49 months found that high-grade tumors were most likely to recur during the first 2 years, with 20% of their patients recurring locally and 40% recurring distally. Chest x-rays performed during surveillance follow-up found distant lung metastases in 36 asymptomatic patients and had a positive predictive value of 92%, a negative predictive value of 97%, and a quality-adjusted life-year of $30,000.^40,41 No laboratory testing was found to aid in detection of recurrence.

›  Case Continued

The patient does well for 1 year. With physical therapy, he regains most of the strength and coordination of the lower extremity. He is followed every 3 months with chest x-rays and a MRI of the thigh for the first year. On his fourth follow-up clinic visit, he describes increased dysp-nea on exertion over the previous few weeks and is found to have multiple lung metastases in both lungs on chest x-ray. He undergoes further evaluation for metastases and is not found to have any other metastatic lesions. Bronchoscopy and biopsy of 1 of the lung nodules confirms recurrent dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

• Should this patient undergo metastectomy?

An analysis of 3149 patients with STS treated at Memorial Sloan-Kettering who developed lung metastases found that patients with pulmonary metastases have survival rates of 25%. The most important prognostic factor for survival was complete resection of all metastases.⁴² For stage IV disease, surgery is used only in certain instances. In instances where tumor is more localized or limited, removal of metastases or metastectomy can play a role in management.²

›  Case Continued

Because the patient’s metastases are limited to the lungs, he is referred for metastectomy. He undergoes wedge resection for definitive diagnosis but it is not possible to completely resect all of the metastases. He is thus referred to a medical oncologist to discuss his treatment options.

• What are treatment options for unresectable or metastatic disease?

Metastatic Disease

Unlike local and locally advanced disease, chemotherapy forms the backbone of treatment in stage IV disease. Doxorubicin and olaratumab or doxorubicin and ifosfamide in combination are considered first line in metastatic disease. Response rates for single-agent doxorubicin range from 16% to 27%, while phase 2 and phase 3 studies of doxorubicin and ifosfamide have found response rates ranging from 18% to 36%.⁴³ In addition, the effectiveness of doxorubicin and ifosfamide phase 2 and 3 trials varied. Edmonson et al found a tumor regression rate of 34% for doxorubicin and ifosfamide as compared to 20% for doxorubicin alone.⁴⁴ In comparison, Santoro et al found a response rate of 21.3% for doxorubicin alone and 25.2% for doxorubicin and ifosfamide.⁴⁵ Neither study found increased survival benefit for doxorubicin and ifosfamide when compared to doxorubicin alone. In a Cochrane review evaluating randomized trials that compared doxorubicin and combination chemotherapy regimens, response rates varied from 14% for doxorubicin in combination with streptomycin to 34% for doxorubicin and ifosfamide. Most trials did not show a significant benefit for combination therapies when compared to doxorubicin alone.⁴³ Mean survival with doxorubicin or doxorubicin and ifosfamide is 12 months. High rates of recurrence highlight the need for additional chemotherapy regimens.

The newest approved agent is olaratumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha and prevents receptor activation. A phase 1-b and phase 2 trial evaluated patients with locally advanced and metastatic STS and randomly assigned them to either olaratumab and doxorubicin or doxorubicin alone.⁴⁶ Progression-free survival for olaratumab/doxorubicin was 6.6 months (95% CI 4.1 to 8.3) compared to 4.1 months (95% CI 2.8 to 5.4) for doxorubicin alone. The objective response rate was 18.2% (95% CI 9.8 to 29.6) for olaratumab/doxorubicin compared to 7.5% (95% CI 2.5 to 6.6) for doxorubicin alone. Furthermore, the median overall survival for olaratumab plus doxorubicin was 26.5 months (95% CI 20.9 to 31.7) compared to 14.7 months for doxorubicin alone (95% CI 5.5 to 26.0). Impressively, this improved response was notable across histological types. Furthermore, patients who had previously been treated with more than 1 regimen and those who were treatment naïve had similar response rates.⁴⁶

• What are second-line treatment options?

Doxorubicin has been used in combination with several other agents including dacarbazine (DTIC) as well as DTIC and ifosfamide (MAID). Borden et al evaluated patients with metastatic STS and randomly assigned the patients to either doxorubicin or doxorubicin and DTIC. Combination therapy demonstrated better tumor response than doxorubicin alone: 30% complete or partial response for combination therapy and 18% for doxorubicin alone.⁴⁷ However, Omura et al found similar rates of efficacy between doxorubicin and combination doxorubicin and DTIC in women with recurrent or nonresectable uterine sarcomas.⁴⁸ MAID has never been directly compared in a randomized trial to doxorubicin alone. In a study that compared MAID to doxorubicin and DTIC (AD) in patients with unresectable or metastatic sarcomas, MAID had superior response rates (32% versus 17%), but there was no difference with regards to overall survival (mean survival of 12.5 months).⁴⁹

Several additional regimens have undergone evaluation in metastatic and recurrent STSs. Gemcitabine has been used both as a single agent and as part of combination therapy in many studies. Studies with gemcitabine in combination with either docetaxel or DTIC have been the most efficacious. In a phase 2 trial, patients with metastatic STS were randomly assigned to either gemcitabine alone or gemcitabine and docetaxel. Combination therapy had a higher response rate (16% versus 8%) and longer overall survival (17.9 months versus 11.5 months) than gemcitabine alone.⁵⁰ Furthermore, a phase 2 trial of gemcitabine and docetaxel in patients with unresectable leiomyosarcoma showed an overall response rate of 56%, with 3 complete and 15 partial responses among the 34 patients enrolled in the study.⁵¹ A phase 2 trial randomly assigned patients with unresectable or metastatic STS to either DTIC or combination gemcitabine and DTIC.⁵² Gemcitabine-DTIC had a superior progression-free survival at 3 months (56% [95% CI 43% to 69%]) as compared to DTIC alone (37% [95% CI 23.5% to 50%]). Furthermore, mean progression-free survival and overall survival were improved in the gemcitabine-DTIC group (4.2 months and 16.8 months) as compared to the DTIC group (2.0 months and 8.2 months).⁵² DTIC has a single-agent response rate of 16%, but has been shown to be particularly effective in the setting of leiomyosarcomas.⁴⁹

• Does response to treatment regimens differ by histologic subtype?

The majority of STS trials include many different histologic subtypes. Given the rarity of sarcomas as a whole, many trials have had difficulty recruiting adequate numbers of patients to have sufficient power to definitely determine if the treatment under investigation has clinical benefit. Furthermore, the patients recruited have been heterogeneous with regard to subtype. Many older studies hypothesized that the efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents vary based on histologic subtype; however, for most subtypes the number of individuals included in those trials was too low to evaluate efficacy based on subtype.

Some exceptions exist, however. For example, both gemcitabine-DTIC and gemcitabine-docetaxel have been found to be particularly effective in the treatment of leiomyosarcomas.^50,52 Additionally, a retrospective study found a 51% overall response rate for patients with myxoid liposarcomas treated with trabectedin.⁵³ Studies of patients with angiosarcoma treated with paclitaxel have demonstrated response rates of 43% and 53%.^54,55

• What are the newest approved and investigational agents?

A recently approved agent is trabectedin, a tris tetrahydroisoquinoline alkaloid isolated from ascidians that binds to the minor groove of DNA and causes disruptions in the cell cycle. Samuels et al reported data from a single-arm, open-label expanded access trial that evaluated patients with advanced metastatic sarcomas.⁵⁶ In this study, patients with liposarcomas and leiomyosarcomas had an objective response rate of 6.9% (95% CI 4.8 to 9.6) as compared to a rate of 5.9% (95% CI 4.4 to 7.8) for all assessable patients. Median survival was 11.9 months for all patients, with improved median survivals for liposarcoma and leiomyosarcomas of 16.2 months (95% CI 14.1 to 19.5) compared to 8.4 months (95% CI 7.1 to 10.7 months) for other subtypes.⁵⁶

Schöffski et al evaluated eribulin, a chemotherapeutic agent that affects microtubule dynamics, in a phase 2 trial of patients with progressive or high-grade STS with progression on previous chemotherapy. They found a median progression-free survival of 2.6 months (95% CI 1.7 to 6.2) for adipocytic sarcoma, 2.9 months (95% CI 2.4 to 4.6) for leiomyosarcoma, 2.6 months (95% CI 2.3 to 4.3) for synovial sarcoma, and 2.1 months (95% CI 1.4 to 2.9) for other sarcomas.⁵⁷

Van der Graaf and colleagues randomly assigned patients with metastatic nonadipocytic STS to pazopanib or placebo in a phase 3 trial. Pazopanib is a small-molecule endothelial growth factor inhibitor with activity against vascular endothelial growth factors 1, 2, and 3 as well as platelet-derived growth factors. Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI 3.7 to 4.8) with pazopanib compared to 1.6 months (95% CI 0.9 to 1.8) with placebo.⁵⁸ Adipocytic sarcomas (liposarcomas) were excluded from the trial because phase 2 trials had found a lower rate of progression-free survival (26%) for them compared to other subtypes.

• What are the most common toxicities associated with the approved and investigational chemotherapeutic agents?

Toxicities were seen with each of the regimens studied and were common in the randomized trials, with higher rates of toxicities in the combination chemotherapy regimens. The most common toxicities are myelosuppression, nausea, and vomiting. In the doxorubicin trials, the most common toxicities were myelosuppression, nausea, and vomiting.⁴⁴

Ifosfamide both as an individual agent and in combination with doxorubicin has higher rates and higher grades of toxicity than doxorubicin alone. Myelosuppression is the most common toxicity associated with ifosfamide, and the most commonly affected cell line is leukocytes.⁴⁴ Combination doxorubicin and ifosfamide also had high rates of nausea and vomiting (95%) and alopecia (100%).³⁵Neutropenia is the most common toxicity associated with gemcitabine and dacarbazine, while their most common nonhematologic toxicities are fatigue and nausea.^52,59 Trabectedin’s most common toxicities are nausea (29%), neutropenia (24%), and fatigue (23%). It has also been shown to cause increased alkaline phosphatase (20%) and alanine aminotransferase (19%) levels.⁵⁶ In a phase 2 study of eribulin, 50% of patients had neutropenia, and other toxicities included fatigue, alopecia, nausea, sensory neuropathy, and thrombocytopenia.⁵⁷ Pazopanib is generally well tolerated; the most common toxicities are fatigue (65%), diarrhea (58%), nausea (54%), and hypertension (41%).⁵⁸ Higher rates of neutropenia, mucositis, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and transfusion reactions were seen with olaratumab and doxorubicin compared to doxorubicin alone in phase 1b and 2 studies.⁴⁶

›  Case Continued

Given his poor prognosis with unresectable metastatic undifferentiated liposarcoma, the patient considers a clinical trial prior to undergoing combined therapy with doxorubicin and ifosfamide. He tolerates therapy well with stable disease at 6 months.

Conclusion

STSs are a heterogeneous collection of rare tumors. Low-grade, localized tumors have the best prognosis, and patients who undergo complete resection have the best long-term survival. Due to the rarity of STSs, trials often have limited enrollment, and little progress has been made with regards to treatment and survival rates for metastatic and unresectable disease. All patients should be evaluated and treated at specialized sarcoma centers. This case highlights the need for continued research and clinical trials to improve overall survival of patients with sarcoma. TSJ

CORRESPONDENCE

Ashley Pariser, MD, Resident, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine Chicago, IL. Accepted for publication Jan/Feb 2017; Hosp Phys; Vol. 12, Part1

Introduction

Soft tissue sarcomas (STSs) are rare adult tumors, with 3.4 new cases per 100,000 persons or 12,310 expected new cases in 2016.¹ Sarcomas are a heterogeneous collection of tumors that affect fat, muscle, nerve, nerve sheath, vascular, and connective tissues. There are more than 50 histological subtypes that comprise this diverse category of tumors. Treatment varies by stage, with limb-sparing surgery representing the mainstay of curative-intent treatment. Radiation and chemotherapy may also be considered depending on the size, grade, and location of the tumor. Survival rates have been stagnant until recently, with a disease-specific survival hovering around 65%.¹ Given the complexity of these cases, all patients ideally should be evaluated and treated by a multidisciplinary team at an institution with extensive experience treating STS.²

Epidemiology and Classification

The most common STS subtypes are gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST), undifferentiate pleomorphic sarcoma (previously referred to as malignant fibrous histiocytoma), liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, synovial sarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, rhabdomyosarcoma, and unclassified sarcoma.³ Liposarcoma is one of the most common subtypes, comprising 20% of all STSs; it is subdivided into well-differentiated/dedifferentiated liposarcomas, myxoid/round cell liposarcomas, and pleomorphic liposarcomas. Well-differentiated liposarcomas tend to occur in the retroperitoneum and limbs, while both myxoid and round cell as well as pleomorphic liposarcomas more commonly originate on the limbs. Histology varies based on subtype and ranges from mature-appearing adipocytes and fibroblasts to undifferentiated cells with minimal lipogenic differentiation.⁴

Leiomyosarcomas are smooth muscle tumors and are usually located in the retroperitoneum, but have also been associated with peripheral soft tissue and vasculature. Typical histology ranges from well-defined areas of spindle-shaped cells to poorly differentiated anaplastic spindle cells.^5,6 Synovial sarcomas are a distinct type of STS that can show epithelial differentiation and account for 5% of adult STSs. The extremities are the most common presenting location (90%).⁷

Rhabdomyosarcomas are skeletal muscle tumors and are further subdivided into embryonal, alveolar, and pleomorphic subtypes. Embryonal histology ranges from primitive mesenchymal-appearing cells to highly differentiated muscle cells. Alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma has the worst prognosis of the subtypes and consists of round cells with high nuclear-to-chromatin ratios that form “glandular-like” or “alveolar” spaces.⁸ Pleomorphic rhabdomyosarcomas are composed of rhabdomyoblasts that can affect many different locations, but most commonly present on the lower extremities.⁹

Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) comprises 5% to 10% of all STSs. These tumors are associated with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1), with 25% to 50% of tumors occurring in NF-1 patients. Additionally, most patients have a truncating lesion in the NF1 gene on chromosome 17.¹⁰ Anghileri et al in their single institution analysis of 205 patients with MPNSTs found the 2 most common presenting sites were the trunk and extremities. Histologically, these tumors have dense fascicles of spindle cells.¹⁰

GISTs are the most common STS of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Previously, GISTs were classified as smooth muscle tumors and were not accounted for in the literature as a separate entity distinct from leiomyomas, leiomyoblastomas, and leiomyosarcomas.¹¹ GISTs are found throughout the GI tract: the most common sites are the stomach (60%) and small intestine (30%). Less common sites include duodenum (4%–5%), esophagus (1%), rectum (1%–2%), and appendix (< 0.2%).¹² GISTs can be spindle cell, epithelioid, or mesenchymal tumors. Immunohistochemically, GISTs are KIT (CD117) positive. Other cell markers that are also commonly positive include CD34 (60%–70%) and smooth muscle actin (SMA) (25%).¹¹ The majority of GISTs (80%) have an activating c-KIT gene mutation. The most common mutation site is exon 11, with less common c-KIT gene mutations also occurring at exon 9 or 13. Not all GISTs have KIT mutations. The second most common mutation is the PDGFRA mutation (5%–10% of GISTs).² A minority of GISTs are negative for both KIT and PDGFRA mutations. These tumors were previously called wild-type, but as the majority have either a succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) loss of function or loss of SDHB protein expression, they are now referred to as SDH-deficient GISTs.² GISTs vary in aggressiveness from incidental to aggressive. Typically, small intestine and rectal GISTs are more aggressive than gastric GISTs. Both size and mitotic rate help to predict the metastatic potential of the tumor. Tumors less than 2 cm in size and having a mitotic rate of less than 5 per 50 high-power fields (hpf) have the lowest risk of metastases, while tumors greater than 5 cm and with more than 5 mitoses per 50 hpf have the highest rates of metastases.¹²

Angiosarcomas are rare tumors comprising 4% of all STSs. Although they can occur in any site, the majority are cutaneous and occur most frequently in the head and neck regions. These tumors are either of vascular or lymphatic origin and are comprised of abnormal, pleomorphic, malignant endothelial cells. The most useful immunohistochemical markers include von Willebrand factor, CD31, and Ulex europaeus agglutinin 1. The majority of these tumors occur sporadically; however, radiation exposure, chronic lymphedema, and certain toxins including vinyl chloride and thorium dioxide are known risk factors.¹³

Undifferentiated sarcomas have no specific features and typically consist of primitive mesenchymal cells.

Clinical Evaluation

›  Case Presentation

Initial Presentation and History

A 55-year-old man presents to his primary care physician with a painless mass in his anterior thigh. The mass has been present for the past 3 months and he believes that it is enlarging. The patient has a history of well-controlled hypertension and hyperlipidemia. His medications include atorvastatin and hydrochlorothiazide. He has no known drug allergies. Family history is notable for diabetes and hypertension. He drinks 4 to 5 alcoholic drinks a week and he is a former smoker. He quit smoking in his 30s and only smoked intermittently prior to quitting. He denies any illicit drug use. He works as a high school principal. Currently, he feels well. His review of systems is otherwise noncontributory.

Physical Examination

On physical exam, he is afebrile with a blood pressure of 132/75 mm Hg, respiratory rate of 10 breaths/min, and oxygen saturation of 99% on room air. He is a well appearing, overweight male. His head and neck exam is unremarkable. Lung exam reveals clear breath sounds, and cardiac exam reveals a regular rate and rhythm. His abdomen is obese, soft, and without hepatosplenomegaly. There is a large, fixed mass on the anterior lateral aspect of his right thigh. He has no appreciable lymphadenopathy. His neurological exam is unremarkable.

• What are risk factors for sarcoma?

There are few known risk factors for sarcoma. Established risks factors include prior radiation therapy, chronic lymphedema, viruses, and genetic cancer syndromes including Li-Fraumeni syndrome, hereditary retinoblastoma, and NF-1. Other environmental exposures include phenoxyacetic acids and chlorophenols.¹⁴ The majority of cases are sporadic, with only a minority of patients having one of these known risk factors.¹⁵ Up to one third of sarcomas have a specific translocation and are driven by fusion oncogenes (Table 1).

• What is the typical presentation for sarcomas?

A painless mass is the most typical presenting symptom. Size at presentation varies based on location, with extremity and head and neck locations typically presenting at smaller sizes than retroperitoneal tumors.¹⁴ Patients may experience pain and numbness as the mass enlarges and impinges on surrounding structures including nerves and vasculature. The vast majority of patients are without systemic symptoms.

• How is sarcoma staged?

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system is the most widely used staging system in the United States. The latest AJCC manual was updated in 2010 to include a 3-tiered grading system where the tumor is classified according to tumor size, lymph node involvement, metastases, and grade at time of diagnosis (Table 2 and Table 3). Additionally, tumor depth in relation to deep fascia is also taken into account, with superficial tumors being assigned a designation of “a” and deep tumors a designation of “b.”

Previously, 2 of the most widely used grading systems were the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma Group (FNCLCC) systems, both 3-tier grading systems. The main components that determine the NCI grade are the tumor’s histologic type and location and the amount of tumor necrosis. The FNCLCC system evaluation focuses on tumor differentiation, mitotic rate, and amount of tumor necrosis. A study that compared the NCI and FNCLCC grading systems found that FNCLCC was a better predictor of mortality and distant metastasis.¹⁶ Previously, the AJCC was a 4-tier grading system, but the 2010 version was updated to the 3-tier FNCLCC grading system. Additionally, the AJCC system has reclassified single lymph node disease as stage III as it confers better survival than metastatic disease.¹⁷ It is important that pathology be evaluated by a sarcoma specialist as disagreements with regard to histologic subtype and grade are common.^18,19

• What are the most important prognostic factors?

Prognostic factors include grade, size, and presence of metastases at presentation. Best survival is associated with low-grade, small tumors with no metastases at time of diagnosis.¹⁴

• What imaging should be considered?

Imaging should be undertaken to help differentiate between benign and malignant lesions. Ideally, it should be undertaken before a biopsy is planned as the imaging can be used to plan biopsy as well as provide invaluable prognostic information. There are several imaging modalities that should be considered during the preliminary work-up and staging of STSs. Conventional imaging includes magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the original tumor site; computed tomography (CT) to evaluate for pulmonary metastases and, depending on location, liver metastases; and in the case of small, low-grade tumors, chest radiography. MRI is considered the test of choice for soft tissue masses and can help delineate benign masses such as hematomas, lipomas, and hemangiomas from sarcomas.²⁰ It is difficult to compare the accuracy of positron emission tomography (PET)/CT to CT and MRI because most studies have evaluated PET/CT in parallel with CT and MRI.²¹ Tateishi et al compared the accuracy of conventional imaging, PET/CT, and PET/CT combined with conventional imaging at determining the TNM staging for 117 patients. They found that conventional imaging correctly classified 77% of patients, PET alone correctly classified 70%, PET/CT correctly classified 83%, and PET/CT combined with conventional imaging correctly staged 87%.²²

• Which subtypes are most likely to metastasize?

Although the vast majority of sarcomas spread hematogenously, 3 have a propensity to spread lymphogenously: epithelioid sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, and clear-cell sarcoma. Additionally, certain subtypes are more likely to metastasize: leiomyosarcomas, synovial sarcomas, neurogenic sarcomas, rhabdomyosarcomas, and epithelioid sarcomas.²³ Sarcomas metastasize to the lungs more frequently than to the liver. The metastatic pattern is defined primarily by sarcoma subtype and site of primary tumor. Sarcomas rarely metastasize to the brain (~1%).

Management

›  Case Continued

The patient undergoes an ultrasound to better visualize the mass. Given the heterogeneous character of the mass, he is referred for an MRI to evaluate the mass and a CT scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis to evaluate for distant metastases. MRI reveals a 5.1 cm × 4.6 cm heterogeneous mass invading the superficial fascia of the rectus femoris muscle. No suspicious lymph nodes or other masses are identified on imaging. The patient next undergoes an image-guided core needle biopsy. Pathology from that procedure is consistent with a stage III, T2bNxMx, grade 3, dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

• What is the best management approach for this patient?

Surgery

Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for STS. Patients with the best prognosis are those who undergo complete resection with negative surgical margins.^24,25 Goal tumor-free margin is 1 to 3 cm.²⁶ Complete resection confers the best long-term survival. Both local and metastatic recurrence is higher in patients with incomplete resection and positive margins.^24,25 In a study that analyzed 2084 localized primary STSs, patients with negative margins had a local recurrence rate of 15% versus a rate of 28% in patients with positive margins. This translated into higher 5-year local recurrence-free survival for patients with negative surgical margins (82%) compared to patients with positive margins (65%).²⁷ Another study similarly found that patients with negative margins at referral to their institution who underwent postoperative radiation had high local control rates of 93% (95% confidence interval [CI] 87% to 97%) at 5, 10, and 15 years.²⁶ Although radiation improves local control, neither preoperative or postoperative radiation has been shown to improve progression-free or overall survival.²⁸ Other factors that are associated with risk of recurrence are tumor location, history of previous recurrence, age of patient, histopathology, tumor grade, and tumor size. Approximately 40% to 50% of patients with high-grade tumors (defined as size > 5 cm, deep location, and high grade) will develop distant metastases.²⁹

Zagars et al found that positive or uncertain resection margin had a relative risk of local recurrence of 2.0 (95% CI 1.3 to 3.1; P = 0.002), and presentation with locally recurrent disease (vs new tumor) had a relative risk of local recurrence of 2.0 (95% CI 1.2 to 3.4; P = 0.013).²⁶ Patients with STS of head and neck and deep trunk have higher recurrence rates than those with superficial trunk and extremity STS. A single-institution retrospective review demonstrated that patients with completely resectable retroperitoneal sarcomas have longer median survival (103 months) compared to patients with incompletely resected abdominal sarcomas (18 months).²⁵Rosenberg and colleagues compared amputation to limb-sparing surgery and radiation.²⁴ Their prospective analysis of 65 patients found no difference in disease-free and overall survival between the 2 treatment groups.The limb-sparing treatment group had higher rates of local recurrence, which was highly correlated with positive surgical margins on pathology.²⁴ Evidence from this and similar studies has resulted in radical amputations being replaced by conservative limb-sparing procedures and radiation therapy. In those found to have positive margins, re-resection is an option for some. Patients who undergo re-resection have higher local control rates than patients with positive margins who do not undergo re-resection. The 5-year control rate for patients who undergo re-resection is 85% (95% CI 80% to 89%) compared to 78% (95% CI 71% to 83%) for those who do not undergo re-resection. Similarly, patients who undergo re-resection have lower rates of metastases at 5, 10, and 15 years as well as higher 5-, 10-, and 15-year disease-free survival rates.²⁶

›  Case Continued

The patient is referred for limb-sparing surgery after presentation at a multidisciplinary tumor board. Prior to undergoing resection of the tumor, he is also referred to radiation-oncology to discuss the risks and benefits of combination radiotherapy and surgery as opposed to surgical resection alone.

• What is the evidence for radiation therapy?

Radiation THERAPY

Radiation therapy is used in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative settings to reduce the risk of local recurrence. There are several options for radiation, including external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), intraoperative radiation, and brachytherapy. A newer strategy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), utilizes 3-dimensional modeling to reduce radiation dosages. Overall there are no differences in overall survival or local recurrence rates between preoperative and postoperative radiation in STS.²⁸

The rationale behind preoperative radiation is that it reduces seeding of tumor cells, especially at the time of surgery.³⁰ Additionally, for EBRT, preoperative radiation has smaller field sizes and lower radiation doses. It can also help to reduce the size of the tumor prior to resection. Intraoperative radiation is often paired with preoperative radiation as a boost dose given only to the area of residual tumor.

Suit et al reviewed patients treated at a single institution with limb-sparing surgery and different radiation strategies. Local control rates between preoperative and postoperative radiation groups were not statistically significant. Local recurrence was linked to grade and size of the tumor in both groups. The authors did note, however, that the preoperative radiation group tended to have larger tumor sizes at baseline compared to the patients who received postoperative radiation.³⁰ A study that compared 190 patients who received preoperative and postoperative EBRT or brachytherapy (primary end point was wound complications, and local control was a secondary end point) showed a trend towards greater local control with preoperative radiation; however, the preoperative radiation group had significantly more wound complications compared to the postoperative radiation group.³¹

Yang et al found that postoperative EBRT decreases rates of local recurrence compared to surgery alone in high-grade extremity sarcomas.³² However, there were no differences in rates of distant metastases and overall survival between the 2 treatment groups. Similarly, in patients with low-grade sarcoma, there were fewer local recurrences in those who received EBRT and surgery as compared to surgery alone.³² Another study that evaluated 164 patients who received either adjuvant brachytherapy or no further therapy after complete resection found that brachytherapy reduced local recurrence in high-grade sarcomas. No difference in local recurrence rates was found in patients with low-grade sarcomas, nor was a significant difference found in the rates of distant metastases and overall survival between the 2 treatment groups.³³ With regards to IMRT, a single institution cohort experience with 41 patients who received IMRT following limb-sparing surgery had similar local control rates when compared to historical controls.³⁴

›  Case Continued

After discussion of the risks and benefits of radiation therapy, the patient opts for preoperative radiation prior to resection of his liposarcoma. He receives 50 Gy of EBRT prior to undergoing resection. Resection results in R1 margin consistent with microscopic disease. He receives 16 Gy of EBRT as a boost after recovery from his resection.²

• What is the evidence for neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for stage I tumors?

Chemotherapy

Localized Sarcoma

For localized sarcoma, limb-sparing resection with or without radiation forms the backbone of treatment. Studies have evaluated chemotherapy in both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, with the vast majority of studies evaluating doxorubicin-based chemotherapy regimens in the adjuvant settings. Due to the rare nature of sarcomas, most studies are not sufficiently powered to detect significant benefit from chemotherapy. Several trials evaluating chemotherapy regimens in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings needed to be terminated prematurely due to inadequate enrollment into the study.^35,36

For stage IA (T1a-Tb, N0, M0, low grade) tumors, no additional therapy is recommended after limb-sparing surgery with appropriate surgical margins. For stage IB (T2a-2b, N0, M0, low grade) tumors with insufficient margins, re-resection and radiation therapy should be considered, while for stage IIA (T1a-1b, N0, M0, G2-3) tumors preoperative or postoperative radiation therapy is recommended.² Studies have not found benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in these low-grade, stage I tumors in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival.³⁷

• At what stage should chemotherapy be considered?

For stage IIb and stage III tumors, surgery and radiation therapy again form the backbone of therapy; however, neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy are also recommended as considerations. Anthracycline-based chemotherapy with either single-agent doxorubicin or doxorubicin and ifosfamide in combination are considered first-line chemotherapy agents in locally advanced STS.^2,29,37

Evidence regarding the efficacy of both neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy regimens in the setting of locally advanced high-grade STS has been mixed. The Sarcoma Meta-analysis Collaboration evaluated 14 trials of doxorubicin-based adjuvant chemotherapy and found a trend towards overall survival in the treatment groups that received chemotherapy.³⁷ All trials included in the meta-analysis compared patients with localized resectable soft-tissue sarcomas who were randomized to either adjuvant chemotherapy or no adjuvant chemotherapy after limb-sparing surgery with or without radiation therapy. None of the individual trials showed a significant benefit, and all trials had large confidence intervals; however, the meta-analysis showed significant benefit in the chemotherapy treatment groups with regard to local recurrence, distant recurrence, and progression-free survival. No significant difference in overall survival was found.³⁷ Pervais et al updated the Sarcoma Meta-analysis Collaboration’s 1997 meta-analysis with the inclusion of 4 new trials that evaluated doxorubicin combined with ifosfamide and found that both patients who received doxorubicin-based regimens or doxorubicin with ifosfamide had significant decreases in distant and overall recurrences. Only the trials that utilized doxorubicin and ifosfamide had an improved overall survival that was statistically significant (hazard ratio 0.56 [95% CI 0.36 to 0.85]; P = 0.01).²⁹ Although no significant heterogeneity was found among the trials included in either meta-analysis, a variety of sarcomas were included in each clinical trial evaluated. Given the extremely small number of each sarcoma subtype present in each trial, subgroup analysis is difficult and prone to inaccuracies. As a result, it is not known if certain histological subtypes are more or less responsive to chemotherapy.^37–39

One randomized controlled trial evaluated neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk sarcomas defined as tumors greater than 8 cm or grade II/III tumors. This study evaluated doxorubicin and ifosfamide and found no significant difference in disease-free and overall survival in the neoadjuvant therapy group compared to the control group.³⁵ There remains controversy in the literature with regards to adjuvant chemotherapy. Many oncologists offer adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with certain stage III subtypes. Examples of subtypes that may be offered adjuvant therapy include myxoid liposarcomas, synovial sarcomas, and leiomyosarcomas.² With regards to how many cycles of chemotherapy should be considered, a noninferiority study compared 3 cycles of epirubicin and ifosfamide to 5 cycles of epirubicin and ifosfamide in patients with high-risk locally advanced adult STSs. Three cycles of preoperative epirubicin and ifosfamide was found to be noninferior to 5 cycles with regards to overall survival.³⁸

• What is this patient’s risk for recurrence?

The patient is at intermediate risk for recurrence. Numerous studies have demonstrated that tumor size, grade, and location are the most important factors to determine risk of recurrence, with larger size, higher grades, and deeper locations being associated with higher risk of recurrence. In an analysis of 1041 patients with STS of the extremities, high grade was the most important risk factor for distant metastases.³⁹ The highest risk of recurrence is within the first 2 years. Given that the patient’s initial tumor was located in the extremity, he is more likely to have a distant metastasis as his site of recurrence; individuals with retroperitoneal tumors and visceral tumors are more likely to recur locally.⁴⁰ For STSs of the extremity, distant metastases determine overall survival, whereas patients with retroperitoneal sarcomas can die from complications of local metastases.⁴¹ Once a patient develops distant metastases, the most important prognostic factor is the size of the tumor, with tumors larger than 10 cm having a relative risk of 1.5 (95% CI 1.0 to 2.0).³⁹

• What are the recommendations for surveillance?

Surveillance recommendations are based on the stage of the sarcoma. Stage I tumors are the least likely to recur either locally or distally. As a result, it is recommended that stage I tumors be followed with history and physical exam every 3 to 6 months for the first 2 to 3 years, and then annually after the first 2 to 3 years. Chest x-rays should be considered every 6 to 12 months.² For stage II–IV tumors, history and physical exam is recommended every 3 to 6 months for the first 2 to 3 years. Chest and distant metastases imaging should also be performed every 3 to 6 months during this time frame. For the next 2 years, history and physical exam and imaging are recommended every 6 months. After the first 4 to 5 years, annual follow-up is recommended.²

A study that followed 141 patients with primary extremity STSs for a median interval of 49 months found that high-grade tumors were most likely to recur during the first 2 years, with 20% of their patients recurring locally and 40% recurring distally. Chest x-rays performed during surveillance follow-up found distant lung metastases in 36 asymptomatic patients and had a positive predictive value of 92%, a negative predictive value of 97%, and a quality-adjusted life-year of $30,000.^40,41 No laboratory testing was found to aid in detection of recurrence.

›  Case Continued

The patient does well for 1 year. With physical therapy, he regains most of the strength and coordination of the lower extremity. He is followed every 3 months with chest x-rays and a MRI of the thigh for the first year. On his fourth follow-up clinic visit, he describes increased dysp-nea on exertion over the previous few weeks and is found to have multiple lung metastases in both lungs on chest x-ray. He undergoes further evaluation for metastases and is not found to have any other metastatic lesions. Bronchoscopy and biopsy of 1 of the lung nodules confirms recurrent dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

• Should this patient undergo metastectomy?

An analysis of 3149 patients with STS treated at Memorial Sloan-Kettering who developed lung metastases found that patients with pulmonary metastases have survival rates of 25%. The most important prognostic factor for survival was complete resection of all metastases.⁴² For stage IV disease, surgery is used only in certain instances. In instances where tumor is more localized or limited, removal of metastases or metastectomy can play a role in management.²

›  Case Continued

Because the patient’s metastases are limited to the lungs, he is referred for metastectomy. He undergoes wedge resection for definitive diagnosis but it is not possible to completely resect all of the metastases. He is thus referred to a medical oncologist to discuss his treatment options.

• What are treatment options for unresectable or metastatic disease?

Metastatic Disease

Unlike local and locally advanced disease, chemotherapy forms the backbone of treatment in stage IV disease. Doxorubicin and olaratumab or doxorubicin and ifosfamide in combination are considered first line in metastatic disease. Response rates for single-agent doxorubicin range from 16% to 27%, while phase 2 and phase 3 studies of doxorubicin and ifosfamide have found response rates ranging from 18% to 36%.⁴³ In addition, the effectiveness of doxorubicin and ifosfamide phase 2 and 3 trials varied. Edmonson et al found a tumor regression rate of 34% for doxorubicin and ifosfamide as compared to 20% for doxorubicin alone.⁴⁴ In comparison, Santoro et al found a response rate of 21.3% for doxorubicin alone and 25.2% for doxorubicin and ifosfamide.⁴⁵ Neither study found increased survival benefit for doxorubicin and ifosfamide when compared to doxorubicin alone. In a Cochrane review evaluating randomized trials that compared doxorubicin and combination chemotherapy regimens, response rates varied from 14% for doxorubicin in combination with streptomycin to 34% for doxorubicin and ifosfamide. Most trials did not show a significant benefit for combination therapies when compared to doxorubicin alone.⁴³ Mean survival with doxorubicin or doxorubicin and ifosfamide is 12 months. High rates of recurrence highlight the need for additional chemotherapy regimens.

The newest approved agent is olaratumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha and prevents receptor activation. A phase 1-b and phase 2 trial evaluated patients with locally advanced and metastatic STS and randomly assigned them to either olaratumab and doxorubicin or doxorubicin alone.⁴⁶ Progression-free survival for olaratumab/doxorubicin was 6.6 months (95% CI 4.1 to 8.3) compared to 4.1 months (95% CI 2.8 to 5.4) for doxorubicin alone. The objective response rate was 18.2% (95% CI 9.8 to 29.6) for olaratumab/doxorubicin compared to 7.5% (95% CI 2.5 to 6.6) for doxorubicin alone. Furthermore, the median overall survival for olaratumab plus doxorubicin was 26.5 months (95% CI 20.9 to 31.7) compared to 14.7 months for doxorubicin alone (95% CI 5.5 to 26.0). Impressively, this improved response was notable across histological types. Furthermore, patients who had previously been treated with more than 1 regimen and those who were treatment naïve had similar response rates.⁴⁶

• What are second-line treatment options?

Doxorubicin has been used in combination with several other agents including dacarbazine (DTIC) as well as DTIC and ifosfamide (MAID). Borden et al evaluated patients with metastatic STS and randomly assigned the patients to either doxorubicin or doxorubicin and DTIC. Combination therapy demonstrated better tumor response than doxorubicin alone: 30% complete or partial response for combination therapy and 18% for doxorubicin alone.⁴⁷ However, Omura et al found similar rates of efficacy between doxorubicin and combination doxorubicin and DTIC in women with recurrent or nonresectable uterine sarcomas.⁴⁸ MAID has never been directly compared in a randomized trial to doxorubicin alone. In a study that compared MAID to doxorubicin and DTIC (AD) in patients with unresectable or metastatic sarcomas, MAID had superior response rates (32% versus 17%), but there was no difference with regards to overall survival (mean survival of 12.5 months).⁴⁹

Several additional regimens have undergone evaluation in metastatic and recurrent STSs. Gemcitabine has been used both as a single agent and as part of combination therapy in many studies. Studies with gemcitabine in combination with either docetaxel or DTIC have been the most efficacious. In a phase 2 trial, patients with metastatic STS were randomly assigned to either gemcitabine alone or gemcitabine and docetaxel. Combination therapy had a higher response rate (16% versus 8%) and longer overall survival (17.9 months versus 11.5 months) than gemcitabine alone.⁵⁰ Furthermore, a phase 2 trial of gemcitabine and docetaxel in patients with unresectable leiomyosarcoma showed an overall response rate of 56%, with 3 complete and 15 partial responses among the 34 patients enrolled in the study.⁵¹ A phase 2 trial randomly assigned patients with unresectable or metastatic STS to either DTIC or combination gemcitabine and DTIC.⁵² Gemcitabine-DTIC had a superior progression-free survival at 3 months (56% [95% CI 43% to 69%]) as compared to DTIC alone (37% [95% CI 23.5% to 50%]). Furthermore, mean progression-free survival and overall survival were improved in the gemcitabine-DTIC group (4.2 months and 16.8 months) as compared to the DTIC group (2.0 months and 8.2 months).⁵² DTIC has a single-agent response rate of 16%, but has been shown to be particularly effective in the setting of leiomyosarcomas.⁴⁹

• Does response to treatment regimens differ by histologic subtype?

The majority of STS trials include many different histologic subtypes. Given the rarity of sarcomas as a whole, many trials have had difficulty recruiting adequate numbers of patients to have sufficient power to definitely determine if the treatment under investigation has clinical benefit. Furthermore, the patients recruited have been heterogeneous with regard to subtype. Many older studies hypothesized that the efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents vary based on histologic subtype; however, for most subtypes the number of individuals included in those trials was too low to evaluate efficacy based on subtype.

Some exceptions exist, however. For example, both gemcitabine-DTIC and gemcitabine-docetaxel have been found to be particularly effective in the treatment of leiomyosarcomas.^50,52 Additionally, a retrospective study found a 51% overall response rate for patients with myxoid liposarcomas treated with trabectedin.⁵³ Studies of patients with angiosarcoma treated with paclitaxel have demonstrated response rates of 43% and 53%.^54,55

• What are the newest approved and investigational agents?

A recently approved agent is trabectedin, a tris tetrahydroisoquinoline alkaloid isolated from ascidians that binds to the minor groove of DNA and causes disruptions in the cell cycle. Samuels et al reported data from a single-arm, open-label expanded access trial that evaluated patients with advanced metastatic sarcomas.⁵⁶ In this study, patients with liposarcomas and leiomyosarcomas had an objective response rate of 6.9% (95% CI 4.8 to 9.6) as compared to a rate of 5.9% (95% CI 4.4 to 7.8) for all assessable patients. Median survival was 11.9 months for all patients, with improved median survivals for liposarcoma and leiomyosarcomas of 16.2 months (95% CI 14.1 to 19.5) compared to 8.4 months (95% CI 7.1 to 10.7 months) for other subtypes.⁵⁶

Schöffski et al evaluated eribulin, a chemotherapeutic agent that affects microtubule dynamics, in a phase 2 trial of patients with progressive or high-grade STS with progression on previous chemotherapy. They found a median progression-free survival of 2.6 months (95% CI 1.7 to 6.2) for adipocytic sarcoma, 2.9 months (95% CI 2.4 to 4.6) for leiomyosarcoma, 2.6 months (95% CI 2.3 to 4.3) for synovial sarcoma, and 2.1 months (95% CI 1.4 to 2.9) for other sarcomas.⁵⁷

Van der Graaf and colleagues randomly assigned patients with metastatic nonadipocytic STS to pazopanib or placebo in a phase 3 trial. Pazopanib is a small-molecule endothelial growth factor inhibitor with activity against vascular endothelial growth factors 1, 2, and 3 as well as platelet-derived growth factors. Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI 3.7 to 4.8) with pazopanib compared to 1.6 months (95% CI 0.9 to 1.8) with placebo.⁵⁸ Adipocytic sarcomas (liposarcomas) were excluded from the trial because phase 2 trials had found a lower rate of progression-free survival (26%) for them compared to other subtypes.

• What are the most common toxicities associated with the approved and investigational chemotherapeutic agents?

Toxicities were seen with each of the regimens studied and were common in the randomized trials, with higher rates of toxicities in the combination chemotherapy regimens. The most common toxicities are myelosuppression, nausea, and vomiting. In the doxorubicin trials, the most common toxicities were myelosuppression, nausea, and vomiting.⁴⁴

Ifosfamide both as an individual agent and in combination with doxorubicin has higher rates and higher grades of toxicity than doxorubicin alone. Myelosuppression is the most common toxicity associated with ifosfamide, and the most commonly affected cell line is leukocytes.⁴⁴ Combination doxorubicin and ifosfamide also had high rates of nausea and vomiting (95%) and alopecia (100%).³⁵Neutropenia is the most common toxicity associated with gemcitabine and dacarbazine, while their most common nonhematologic toxicities are fatigue and nausea.^52,59 Trabectedin’s most common toxicities are nausea (29%), neutropenia (24%), and fatigue (23%). It has also been shown to cause increased alkaline phosphatase (20%) and alanine aminotransferase (19%) levels.⁵⁶ In a phase 2 study of eribulin, 50% of patients had neutropenia, and other toxicities included fatigue, alopecia, nausea, sensory neuropathy, and thrombocytopenia.⁵⁷ Pazopanib is generally well tolerated; the most common toxicities are fatigue (65%), diarrhea (58%), nausea (54%), and hypertension (41%).⁵⁸ Higher rates of neutropenia, mucositis, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and transfusion reactions were seen with olaratumab and doxorubicin compared to doxorubicin alone in phase 1b and 2 studies.⁴⁶

›  Case Continued

Given his poor prognosis with unresectable metastatic undifferentiated liposarcoma, the patient considers a clinical trial prior to undergoing combined therapy with doxorubicin and ifosfamide. He tolerates therapy well with stable disease at 6 months.

Conclusion

STSs are a heterogeneous collection of rare tumors. Low-grade, localized tumors have the best prognosis, and patients who undergo complete resection have the best long-term survival. Due to the rarity of STSs, trials often have limited enrollment, and little progress has been made with regards to treatment and survival rates for metastatic and unresectable disease. All patients should be evaluated and treated at specialized sarcoma centers. This case highlights the need for continued research and clinical trials to improve overall survival of patients with sarcoma. TSJ

CORRESPONDENCE

Ashley Pariser, MD, Resident, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine Chicago, IL. Accepted for publication Jan/Feb 2017; Hosp Phys; Vol. 12, Part1

The Food and Drug Administration approved a new genetic sequencing test that detects mutations across 324 genes in tumor biopsy specimens with an accuracy of 94.6%.

The FoundationOne CDx (F1CDx) test from Foundation Medicine “can identify which patients with any of five tumor types” – non–small-cell lung cancer, melanoma, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, or ovarian cancer – “may benefit from 15 different FDA-approved targeted treatment options,” as well as clinical trial eligibility, “with one test report, avoiding duplicative biopsies,” the agency said in a statement.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration approved a new genetic sequencing test that detects mutations across 324 genes in tumor biopsy specimens with an accuracy of 94.6%.

The FoundationOne CDx (F1CDx) test from Foundation Medicine “can identify which patients with any of five tumor types” – non–small-cell lung cancer, melanoma, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, or ovarian cancer – “may benefit from 15 different FDA-approved targeted treatment options,” as well as clinical trial eligibility, “with one test report, avoiding duplicative biopsies,” the agency said in a statement.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration approved a new genetic sequencing test that detects mutations across 324 genes in tumor biopsy specimens with an accuracy of 94.6%.

The FoundationOne CDx (F1CDx) test from Foundation Medicine “can identify which patients with any of five tumor types” – non–small-cell lung cancer, melanoma, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, or ovarian cancer – “may benefit from 15 different FDA-approved targeted treatment options,” as well as clinical trial eligibility, “with one test report, avoiding duplicative biopsies,” the agency said in a statement.

[email protected]

The Diagnosis: Microcystic Adnexal Carcinoma

Microcystic adnexal carcinoma (MAC) is a rare, low-grade adnexal carcinoma consisting of both ductal and pilar differentiation.¹ It typically presents in young to middle-aged adults as a flesh-colored or yellow indurated plaque on the upper lip, medial cheek, or chin. Histologically, MACs exhibit a biphasic pattern consisting of epithelial islands of cords and lumina creating tadpolelike ducts intermixed with basaloid nests (quiz image). Keratin horn cysts are common superficially. A dense red sclerotic stroma is seen interspersed between the ducts and epithelial islands creating a "paisley tie" appearance. The lesion displays an infiltrative pattern and can be deeply invasive, extending down to the fat and muscle (quiz image, inset). Perineural invasion is common. Atypia, when present, is minimal or mild and mitoses are rare. Although this tumor's histologic pattern appears aggressive in nature, it lacks immunohistochemical staining such as p53, Ki-67, bcl-2, and c-erbB-2 that correlate with malignant behavior.² A common diagnostic pitfall is examination of a superficial biopsy in which an MAC may be mistakenly identified as another entity.

Syringomas are benign adnexal neoplasms with ductal differentiation.³ They are more common in women, especially those of Asian descent, and in patients with Down syndrome. They typically present as multiple small, firm, flesh-colored papules in the periorbital area or upper trunk. Histologically, syringomas also display comma-shaped tubules and ducts with a tadpolelike appearance and a dense red stroma creating a paisley tie-like pattern. Ductal cells have an abundant pink cytoplasm. Syringomas are well-circumscribed and more superficial than MACs without an infiltrative pattern. They lack mitotic activity or perineural invasion (Figure 1).

Desmoplastic trichoepithelioma (DTE) is a benign follicular neoplasm.⁴ It presents in adulthood with a female predominance. Clinically, it appears as a solitary flesh-colored to yellow annular plaque with raised borders and a depressed central area, often on the medial cheek. Histologically, DTEs are well-circumscribed with narrow branching cords lined with polygonal cells. A dense red stroma in combination with the epithelioid aggregates also creates the paisley tie-like pattern in this lesion. Retraction between collagen bundles within the stroma can be seen, helping distinguish this lesion from a morpheaform basal cell carcinoma (BCC), which has retraction between the epithelium and stroma. Immunohistochemistry also can be a useful tool to help differentiate DTEs from morpheaform BCCs in that sparse cytokeratin 20-positive Merkel cells can be seen within the basaloid islands of DTE but not BCC.⁵ Also seen with DTEs are numerous keratin horn cysts that commonly are filled with dystrophic calcifications. Cellular atypia and mitoses are not seen (Figure 2). Compared to MACs, DTEs lack abundant ductal structures and also contain papillary mesenchymal bodies and a more fibroblast-rich stroma.

Morpheaform BCC is an aggressive subtype of BCC. It presents as a scarlike plaque that gradually expands. Thin infiltrating strands of basaloid cells are seen haphazardly throughout a pink sclerotic stroma. Tadpolelike basaloid islands and rarely horn cysts can be seen scattered superficially, creating the paisley tie-like pattern. This lesion is more infiltrating than a syringoma or a DTE, and perineural invasion is common. Retraction is uncommon, but when present, it is seen between the epithelial cords and adjacent stroma (Figure 3).

Trichoadenoma is another benign neoplasm of follicular differentiation.⁶ It typically presents as a dome-shaped papule or plaque on the head or neck. Histologically it displays numerous dilated cystic spaces that reflect its origin from isthmic and infundibular differentiation. There is no attachment to the overlying epidermis. It can be distinguished from MAC, DTE, and syringoma due to a lack of basaloid aggregates and only a small number of non-cyst-forming epithelial cells (Figure 4).

The Diagnosis: Microcystic Adnexal Carcinoma

Microcystic adnexal carcinoma (MAC) is a rare, low-grade adnexal carcinoma consisting of both ductal and pilar differentiation.¹ It typically presents in young to middle-aged adults as a flesh-colored or yellow indurated plaque on the upper lip, medial cheek, or chin. Histologically, MACs exhibit a biphasic pattern consisting of epithelial islands of cords and lumina creating tadpolelike ducts intermixed with basaloid nests (quiz image). Keratin horn cysts are common superficially. A dense red sclerotic stroma is seen interspersed between the ducts and epithelial islands creating a "paisley tie" appearance. The lesion displays an infiltrative pattern and can be deeply invasive, extending down to the fat and muscle (quiz image, inset). Perineural invasion is common. Atypia, when present, is minimal or mild and mitoses are rare. Although this tumor's histologic pattern appears aggressive in nature, it lacks immunohistochemical staining such as p53, Ki-67, bcl-2, and c-erbB-2 that correlate with malignant behavior.² A common diagnostic pitfall is examination of a superficial biopsy in which an MAC may be mistakenly identified as another entity.

Syringomas are benign adnexal neoplasms with ductal differentiation.³ They are more common in women, especially those of Asian descent, and in patients with Down syndrome. They typically present as multiple small, firm, flesh-colored papules in the periorbital area or upper trunk. Histologically, syringomas also display comma-shaped tubules and ducts with a tadpolelike appearance and a dense red stroma creating a paisley tie-like pattern. Ductal cells have an abundant pink cytoplasm. Syringomas are well-circumscribed and more superficial than MACs without an infiltrative pattern. They lack mitotic activity or perineural invasion (Figure 1).

Desmoplastic trichoepithelioma (DTE) is a benign follicular neoplasm.⁴ It presents in adulthood with a female predominance. Clinically, it appears as a solitary flesh-colored to yellow annular plaque with raised borders and a depressed central area, often on the medial cheek. Histologically, DTEs are well-circumscribed with narrow branching cords lined with polygonal cells. A dense red stroma in combination with the epithelioid aggregates also creates the paisley tie-like pattern in this lesion. Retraction between collagen bundles within the stroma can be seen, helping distinguish this lesion from a morpheaform basal cell carcinoma (BCC), which has retraction between the epithelium and stroma. Immunohistochemistry also can be a useful tool to help differentiate DTEs from morpheaform BCCs in that sparse cytokeratin 20-positive Merkel cells can be seen within the basaloid islands of DTE but not BCC.⁵ Also seen with DTEs are numerous keratin horn cysts that commonly are filled with dystrophic calcifications. Cellular atypia and mitoses are not seen (Figure 2). Compared to MACs, DTEs lack abundant ductal structures and also contain papillary mesenchymal bodies and a more fibroblast-rich stroma.

Morpheaform BCC is an aggressive subtype of BCC. It presents as a scarlike plaque that gradually expands. Thin infiltrating strands of basaloid cells are seen haphazardly throughout a pink sclerotic stroma. Tadpolelike basaloid islands and rarely horn cysts can be seen scattered superficially, creating the paisley tie-like pattern. This lesion is more infiltrating than a syringoma or a DTE, and perineural invasion is common. Retraction is uncommon, but when present, it is seen between the epithelial cords and adjacent stroma (Figure 3).

Trichoadenoma is another benign neoplasm of follicular differentiation.⁶ It typically presents as a dome-shaped papule or plaque on the head or neck. Histologically it displays numerous dilated cystic spaces that reflect its origin from isthmic and infundibular differentiation. There is no attachment to the overlying epidermis. It can be distinguished from MAC, DTE, and syringoma due to a lack of basaloid aggregates and only a small number of non-cyst-forming epithelial cells (Figure 4).

The Diagnosis: Microcystic Adnexal Carcinoma

Microcystic adnexal carcinoma (MAC) is a rare, low-grade adnexal carcinoma consisting of both ductal and pilar differentiation.¹ It typically presents in young to middle-aged adults as a flesh-colored or yellow indurated plaque on the upper lip, medial cheek, or chin. Histologically, MACs exhibit a biphasic pattern consisting of epithelial islands of cords and lumina creating tadpolelike ducts intermixed with basaloid nests (quiz image). Keratin horn cysts are common superficially. A dense red sclerotic stroma is seen interspersed between the ducts and epithelial islands creating a "paisley tie" appearance. The lesion displays an infiltrative pattern and can be deeply invasive, extending down to the fat and muscle (quiz image, inset). Perineural invasion is common. Atypia, when present, is minimal or mild and mitoses are rare. Although this tumor's histologic pattern appears aggressive in nature, it lacks immunohistochemical staining such as p53, Ki-67, bcl-2, and c-erbB-2 that correlate with malignant behavior.² A common diagnostic pitfall is examination of a superficial biopsy in which an MAC may be mistakenly identified as another entity.

Syringomas are benign adnexal neoplasms with ductal differentiation.³ They are more common in women, especially those of Asian descent, and in patients with Down syndrome. They typically present as multiple small, firm, flesh-colored papules in the periorbital area or upper trunk. Histologically, syringomas also display comma-shaped tubules and ducts with a tadpolelike appearance and a dense red stroma creating a paisley tie-like pattern. Ductal cells have an abundant pink cytoplasm. Syringomas are well-circumscribed and more superficial than MACs without an infiltrative pattern. They lack mitotic activity or perineural invasion (Figure 1).

Desmoplastic trichoepithelioma (DTE) is a benign follicular neoplasm.⁴ It presents in adulthood with a female predominance. Clinically, it appears as a solitary flesh-colored to yellow annular plaque with raised borders and a depressed central area, often on the medial cheek. Histologically, DTEs are well-circumscribed with narrow branching cords lined with polygonal cells. A dense red stroma in combination with the epithelioid aggregates also creates the paisley tie-like pattern in this lesion. Retraction between collagen bundles within the stroma can be seen, helping distinguish this lesion from a morpheaform basal cell carcinoma (BCC), which has retraction between the epithelium and stroma. Immunohistochemistry also can be a useful tool to help differentiate DTEs from morpheaform BCCs in that sparse cytokeratin 20-positive Merkel cells can be seen within the basaloid islands of DTE but not BCC.⁵ Also seen with DTEs are numerous keratin horn cysts that commonly are filled with dystrophic calcifications. Cellular atypia and mitoses are not seen (Figure 2). Compared to MACs, DTEs lack abundant ductal structures and also contain papillary mesenchymal bodies and a more fibroblast-rich stroma.

Morpheaform BCC is an aggressive subtype of BCC. It presents as a scarlike plaque that gradually expands. Thin infiltrating strands of basaloid cells are seen haphazardly throughout a pink sclerotic stroma. Tadpolelike basaloid islands and rarely horn cysts can be seen scattered superficially, creating the paisley tie-like pattern. This lesion is more infiltrating than a syringoma or a DTE, and perineural invasion is common. Retraction is uncommon, but when present, it is seen between the epithelial cords and adjacent stroma (Figure 3).

Trichoadenoma is another benign neoplasm of follicular differentiation.⁶ It typically presents as a dome-shaped papule or plaque on the head or neck. Histologically it displays numerous dilated cystic spaces that reflect its origin from isthmic and infundibular differentiation. There is no attachment to the overlying epidermis. It can be distinguished from MAC, DTE, and syringoma due to a lack of basaloid aggregates and only a small number of non-cyst-forming epithelial cells (Figure 4).

Correct Answer: E

Rationale

On serial imaging, two worrisome features have developed in the pancreas cyst, i.e., an enhancing mural nodule and dilation of the main pancreatic duct. These features are high-risk stigmata, and therefore surgical resection is recommended. EUS FNA can be considered but is unlikely to change management if cytology is negative. Radiologic surveillance is not appropriate unless the patient refuses surgery.

Reference

1. Tanaka M., Fernández-del Castillo C., Adsay V., et al. International consensus guidelines 2012 for the management of IPMN and MCN of the pancreas. Pancreatology. 2012;12(3):183-97.

Correct Answer: E

Rationale

On serial imaging, two worrisome features have developed in the pancreas cyst, i.e., an enhancing mural nodule and dilation of the main pancreatic duct. These features are high-risk stigmata, and therefore surgical resection is recommended. EUS FNA can be considered but is unlikely to change management if cytology is negative. Radiologic surveillance is not appropriate unless the patient refuses surgery.

Reference

1. Tanaka M., Fernández-del Castillo C., Adsay V., et al. International consensus guidelines 2012 for the management of IPMN and MCN of the pancreas. Pancreatology. 2012;12(3):183-97.

Correct Answer: E

Rationale

On serial imaging, two worrisome features have developed in the pancreas cyst, i.e., an enhancing mural nodule and dilation of the main pancreatic duct. These features are high-risk stigmata, and therefore surgical resection is recommended. EUS FNA can be considered but is unlikely to change management if cytology is negative. Radiologic surveillance is not appropriate unless the patient refuses surgery.

Reference

1. Tanaka M., Fernández-del Castillo C., Adsay V., et al. International consensus guidelines 2012 for the management of IPMN and MCN of the pancreas. Pancreatology. 2012;12(3):183-97.