What comprises appropriate therapy for children/adolescents with rhabdomyosarcoma arising in the abdominal wall? A report from the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group.
ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to define clinical features and determine the best therapy for patients with rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) of the abdominal wall.
We examined the demographic, clinical features, therapy (especially surgical), and outcome of 34 patients. Patients received combination chemotherapy after complete surgical resection (group I, n = 14; 41%); resection with microscopic residual followed by local irradiation (RT; group II, n = 8; 24%); partial resection or biopsy only plus RT with gross locoregional residual tumor (group III, n = 4; 12%); or biopsy only plus RT with metastatic disease (group IV, n = 8; 24%). Patients with group I or group II tumors had undergone partial abdominal wall resection (ie, involved muscle only with preservation of peritoneum, n = 11) or complete abdominal wall resection (n = 7). Four additional patients had groin lesions.
Thirty-four children or adolescents with abdominal wall RMS (about 1% of all patients) were treated on Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study I (IRS-I) through IRS-IV. Overall, adolescents comprised 14 of 34 eligible patients (41%), and 10 of 14 (71%) adolescents had alveolar or undifferentiated tumors versus 8 of 20 (40%) younger children (P= .07). Failure-free survival (FFS) rate and survival rate at 5 years was 65%. Treatment outcome was poorer for patients with group III-IV tumors (P = .01), adolescents (P = .09) and patients with alveolar or undifferentiated sarcomas (P = .12).
Patients with localized tumors appear to fare better if they undergo complete abdominal wall resection (long-term survival rate, 100%) versus partial resection (long-term survival rate, 62% [P = .12]).
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A retrospective study was conducted on 126 patients with rhabdomyosarcoma enrolled in the Japanese Pediatric Tumor Resgistry between 1971 and 1980. The age of the patients ranged from less than 1 year to 15 years, and the male to female ratio was 1.3∶1.0. Primary sites included the pelvis (37.3 per cent), abdomen (23.8 per cent), head and neck (21.4 per cent), thorax (9.5 per cent), extremities (6.4 per cent) and unknown (1.6 per cent). According to the staging system of the Japanese Society of Pediatric Surgeons, the extent of disease was classified into stages Ia (26.2 per cent of the total); Ib (14.6 per cent); II (12.6 per cent), III (29.1 per cent) and IV (17.5 per cent). The clinical stage was significantly correlated with survival outcome in this series (p<0.05). Age, sex, histology and primary siteper se had no independent prognostic influence on tumor-free survival. With regard to treatment modalities, surgery was performed in 94.0 per cent of the patients, and radiotherapy at a mean dose of 37 Gy, and/or multi-agent chemotherapy in 41.7 per cent and 80.0 per cent, respectively. The patients who underwent total excision had a better survival outcome than those who did not (p<0.05). Combination chemotherapy such as VAC was more commonly administered in the latter study period. The overall 2-year tumorfree survival rate (2YTFSR) significantly improved from 24.0 per cent in the former period between 1971 and 1975 to 48.7 per cent in the latter period between 1976 and 1980 (p<0.05).Surgery Today 08/1990; 20(5):503-509. · 0.96 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background. Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study (IRS)-II, (1978–1984) had the general goals of improving the survival and treatment of children with rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS).Methods. Nine hundred ninety-nine previously untreated eligible patients entered the study after surgery and were randomized or assigned to therapy by IRS Clinical Group (I-IV), tumor site, and histologic type. Outcomes were compared between treatments and with results of IRS-I (1972–1978).Results. Patients in Group I, excluding extremity alveolar (EA) RMS, were randomized to standard vincristine (V), dactinomycin (A), and cyclophosphamide (C) or standard VA. At 5 years, disease-free survival (DFS) and survival (S) rates were similar between VAC and VA (DFS:80%, 70%, P = 0.47; S:85%, 84%, P = 0.73). Patients in Group II, excluding EA RMS, received radiation and were randomized to intensive VA or repetitive-pulse VAC. Outcomes were similar for rates of DFS (69%, 74%, P = 0.83) and S (88%, 79%, P = 0.17). Patients in Group III, excluding certain pelvic tumors, received radiation and were randomized to repetitive-pulse VAC or repetitivepulse VAdrC-VAC (Adr, Adriamycin [doxorubicin]). Complete remission (CR) rates were close at 74%, 78%, respectively (P = 0.32), as were percentages in CR (73%) and S (66%) rates; the latter outcomes were significantly better than IRS-I (CR: 56%, P < 0.001; S:50%, P < 0.001). Central nervous system prophylaxis for Group III patients with cranial parameningeal sarcoma increased S rate to 67% from 45% in IRS-I (P < 0.001). Patients in Group IV received the same regimens as Group III; the CR rate was 53%, 38% remained in CR and S rate was 27% with and 26% without Adr (P = 0.90). At 5 years, S rate for IRS-II, including EA and all pelvic tumors, was 63%: an 8% increase over IRS-I (P < 0.001). Outcomes by primary site were as good as, or better than, the IRS-I experience.Conclusions. Combining all Groups and treatments in IRS-II, the major improvement in S rate at 5 years between studies was in nonmetastatic patients (71% for IRS-II versus 63% for IRS-I, P = 0.01).Cancer 06/2006; 71(5):1904 - 1922. · 5.20 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The results of treatment of 686, previously untreated patients younger than 21 years with rhabdomyosarcoma or undifferentiated sarcoma, who were entered on Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study-I (IRS-I) were analyzed after a minimum potential follow-up time of 7 years. Patients in Clinical Group I (localized disease, completely resected) were randomized to receive either vincristine, dactinomycin, and cyclophosphamide (VAC) or VAC + radiation. At 5 years, approximately 80% of patients given either treatment were still disease-free and there was no significant difference between treatments in the overall percentages of patients surviving of 93% and 81%, respectively (P = 0.67). Patients in Clinical Group II (regional disease, grossly resected) were randomized to receive either vincristine and dactinomycin (VA) + radiation or VAC + radiation. At 5 years, 72% and 65% of the patients, respectively, were disease-free and there was no evidence of a difference between treatments (P = 0.46). The overall survival percentage at 5 years was approximately 72% for both treatments. Patients in Clinical Groups III (gross residual disease after surgery) and IV (metastatic disease) were randomized to receive either “pulse” VAC + radiation or “pulse” VAC + Adriamycin (doxorubicin) + radiation. The complete remission (CR) rate was 69% in Clinical Group III and 50% in IV, with no statistically significant difference in CR rates between treatments in either group. Those who achieved a CR had a nearly 60% chance of staying in remission for 5 years in Clinical Group III compared with approximately 30% in Clinical Group IV. The overall survival percentage at 5 years was 52% in Clinical Group III compared to 20% in Clinical Group IV (P < 0.0001). The 5-year survival percentage for the entire cohort of 686 patients was 55%. Survival after relapse was poor, being 32% at 1 year and 17% at 2 years. The risk of distant metastasis was much greater than the risk of local recurrence within each clinical group, and there was no evidence of differing types of relapses between treatments. Primary tumors of the orbit and genitourinary tract carried the best prognosis, whereas tumors of the retroperitoneum had the worst prognosis. The authors conclude that for the therapeutic regimens evaluated there was no therapeutic advantage to including radiation in the treatment of Clinical Group I disease, or cyclophosphamide given as a daily low-dose oral regimen in the treatment of Clinical Group II disease or Adriamycin in the treatment of Clinical Groups III and IV diseases.Cancer 01/1988; 61(2):209 - 220. · 5.20 Impact Factor