Sclerosing Epithelioid Fibrosarcoma (SEF) versus Low Grade Fibromyxoid Sarcoma (LGFMS): Presentation and outcome in the nationwide NETSARC+ series of 330 patients over 13 years
JY Blay,C. Tlemsani,M. Toulmonde,A. Italiano,M. Rios,E. Bompas,T. Valentin,F. Duffaud,LR Le Nail,S. Watson,N. Firmin,P. Dubray-Longeras,M. Ropars,C. Perrin,A. Hervieu,C. Lebbe,E. Saada-Bouzid,P. Soibinet,F. Fiorenza,F. Bertucci,P. Boudou,G. Vaz,S. Bonvalot,C. Honoré,P. Marec-Berard,V. Minard,M. Cleirec,D. Biau,P. Meeus,A. Babinet,V. Dumaine,S. Carriere,M. Fau,G. Decanter,F. Gouin,C. Ngo,F. Le Loarer,M. Karanian,A. Meurgey,A. Dufresne,M. Brahmi,C. Chemin-Airiau,F. Ducimetiere,N. Penel,A. Le Cesne,on behalf of the NETSARC/REPPS/RESOS and French Sarcoma Group- Groupe d′Etude des Tumeurs Osseuses networks
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2023.113454
IF: 10.002
2024-01-01
European Journal of Cancer
Abstract:Sclerosing Epithelioid Fibrosarcoma (SEF) and Low Grade Fibromyxoid Sarcoma (LGFMS) are ultrarare sarcomas sharing common translocations whose natural history are not well known. We report on the nationwide exhaustive series of 330 patients with SEF or LGFMS in NETSARC+ since 2010.PATIENTS AND METHODS: NETSARC (netsarc.org) is a network of 26 reference sarcoma centers with specialized multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTB). Since 2010, (i) pathological review has been mandatory for sarcoma,and (ii) tumour/patients' characteristics have been collected in the NETSARC+ nationwide database. The characteristics of patients with SEF and LGFMS and their outcome are compared.RESULTS: 35/73 (48%) and 125/257(49%) of patients with SEF and LGFMS were female. More visceral, bone and trunk primary sites were observed in SEF (p < 0.001). 30% of SEF vs 4% of LGFMS patients had metastasis at diagnosis (p < 0.0001). Median size of the primary tumor was 51 mm (range 10-90) for LGFMS vs 80 (20-320) for SEF (p < 0.001). Median age for LGFMS patients was 12 years younger than that of SEF patients (43 [range 4-98] vs 55 [range 10-91], p < 0.001). Neoadjuvant treatment was more often given to SEF (16% vs 9%, p = 0.05). More patients with LGFMS were operated first in reference centers (51% vs 26%, p < 0.001). The R0 rate on the operative specimen was 41% in LGFMS vs 16% in SEF (p < 0.001). Median event-free survival (EFS) of patients with SEF and LGFMS were 32 vs 136 months (p < 0.0001). The median overall survival (OS) was not reached. Fifty-months OS was 93% vs 81% for LGFMS vs SEF (p = 0.05). Median OS was 77 months after first relapse, similar for SEF and LGFMS. In multivariate analysis, age, tumor size, metastasis at diagnosis were independent prognostic factors for OS in LGFMS.CONCLUSIONS: Although sharing close molecular alterations, SEF and LGFMS have a different natural history, clinical presentation and outcome, with a higher risk of metastatic relapse in SEF. Survival after relapse is longer than with other sarcomas, and similar for SEF and LGFMS.
oncology