Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for high grade osteosarcoma of the extremities: long-term results for patients treated according to the Rizzoli IOR/OS-3b protocol

The results of the Rizzoli IOR/OS-3b neoadjuvant protocol for the treatment of osteosarcoma of the extremity are reported. Preoperative chemotherapy consisted of two cycles of high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX i.v.), followed by a combination of cisplatin (CDP i.a.)/ doxorubicin (ADM i.v.). Postoperatively all patients, regardless of the histologic response, received 3 more cycles of MTX, CDP/ADM alternated with 3 cycles of ifosfamide. In the study performed between January and December 1992 43 patients were enrolled and limb salvage was performed in 39 of them (91%). The histologic response to chemotherapy was good (90% or more tumor necrosis) in 24 patients (56%) and poor (less than 90% tumor necrosis) in 19 (44%). With a minimum follow-up of 7 years, 23 pts (53%) remained continuously free of disease, 19 relapsed and one died due to unrelated cause. In spite of the high number of limb salvages performed, only 2 local recurrences were registered. The 7-year event-free survival and overall survival were, respectively, 53% and 68%. The hematopoietic and extrahematopoietic toxicity experienced by the patients during the entire treatment was relatively mild. These long-term results confirm that, with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, it is possible to cure more than 60% of patients with osteosarcoma of the extremities, avoiding amputation in most of them. These results, however, are no better than those achieved in our previous study IOR/OS-3a, in which only poor responder patients received ifosfamide during the postoperative treatment.     

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for osteosarcoma of the extremity: long-term results of the Rizzoli's 4th protocol

From January 1993 to March 1995, 162 patients with osteosarcoma of extremities were treated according to the IOR/OS-4 protocol. 133 patients had localised disease, while 29 had metastases at diagnosis. These last patients were simultaneously operated upon for their primary and metastatic lesions. Chemotherapy consisted preoperatively of two cycles of high dose methotrexate (HDMTX) and one cycle each of cisplatin (CDP)-doxorubicin (ADM), CDP/ifosfamide (IFO) and IFO/ADM. After surgery, patients were treated with the aforementioned drugs used as single agents. The mean follow-up of all patients was 6.5 years (5.5-8 years). Surgery was a limb salvage in 94% of cases, and the 5-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 56 and 71% for patients with localised disease, and 17 and 24% for patients with metastases at diagnosis. These results did not differ from those achieved in our previous study (IOR/OS-3) in which IFO was used only postoperatively in poor responders.     

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in malignant fibrous histiocytoma of bone and in osteosarcoma located in the extremities: Analogies and differences between the two tumors

Background: Malignant fibrous histiocytoma (MFH) is a rare bone tumor usually treated like osteosarcoma. Studies on analogies and differences between the two tumors have seldom been reported.Patients and methods: Between March 1982 and December 1994, 51 patients with high-grade MFH of bone and 390 with high-grade osteosarcoma were treated with the same regimen of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. All of the tumors in both groups were located in the limbs. Preoperative chemotherapy was performed according to three different, successively activated, regimens consisting of MTX/CDP intraarterially, MTX/CDP/ADM, and MTX/CDP/ADM//IFO.Results: The rate of limb salvage was the same in both the MFH (92%) and osteosarcoma (85%) patients. MFH showed a statistically significantly lower rate of good histologic response, 90% or more tumor necrosis (27% vs. 67%, P = 0.00001) for all three regimens. Despite this low chemosensitivity, the disease-free survivals of the two neoplasms were similar (67% vs. 65%).Conclusions: In terms of histologic response to primary chemotherapy, MFH has a lower chemosensitivity than osteosarcoma. Nevertheless, the two tumors have similar prognoses when treated with chemotherapy regimens based on MTX, CDP, ADM and IFO.     

The Importance of Dose-Intensity in Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy of Osteosarcoma: A retrospective analysis of high-dose methotrexate,cisplatinum and adriamycin used preoperatively

Summary

The relationship between dose-intensity and outcome was retrospectively analyzed in 125 patients with osteosarcoma of the extremities treated at our institution with neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 1986 and 1988. Before surgery, chemotherapy was performed with high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) i.v. followed by cisplatinum (CDP) i.a. and adriamycin (ADM) i.v. Postoperative chemotherapy was tailored according to the necrosis induced by preoperative treatment. Patients who were «good responders» had 31-weeks of chemotherapy with the same drugs utilized preoperatively, while «poor responder» patients received a longer treatment (40 weeks) in which ifosfamide and etoposide (VP-16) were added to HDMTX, CDP and ADM. At a median follow-up of 2 years (1-3 years) 100 patients (80%) remained continuously disease-free and 25 patients relapsed: 24 with lung metastases and 1 with local recurrence. According to the real dose-intensity received, calculated as a percentage of the dose intensity projected by the protocol, the continuously disease-free survival was 87% in the 82 patients who received 80% or more of the scheduled dose-intensity and only 65% for the 43 patients who received less than 80% of the projected dose-intensity. This difference is highly significant (P < 0.01).

These results suggest that in neoadjuvant chemotherapy of osteosarcoma the real dose-intensity delivered is a determinant of treatment outcome and therefore every effort should be made to avoid reductions of doses and delays of cycles of chemotherapy in these patients.     

The importance of dose-intensity in neoadjuvant chemotherapy of osteosarcoma: a retrospective analysis of high-dose methotrexate, cisplatinum and adriamycin used preoperatively

The relationship between dose-intensity and outcome was retrospectively analyzed in 125 patients with osteosarcoma of the extremities treated at our institution with neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 1986 and 1988. Before surgery, chemotherapy was performed with high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) i.v. followed by cisplatinum (CDP) i.a. and adriamycin (ADM) i.v. Postoperative chemotherapy was tailored according to the necrosis induced by preoperative treatment. Patients who were "good responders" had 31-weeks of chemotherapy with the same drugs utilized preoperatively, while "poor responder" patients received a longer treatment (40 weeks) in which ifosfamide and etoposide (VP-16) were added to HDMTX, CDP and ADM. At a median follow-up of 2 years (1-3 years) 100 patients (80%) remained continuously disease-free and 25 patients relapsed: 24 with lung metastases and 1 with local recurrence. According to the real dose-intensity received, calculated as a percentage of the dose intensity projected by the protocol, the continuously disease-free survival was 87% in the 82 patients who received 80% or more of the scheduled dose-intensity and only 65% for the 43 patients who received less than 80% of the projected dose-intensity. This difference is highly significant (P less than 0.01). These results suggest that in neoadjuvant chemotherapy of osteosarcoma the real dose-intensity delivered is a determinant of treatment outcome and therefore every effort should be made to avoid reductions of doses and delays of cycles of chemotherapy in these patients.     

Influence of Adriamycin Dose in the Outcome of Patients with Osteosarcoma Treated with Multidrug Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Results of Two Sequential Studies

Summary

The results of two sequential studies of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for osteosarcoma of the extremities performed at Rizzoli Institute between 1986 and 1991 in 228 patients are presented. In both studies preoperative chemotherapy consisted of two cycles of high dose methotrexate (HDMTX), cisplatinum (CDP) and adriamycin (ADM). Postoperatively the good responder patients were treated with the same drugs used before surgery while in the poor responder patients ifosfamide was added to these three drugs. The preoperative treatment was the same in both studies while after surgery in the second protocol either the cumulative dose of ADM (270 mg/m² instead of 360 mg/m²) or the single dose per cycle of this drug (60 mg/m² instead of 90 mg/m²) was reduced. These changes in the last protocol were done to reduce the cardiotoxicity of ADM that was high in the first study (2 deaths and 1 heart transplantation). Since in the last protocol – in comparison with the first protocol – after surgery chemotherapy was restarted earlier and ADM was administered not as a single drug but in combination with the CDP the dose intensity of ADM was unchanged while the dose intensity of MTX, CDP and ifosfamide was higher than in the first study. The preliminary results of the 84 patients treated in the second study show a 2-year disease free survival significantly lower than that achieved in the 144 patients treated in the first study (37/51 – 73% vs 123/144 – 85%: P < 0.008). In addition, even if in the last study there were no cases of clinical cardiotoxicity due to ADM, there was a significantly higher percentage of severe myelodepression that led to two deaths for infectious complications. These results suggest that in neoadjuvant treatment of osteosarcoma the total dose of ADM and/or the single dose per cycle of the same drug are an important determinant of outcome and that increasing the dose-intensity of less toxic but less active agents, MTX, CDP and ifosfamide, at the expense of the more active and more toxic agent, ADM, can lead to a poorer outcome without reducing toxicity.     

Primary chemotherapy and delayed surgery (neoadjuvant chemotherapy) for osteosarcoma of the extremities. The Istituto Rizzoli Experience in 127 patients treated preoperatively with intravenous methotrexate (high versus moderate doses) and intraarterial cisplatin

Between March 1983 and June 1986 127 patients with localized osteosarcoma of the extremity were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Preoperative chemotherapy consisted of two cycles of methotrexate (MTX) (high or moderate doses) followed by 6 days by cisplatin (CDP). Surgery was an amputation or a rotation plasty, or a limb salvage. Necrosis was good in 52% of cases, fair in 36%, and poor in 12%. Postoperative chemotherapy consisted of Adriamycin (doxorubicin [ADM]) and bleomycin (BCD) for poor responders; and ADM, MTX, and CDP for fair responders. Good responders were treated as fair responders or with only MTX and CDP. At a 47-month follow-up, 66 patients remained continuously disease free and 61 patients developed metastases. Six of these patients had also a local recurrence. According to the grade of necrosis, the cumulative disease-free probability at 5 years was 67% for good responders, 42% for fair responders, and for poor responders 10% at 45 months. According to the doses of MTX, survival at 5 years was 58% for patients who received high doses and 42% for patients treated with moderate doses. No differences in the rate of survivors were observed between amputated patients and patients treated with limb salvage. The authors conclude that (1) a limb salvage procedure is possible in about 70% of cases and as safe as demolitive surgery, if adequate surgical margins are achieved; (2) good responders have a better prognosis than fair and poor responders if postoperative chemotherapy is sufficiently prolonged and also includes ADM; (3) a different postoperative chemotherapy for poor responders did not improve their prognosis; and (4) a multidrug regimen using high doses of MTX is probably more effective than moderate doses.     

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Osseous Malignant Fibrous Histiocytoma of the Extremity: Results in 18 Cases and Comparison with 112 Contemporary Osteosarcoma Patients Treated with the Same Chemotherapy Regimen

Abstract

Eigthteen patients with high grade malignant fibrous histiocytoma (MFH) of bone and 112 patients with high grade osteosarcoma (OS) of the extremity were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy comprised of methotrexate, cisplatinum, doxorubicin and ifosfamide. For the 18 patients with MFH, surgery involved amputation in 2 cases and limb salvage in 16 (89%); the 112 osteosarcoma patients had amputation in 8 cases and limb salvage procedure in 104 cases (93%). The rate of good histologic response to preoperative chemotherapy (90% or more tumor necrosis) was significantly higher in patients with osteosarcoma than in patients with MFH (74% vs 28%; p<0.003). However, at a median follow-up of 38 months (range 25-61), the 3-year event-free survival (EFS) did not differ in the two groups (MFH 77.8%, OS 70.5%; p=ns). In patients with MFH, no local recurrences were registered, whereas in the osteosarcoma group there were 6 local relapses (5.%).

The effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of osteosarcoma has been assessed during the last 15 years. The results of the present study seem to indicate that, in spite of a usually poor histologic response to preoperative treatment, neoadjuvant chemotherapy is very effective also in MFH of bone.     

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for radioinduced osteosarcoma of the extremity: The Rizzoli experience in 20 cases

PURPOSE: Evaluate treatment and outcome of 20 patients with radioinduced osteosarcoma (RIO). Because of previous primary tumor treatment, RIO protocols were different from others we used for non-RIO. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1983 and 1998, we treated 20 RIO patients, ages 4-36 years (mean 16 years), with chemotherapy (two cycles before surgery, three postoperatively). The first preoperative cycle consisted of high-dose Methotrexate (HDMTX)/Cisplatinum (CDP)/Adriamycin (ADM) and the second of HDMTX/CDP/Ifosfamide (IFO). The three postoperative treatments were performed with cycles of MTX/CDP; IFO was used as single agent per cycle repeated three times. RESULTS: Two patients received palliative treatment because their osteosarcoma remained unresectable after preoperative chemotherapy. The remaining 18 patients had surgery (7 amputations, 11 resections); histologic response to preoperative chemotherapy was good in 8 patients, poor in 10. At a mean follow-up of 11 years (range, 7-22 years), 9 patients remained continuously disease-free, 10 died from osteosarcoma and 1 died from a third neoplasm (myeloid acute leukemia). These results are not significantly different from those achieved in 754 patients with conventional osteosarcoma treated in the same period with protocols used for conventional treatment. However, this later group had an 18% 3-year event-free survival after treatment of relapse vs. 0% in the RIO group. CONCLUSION: Treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy RIO seem to have an outcome that is not significantly different from that of comparable patients with conventional primary high grade osteosarcoma (5-year event-free survival: 40% vs. 60%, p = NS; 5-year overall survival 40% vs. 67%, p < 0.01).     

Long-term outcome for patients with nonmetastatic osteosarcoma of the extremity treated at the istituto ortopedico rizzoli according to the istituto ortopedico rizzoli/osteosarcoma-2 protocol: an updated report.

PURPOSE: To provide an estimate of long-term prognosis for patients with osteosarcoma of the extremity treated in a single institution with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and observed for at least 10 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with nonmetastatic osteosarcoma of the extremity were preoperatively treated with high-dose methotrexate, cisplatin, and doxorubicin (ADM). Postoperatively, good responders (90% or more tumor necrosis) received the same three drugs used before surgery, whereas poor responders (less than 90% tumor necrosis) received ifosfamide and etoposide in addition to those three drugs. RESULTS: For the 164 patients who entered the study between September 1986 and December 1989, surgery was a limb salvage in 136 cases (82%) and a good histologic response was observed in 117 patients (71%). At a follow-up ranging from 10 to 13 years (median, 11.5 years), 101 patients (61%) remained continuously free of disease, 61 relapsed, and two died of ADM-induced cardiotoxicity. There were no differences in prognosis between good and poor responding patients. ADM-induced cardiotoxicity (six patients), male infertility (10 of the 12 assessable patients), and second malignancies (seven patients) were the major complications of chemotherapy. Despite the large number of limb salvages performed, only four local recurrences (2.4%) were registered. CONCLUSION: With an aggressive neoadjuvant chemotherapy, it is possible to cure more than 60% of patients with nonmetastatic osteosarcoma of the extremity and amputation may be avoided in more than 80% of them. Because local or systemic relapses, myocardiopathies, and second malignancies are possible even 5 years or more after the beginning of treatment, a long-term follow-up is recommended for these patients.     

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Extremity Osteosarcoma: Preliminary Results of the Rizzoli's 4th Study

A neoadjuvant chemotherapy protocol (1/93-1/95) for extremity osteosarcoma preoperatively using high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) as single agent per cycle and three different combinations of other drugs (CDP/IFO,CDP/ADM,IFO/ADM) is reported. The four drugs were used postoperatively as single agents. Treatment was uniform, but suspended earlier if total necrosis was attained. An improvement was found in the results of the previous study using only IFO postoperatively, with 16/119 patients (97%) avoiding amputation, and 38 (32%) attaining complete necrosis. At a 3-year (2-4 years) mean follow-up, 92 patients (76%) remained continuously disease-free, 2 died of chemotherapy-related toxicity and 25 suffered relapse. Projected 3-year DFS also improved (75% vs. 60%; p=0.04). Despite limb salvage, local recurrences (6.3%) and infections were few, although postoperative chemotherapy was restarted within a week. Therefore, until new effective drugs are found, expertise in using the four known drugs may improve cure rate and help to avoid amputation in almost all patients.     

Nonmetastatic osteosarcoma of the extremity: results of a neoadjuvant chemotherapy protocol (IOR/OS-3) with high-dose methotrexate, intraarterial or intravenous cisplatin, doxorubicin, and salvage chemotherapy based on histologic tumor response

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: From 1986 to 1989, a study for the treatment of nonmetastatic osteosarcoma of the extremity (IOR/OS-2) was carried out at the Rizzoli Institute. The cumulative dose of doxorubicin delivered was 480 mg/m2, and severe heart failure developed in 5 (3%) of the 164 treated patients. The specific aim of the subsequent study was to assess the efficacy of a protocol, similar to IOR/OS-2, but with a reduced cumulative dose of doxorubicin (390 mg/m2). Additional aims were to assess the role of the route of infusion (intraarterial or intravenous) of cisplatin on histologic response of the primary tumor and the use of ifosfamide as salvage chemotherapy in poor responders. METHODS: The new chemotherapy regimen (IOR/OS-3) was comprised of a preoperative phase with methotrexate (10 g/m2), cisplatin (120 mg/m2 intraarterially or intravenously), and doxorubicin (60 mg/m2). After surgery, the same drugs were administered, with the addition of ifosfamide (10 g/m2) in patients who had a poor histologic response to primary chemotherapy. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients entered the study. The rate of good histologic response was 64% with intraarterial cisplatin and 43% with intravenous cisplatin (P = 0.05). The 8-year event-free survival and overall survival were 54% and 61%, respectively, with no significant difference according to the histologic response. No cases of clinical doxorubicin-induced cardiopathy were recorded. Event-free and overall survival did not significantly differ from those achieved with IOR/OS-2 (8-year disease-free and overall survival, respectively 63% and 72%). CONCLUSIONS: The reduction in the doxorubicin cumulative dose avoided episodes of cardiotoxicity, without consequences on the efficacy of treatment. The addition of ifosfamide was an effective "salvage" therapy for poor responders. A better histologic response with intraarterial cisplatin was observed, but owing to the availability of an effective salvage therapy for poor responders, the advantages in terms of histologic response did not compensate for the cost and discomfort for the patients of this modality of infusion of cisplatin.     

A comparison of methods of loco-regional chemotherapy combined with systemic chemotherapy as neo-adjuvant treatment of osteosarcoma of the extremity.

AIM: Our experience of pre-operative intraarterial (i.a.) vs intravenous (i.v.) infusion of cisplatinum (CDP) in a multiagent neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for osteosarcoma of the extremity is reported. METHODS: Two successive randomized studies were performed. In the first, pre-operatively, CDP i.a. vs CDP i.v. was applied in combination with high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) and adriamycin (ADM) within a three-drug regimen. In the second, a combination of HDMTX, ADM and IFO, within a four-drug regimen was tested. RESULTS: The rate of responses to chemotherapy (tumour necrosis > or = 90%) was significantly higher (P<0.04) for the 142 patients treated with the four-drug regimen than in the 79 patients treated with a three-drug regimen (76%vs 62%). According to the route of CDP infusion, in the three-drug regimen the rate of responses was significantly higher (P=0.004) in patients treated with i.a. CDP (77%) than in patients treated i.v. (46%); with the four-drug regimen the rate of response was not significantly different in patients treated i.a. (81%) and in patients treated i.v. (71%). No significant differences in the rates of limb salvages, local recurrence and event-free survival (EFS) were seen between the i.a. and the i.v. groups. CONCLUSION: In the treatment of osteosarcoma of the extremity, the i.a. infusion of CDP does not offer any significant advantage when this drug is used within an aggressive, multiagent, pre-operative four-drug regimen. Copyright Harcourt Publishers Limited.     

Dose-intense ifosfamide/doxorubicin/cisplatin based chemotherapy for osteosarcoma in adults

The efficacy of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy has been clearly established in the treatment of osteosarcoma; however, the most active regimen remains to be identified. This prospective study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of a dose-intense ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin-based neoadjuvant regimen in adults with osteosarcoma. We prospectively treated 20 patients with osteogenic sarcoma with two cycles of ifosfamide/doxorubicin followed by two cycles of doxorubicin/cisplatin every 2 weeks. Surgical specimens were analyzed for percent tumor necrosis. Patients who demonstrated a "good response" (GR) to chemotherapy received the same combination postoperatively at a lower dose rate. Patients who demonstrated a "poor response" (PR) received four cycles of high-dose methotrexate alternating with two cycles of ifosfamide/etoposide and two cycles of cisplatin/etoposide after the surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was well tolerated with moderate hematologic toxicity. Twelve of 19 evaluable patients (63%) were treated according to the GR arm and 7 according to the PR arm. At median follow-up of 5.5 years, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) are 68% and 74%, respectively. Patients treated on the GR arm had DFS and OS of 75% and 83%, respectively, whereas patients on the PR arm had DFS and OS of 57%. Intensive neoadjuvant chemotherapy is effective and moderately well tolerated in patients with de novo osteosarcoma. The outcome data suggest that lack of a near complete response to preoperative chemotherapy reflects inherent biologic resistance to chemotherapy and hence a poor prognosis.     

Relationship between dose-intensity of treatment and outcome for patients with osteosarcoma of the extremity treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

One hundred and forty-four patients with osteosarcoma of the extremity treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy at the authors' institution between 1986 and 1989 were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate the relationship between the dose-intensity of chemotherapy actually received (RDI) and the prognosis. Preoperative chemotherapy consisted of high-dose methotrexate i.v., cisplatin i.a., and doxorubicin i.v. After surgery "good responder" patients (90% or more tumor necrosis) had a 31-weeks of chemotherapy with the same drugs, while "poor responder" patients (less than 90% tumor necrosis) received a 40 weeks treatment with ifosfamide and etoposide added to the three drugs used preoperatively. Due to delays and dose-reductions, only 17 patients (12%) received the treatment exactly as scheduled by the protocol, 66 (46%) received a dose-intensity between 90 and 99%, and 61 (42%) a dose-intensity between 63 and 89%. At a follow-up ranging between 10 and 13 years, 97 patients (67%) remained continuously free of disease, 45 relapsed, and two died of doxorubicin-induced cardiopathy. The continuous disease-free survival (CDFS) was not related to patients' gender and age, tumor histology, site and size, serum value of alkaline phosphatase, type of surgery and histologic response to chemotherapy. According to the RDI, CDFS resulted significantly higher for those 81 patients who received 90% or more of the scheduled dose-intensity than for those 61 who had less than 90% of the scheduled dose-intensity (76.5% v.s. 57.3%; p<0.02). These results seem to suggest that in neoadjuvant treatment of osteosarcoma the dose-intensity of chemotherapy is crucial for outcome, therefore every effort should be made to avoid reductions of doses and/or delays in performing the cycles of chemotherapy.     

Osteosarcoma of the extremity metastatic at presentation: results achieved in 26 patients treated with combined therapy (primary chemotherapy followed by simultaneous resection of the primary and metastatic lesions).

From September 1986 to December 1989, 26 selected patients with high-grade osteosarcoma of the extremities metastatic at presentation were treated with primary chemotherapy (high doses of methotrexate, -cisplatinum and adriamycin) followed by surgery. Twenty-one cases underwent resections of the primary and metastatic tumor at the same time; owing to the disappearance of lung metastases after preoperative chemotherapy in 3 cases, only the primary tumor was operated on. Due to progression of the disease in 2 patients, no surgery was performed. Histologic examination of the resected specimen was performed to evaluate the percentage of necrosis produced by chemotherapy on the primary and metastatic tumor. After surgery, the patients received further chemotherapy with the same drugs used preoperatively plus ifosfamide and VP-16. The histologic response of the primary tumor was good (> 90% tumor necrosis) in 25% of the cases; in the resected metastatic nodules, 23% had good responses. A discrepancy between the histologic response of the primary and secondary tumor was observed in only 15% of the cases. These results seem to confirm the validity of the strategy (widely used today in the neoadjuvant treatment of non-metastatic osteosarcoma) of changing the postoperative treatment when the histologic response of the primary tumor is poor. At an average follow-up of 3.5 years, only 6 patients remained disease-free; 19 patients relapsed and 1 patient died for adriamycin cardiotoxicity. Of the 19 relapsed patients, 16 died and 3 are still alive but with uncontrolled disease. These results are much worse than those obtained in 144 cases of non-metastatic osteosarcoma of the extremities treated in the same period with the same preoperative chemotherapy (77% with good response in the primary tumor and 78% with continuous disease-free survival). The data suggest that a very effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy for nonmetastatic osteosarcoma of the extremities gives disappointing results in osteosarcoma of the extremities which is metastatic at presentation.     

肢体骨肉瘤的新辅助化疗：异环磷酰胺、甲氨蝶呤、表柔吡星化疗的初步结果

目的评价新辅助化疗的疗效和在骨肉瘤保肢手术方面的作用。方法2001年9月～2005年4月治疗53例肢体骨肉瘤患者。化疗方案：异环磷酰胺2．0g／m^2，第1～5天；甲氨蝶呤8g／m^2，第3天；表柔吡星60mg／m^2，第5天。每3～4周重复1次。评价化疗反应和化疗毒性。术前化疗3次，术后化疗6次。结果2例患者死于化疗毒性反应。完全缓解（CR）23例，部分缓解（PR）15例、稳定（SD）9例、进展（PD）5例。44例患者进行保肢手术，8例进行截肢。3年生存率为77．36％。结论异环磷酰胺、甲氨蝶呤、表柔吡星联合化疗方案有利于保肢手术，改善患者的预后，可以作为一种较理想的化疗方案。     

Primary Chemotherapy and Delayed Surgery (Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy) for Telangiectatic Osteogenic Sarcoma of the Extremities

Summary

Twelve patients with telangiectatic osteogenic sarcoma (TOS) of the extremities were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, according to two different protocols.

Preoperatively the patients received high-dose methotrexate(HD-MTX)/cisplatinum(CPD) or HD-MTX/CPD/adriamycin(ADM). CPD was delivered intra-arteriously, the other drugs intravenously. Limb salvage surgery was performed in eight instances and four patients underwent amputation. Post operative chemotherapy was tailored according to the grade of necrosis determined by preoperative treatment on the primary tumor. In ten cases (83%) the grade of necrosis resulted higher than 95%.

The mean length of follow-up was 3.5 years with a range of 18 to 72 months. Ten patients (83%) reimained continuously disease-free, while two patients developed lung metastases and died of uncontrolled disease. No local recurrences were observed.

These results are better than those observed in 167 contemporary cases of conventional osteosarcoma treated with the same protocols. This study confirms that TOS is not always a lethal tumor as suggested by prior reports. Employing neoadjuvant chemotherapy a high percentage of patients with TOS can be cured and in most of them, limb sparing surgery is possible and safe.     

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for osteosarcoma of the extremities with synchronous lung metastases: treatment with cisplatin, adriamycin and high dose of methotrexate and ifosfamide

We report on the clinical course and outcome of 28 patients, treated at The Istituti Ortopedici Rizzoli between 1995 and 1997 for osteosarcoma of the extremities metastatic to the lung at presentation. The treatment for these patients was the following: primary chemotherapy with cisplatin, adriamycin and high dose of methotrexate and ifosfamide followed by simultaneous resection of primary and metastatic lesions (when feasible), and further chemotherapy. After primary chemotherapy, lung metastases disappeared in 6 patients, whereas metastases in 3 remained surgically unresectable. These 9 patients received surgical treatment of the primary tumor only. In the remaining 19 patients, after chemotherapy, a simultaneous resection of the primary and metastatic tumor was performed. The resection of metastatic lesions was complete in 18 cases and incomplete in one. Three of the 4 patients who did not achieve a tumor-free status died in a few months and one is still alive with uncontrolled disease. With a median follow-up of 32 months (19-43) of the 24 patients who achieved remission, 12 (55%) remained continuously free of disease, 11 relapsed with new metastases and 1 died of chemotherapy-related toxicity. The 2-year DFS and OS were 36% and 53% respectively. These results are much worse than those achieved in 114 contemporary patients with localised disease (2-year DFS: 81%) treated in the same period and they are superimposible to the results achieved in 23 patients previously treated with the same protocol, but with standard dose of ifosfamide (2-year DFS: 32%). However, it must be underlined that, as regards prognosis, patients with metastatic disease at presentation are a hetero-geneous group. The DFS was significantly higher for patients with only one or two metastatic lesions than for patients with 3 or more lesions (2 year DFS: 78% vs. 28%). In 12 of the 19 patients who had a complete simultaneous resection of the primary and metastatic tumor, a strong correlation between the degree of necrosis of the primary and metastatic lesions was found. We conclude that in patients with osteosarcoma of the extremity with lung metastases at presentation: a) the combination of aggressive chemotherapy with simultaneous resection of primary and metastatic tumors works very well only for those patients who present with one or two metastatic nodules whereas for patients with 3 or more pulmonary metastases the prognosis is very poor; b) within the 4-drug regimen used in this study, the increment of ifosfamide dose from 10 g/m2 to 15 g/m2 for cycle does not improve prognosis; c) the strong correlation found between the histologic response of the primary tumor and metastases supports the strategy, largely used nowadays in the neoadjuvant treatment of osteosarcoma, of tailoring postoperative chemo-therapy on the basis of the primary tumor histologic response to preoperative chemotherapy.     

Metastatic osteosarcoma

BACKGROUND: The outcome of patients with metastatic osteosarcoma treated in two consecutive trials from 1986 to 1997 was analyzed to evaluate the efficacy of carboplatin-based multiagent chemotherapy and to identify prognostic factors. The initial study (OS-86) used ifosfamide, cisplatin, doxorubicin, and high-dose methotrexate, and the subsequent study (OS-91) used the same agents at similar doses, but carboplatin was substituted for cisplatin. METHODS: Twelve patients (median age, 15.1 yrs) were treated in OS-86 for osteosarcoma metastatic to the lung only (11 patients) or bone only (1 patient), and 17 patients (median age, 15.1 yrs) were treated in OS-91 for osteosarcoma metastatic to the lung only (12 patients), bone only (2 patients), lung and bone (2 patients), or other site (1 patient). RESULTS: Patients with metastatic disease enrolled in OS-86 and those with metastatic disease enrolled in OS-91 did not differ in terms of demographic features, histologic subtype, site of primary tumor, or site of metastases. There was a difference in survival according to treatment protocol (P = 0.054). All survivors (four of whom were enrolled in OS-86 and one of whom was enrolled in OS-91) had lung metastases only. Five-year survival estimates for patients with lung metastases only were 45.5 +/- 13.7% (OS-86) and 8.3 +/- 5.6% (OS-91) (P = 0.084). Unilateral lung metastases (P = 0.006), no more than three lung nodules (P = 0.014), and surgical remission (P = 0.001) were associated with improved survival probability. CONCLUSIONS: The poor outcome of patients with metastatic osteosarcoma treated in OS-91 justifies the use of cisplatin with its associated toxicity in patients with high-risk disease.