Systematic Review

Systematic literature review of clinical outcomes in adults with metastatic or advanced synovial sarcoma

Kentaro Kogushi

Michael LoPresti

Shunya Ikeda

Graduate School of Medicine, International University of Health and Welfare, Tokyo Perfecture, 4-1-26 Akasaka, Minato City, Tokyo, 107-8402, Japan

Medical Affairs, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Shinagawa Grand Central Tower, 2-16-4 Konan, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108-8242, Japan

Search for more papers by this author

Michael LoPresti

INTAGE Healthcare Inc., 13F Ochanomizu SolaCity 4-6, Kanda-Surugadai, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 101-0062, Japan

Search for more papers by this author

Shunya Ikeda

*Author for correspondence: Tel.: +813 557 43900;

E-mail Address: ikeda@shunya.jp

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1866-2155

Graduate School of Medicine, International University of Health and Welfare, Tokyo Perfecture, 4-1-26 Akasaka, Minato City, Tokyo, 107-8402, Japan

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:27 Aug 2020https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2020-0575

View article

Abstract

Background: Synovial sarcoma (SS) is a rare, aggressive soft tissue sarcoma with a poor prognosis after metastasis. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the clinical evidence for therapeutic options for adults with metastatic or advanced SS. Materials & methods: Relevant databases were searched with predefined keywords. Results: Thirty-nine publications reported clinical data for systemic treatment and other interventions. Data on survival outcomes varied but were generally poor (progression-free survival: 1.0–7.7 months; overall survival: 6.7–29.2 months) for adults with metastatic and advanced SS. A high frequency of neutropenia with systemic treatment and low quality of life post-progression were reported. Conclusion: Reported evidence suggests poor outcomes in adults with metastatic and advanced SS and the need for the development of new treatment modalities.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

References

1. Sultan I, Rodriguez-Galindo C, Saab R et al. Comparing children and adults with synovial sarcoma in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, 1983 to 2005: an analysis of 1268 patients. Cancer 115(15), 3537–3547 (2009).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
2. Corey RM, Swett K, Ward WG. Epidemiology and survivorship of soft tissue sarcomas in adults: a national cancer database report. Cancer Med. 3(5), 1404–1415 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
3. Vlenterie M, Ho VK, Kaal SE et al. Age as an independent prognostic factor for survival of localized synovial sarcoma patients. Br. J. Cancer 113(11), 1602–1606 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
4. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, Genetic and Rare Diseases Information Center. Synovial sarcoma (2019) https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/7721/synovial-sarcoma
Google Scholar
5. Fraid M, Ngeow J. Sarcomas associated with genetic cancer predisposition syndromes: a review. Oncologist 21(8), 1002–1013 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
6. Fletcher CDM, Bridge JA, Hogendoorn P et al. WHO classification of tumours of soft tissue and bone (4th Edition). In: World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer Classification of Tumours (Volume 5). WHO, Geneva, Switzerland (2013).
Google Scholar
7. Brennan B, Stiller C, Grimer R et al. Outcome and the effect of age and socioeconomic status in 1318 patients with synovial sarcoma in the English National Cancer Registry: 1985–2009. Clin. Sarcoma Res. 6, 18 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
8. Wang S, Song R, Sun T et al. Survival changes in patients with synovial sarcoma, 1983–2012. J. Cancer 8(10), 1759–1768 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
9. Nielsen TO, Poulin NM, Ladanyi M. Synovial sarcoma: recent discoveries as a roadmap to new avenues for therapy. Cancer Discov. 5(2), 124–134 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
10. Kawai A, Woodruff J, Healey JH et al. SYT-SSX gene fusion as a determinant of morphology and prognosis in synovial sarcoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 338(3), 153–60 (1998).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
11. He M, Abro B, Kaushal M et al. Tumor mutation burden and checkpoint immunotherapy markers in primary and metastatic synovial sarcoma. Hum. Pathol. 100, 15–23 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
12. Lai JP, Rosenberg AZ, Miettinen MM et al. NY-ESO-1 expression in sarcomas a diagnostic marker and immunotherapy target. Oncoimmunology 1(8), 1409–1410 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
13. Pisters PW, O'Sullivan B, Maki RG. Evidence-based recommendations for local therapy for soft tissue sarcomas. J. Clin. Oncol. 25(8), 1003–1008 (2007).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
14. Pasquali S, Gronchi A. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in soft tissue sarcomas: latest evidence and clinical implications. Ther. Adv. Med. Oncol. 9(6), 415–429 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
15. Ferrari A, Gronchi A, Casanova M et al. Synovial sarcoma: a retrospective analysis of 271 patients of all ages treated at a single institution. Cancer 101(3), 627–634 (2004).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
16. Eilber FC, Brennan MF, Eilber FR et al. Chemotherapy is associated with improved survival in adult patients with primary extremity synovial sarcoma. Ann. Surg. 246(1), 105–113 (2007).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
17. Lewis JJ, Antonescu CR, Leung DH et al. Synovial sarcoma: a multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in 112 patients with primary localized tumors of the extremity. J. Clin. Oncol. 18(10), 2087–2094 (2000).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
18. Trassard M, Le Doussal V, Hacène K et al. Prognostic factors in localized primary synovial sarcoma: a multicenter study of 128 adult patients. J. Clin. Oncol. 19(2), 525–534 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
19. Krieg AH, Hefti F, Speth BM et al. Synovial sarcomas usually metastasize after >5 years: a multicenter retrospective analysis with minimum follow-up of 10 years for survivors. Ann. Oncol. 22(2), 458–67 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
20. Beaino ME, Araujo DM, Gopalakrishnan V et al. Prognosis of T1 synovial sarcoma depends upon surgery by oncologic surgeons. J. Surg. Oncol. 114, 490–494 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
21. Palmerini E, Staals EL, Alberghini M et al. Synovial sarcoma: retrospective analysis of 250 patients treated at a single institution. Cancer 115, 2988–2998 (2009).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
22. Vlenterie M, Litiere S, Rizzo E et al. Outcome of chemotherapy in advanced synovial sarcoma patients: review of 15 clinical trials from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group; setting a new landmark for studies in this entity. Eur. J. Cancer 58, 62–72 (2016). • One of the largest analyses of 15 clinical trials, reporting outcomes for advanced synovial sarcoma (SS).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
23. Billingsley KG, Burt ME, Jera E et al. Pulmonary metastases from soft tissue sarcoma: analysis of patterns of diseases and postmetastasis survival. Ann. Surg. 229(5), 602–610 (1999).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
24. Sheer M, Dantonello T, Hallmen E et al. Primary metastatic synovial sarcoma: experience of the CWS Study Group. Pediatr. Blood Cancer 63, 1198–1206 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
25. Blay J-Y, van Glabbeke M, Verweij J et al. Advanced soft-tissue sarcoma: a disease that is potentially curable for a subset of patients treated with chemotherapy. Eur. J. Cancer 39(1), 64–69 (2003).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
26. van Glabbeke M, van Oosterom AT, Oosterhuis JW et al. Prognostic factors for the outcome of chemotherapy in advanced soft tissue sarcoma: an analysis of 2185 patients treated with anthracyclines containing first-line regimens – a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group study. J. Clin. Oncol. 17(1), 150–157 (1999).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
27. Judson I, Verweij J, Gelderblom H et al. Doxorubicin alone versus intensified doxorubicin plus ifosfamide for first-line treatment of advanced metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma: a randomised controlled Phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 5(4), 415–423 (2014).
Google Scholar
28. Riedel RF, Jones RL, Italiano A et al. Systemic anti-cancer therapy in synovial sarcoma: a systematic review. Cancers (Basel) 10(11), 417 (2018). • Systematic literature review on outcomes of systemic therapy in patients with SS.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
29. Tacconelli E. Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. Lancet Infect. Dis. 10(4), 226 (2010).
Google Scholar
30. Higgins JPT, Green S. The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK (2019) https://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/
Google Scholar
31. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al. PRISMA group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 6(7), e1000097 (2009).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
32. Chi Y, Fang Z, Hong X et al. Safety and efficacy of anlotinib, a multikinase angiogenesis inhibitor, in patients with refractory metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 24(21), 5233–5288 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
33. Chi Y, Yao Y, Wang S et al. Anlotinib for metastatic soft tissue sarcoma: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled and multi-centered clinical trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 36(Suppl. 15), 11503 (2018).
Google Scholar
34. Martin Broto J, Lopez-Pousa A, Hindi N et al. Multi-institutional European Phase I/II trial of trabectedin plus radiotherapy in metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients. a collaborative Spanish (GEIS), Italian (ISG) and French (FSG) sarcoma groups study. J. Clin. Oncol. 36(Suppl. 15), 11544 (2018).
Google Scholar
35. Savina M, Le Cesne A, Blay JY et al. Patterns of care and outcomes of patients with METAstatic soft tissue SARComa in a real-life setting: the METASARC observational study. BMC Med. 15(1), 78 (2017). • One of the largest observational studies reporting patterns of care, outcomes and prognostic factors for metastatic soft tissue sarcoma, including SS.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
36. Schoffski P, Agulnik M, Stacchiotti S et al. Phase 2 multicenter study of the EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat in adults with synovial sarcoma (NCT02601950). J. Clin. Oncol. 35(Suppl. 15), 11057 (2017).
Google Scholar
37. Robbins PF, Kassim SH, Tran TL et al. A pilot trial using lymphocytes genetically engineered with an NY-ESO-1-reactive T-cell receptor: long-term follow-up and correlates with response. Clin. Cancer Res. 21(5), 1019–1027 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
38. Sanfilippo R, Dileo P, Blay JY et al. Trabectedin in advanced synovial sarcomas: a multicenter retrospective study from four European institutions and the Italian Rare Cancer Network. Anticancer Drugs 26(6), 678–681 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
39. Robbins PF, Morgan RA, Feldman SA et al. Tumor regression in patients with metastatic synovial cell sarcoma and melanoma using genetically engineered lymphocytes reactive with NY-ESO-1. J. Clin. Oncol. 29(7), 917–924 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
40. Salah S, Yaser S, Salem A et al. Factors influencing survival in metastatic synovial sarcoma: importance of patterns of metastases and the first-line chemotherapy regimen. Med. Oncol. 30(3), 639 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
41. Araujo D, D'Angelo S, Demetri G et al. Autologous T cells transduced with the affinity enhanced NY-ESO-1 c259TCR in patients with synovial sarcoma expressing low levels of the NY-ESO antigen. Cancer Immunol. Res. 7(Suppl. 2), Abstract nr A002 (2019).
Google Scholar
42. Chawla SP, Pollack S, Block M et al. Immune response, safety, and overall survival of NY-ESO-1+ soft tissue sarcoma patients treated with CMB305 therapy. Ann. Oncol. 29(Suppl. 8), viii576–viii595 (2018).
Google Scholar
43. Brodowicz T, Mir O, Wallet J et al. Efficacy and safety of regorafenib compared to placebo and to post-cross-over regorafenib in advanced non-adipocytic soft tissue sarcoma. Eur. J. Cancer 99, 28–36 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
44. Giraudet AL, Cassier PA, Iwao-Fukukawa C et al. A first-in-human study investigating biodistribution, safety and recommended dose of a new radiolabeled MAb targeting FZD10 in metastatic synovial sarcoma patients. BMC Cancer 18(1), 646 (2018). •• Important trial on the efficacy and safety of OTSA-101 for the treatment of patients with progressive advanced SS.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
45. Somaiah N, Block MS, Kim JW et al. Anti-NY-ESO-1 immune response and survival benefit after LV305 therapy in patients with advanced sarcoma and other solid tumors. J. Immunother. Cancer 5(Suppl. 2), 86 (2017).
Google Scholar
46. Somaiah N, Chawla SP, Block MS et al. Immune response, safety, and survival impact from CMB305 in NY-ESO-1+ recurrent soft tissue sarcomas (STS). J. Clin. Oncol. 35(15), 11006 (2017).
Google Scholar
47. Cassier PA, Giraudet AL, Iwao-Fukukawa C et al. SYNFRIZZ: a first-in-human (FIH) study of a radiolabeled monoclonal antibody (Mab) targeting frizzled homolog 10 (FZD10) in patients (pts) with advanced synovial sarcomas (SyS). J. Clin. Oncol. 35(15), 11054 (2017).
Google Scholar
48. Tawbi HA, Burgess M, Bolejack V et al. Pembrolizumab in advanced soft-tissue sarcoma and bone sarcoma (SARC028): a multicentre, two-cohort, single-arm, open-label, Phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 18(11), 1493–1501 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
49. Attia S, Sankhala KK, Riedel RF et al. A Phase 1B/Phase 2A study of TRC105 (endoglin antibody) in combination with pazopanib (P) in patients (pts) with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS). J. Clin. Oncol. 34(15), 11016 (2016).
Google Scholar
50. Mir O, Brodowicz T, Italiano A et al. Safety and efficacy of regorafenib in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (REGOSARC): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 17(12), 1732–1742 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
51. Penel N, Mir O, Italiano A et al. Regorafenib (RE) in liposarcomas (LIPO), leiomyosarcomas (LMS), synovial sarcomas (SYN), and other types of soft-tissue sarcomas (OTS): results of an international, double-blind, randomized, placebo (PL) controlled Phase II trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 34(15), 11003 (2016).
Google Scholar
52. Syed I, Sudan M, Tseng W et al. Trabectedin for advanced soft-tissue sarcoma: a single-center experience of over 10 years. J. Clin. Oncol. 34(Suppl. 15), 11052 (2016).
Google Scholar
53. Ueda T, Kakunaga S, Ando M et al. Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of trabectedin, a DNA minor groove binder, administered as a 24-h continuous infusion in Japanese patients with soft tissue sarcoma. Invest. New Drugs. 32(4), 691–699 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
54. Maki RG, Jungbluth AA, Gnjatic S et al. A pilot study of anti-CTLA4 antibody ipilimumab in patients with synovial sarcoma. Sarcoma 2013, 168145 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
55. Schoffski P, Adkins D, Blay JY et al. An open-label, Phase 2 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of the anti-IGF-1R antibody cixutumumab in patients with previously treated advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma or Ewing family of tumours. Eur. J. Cancer 49(15), 3219–3228 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
56. Yetisyigit T, Arpaci E, Seber ES et al. Salvage treatment experience in advanced synovial sarcoma: a multicenter retrospective analysis of the Anatolian Society of Medical Oncology. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 14(9), 5185–5188 (2013). •• Important retrospective study on the efficacy of salvage treatment for the treatment of patients with advanced SS.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
57. Cesne AL, Cresta S, Maki RG et al. A retrospective analysis of antitumour activity with trabectedin in translocation-related sarcomas. Eur. J. Cancer 48(16), 3036–3044 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
58. Rahal AS, Cioffi A, Rahal C et al. High-dose ifosfamide (HDI) in metastatic synovial sarcoma: the Institute Gustave Roussy experience. J. Clin. Oncol. 30(15), 10044 (2012).
Google Scholar
59. Schoffski P, Ray-Coquard IL, Cioffi A et al. Activity of eribulin mesylate in patients with soft-tissue sarcoma: a Phase 2 study in four independent histological subtypes. Lancet Oncol. 12(11), 1045–1052 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
60. Schoffski P, Adkins D, Blay J-Y. Phase II trial of anti-IGF-IR antibody cixutumumab in patients with advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma and Ewing family of tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. 29(Suppl. 15), 10004 (2011).
Google Scholar
61. Olmos D, Postel-Vinay S, Molife LR et al. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary activity of the anti-IGF-1R antibody figitumumab (CP-751,871) in patients with sarcoma and Ewing's sarcoma: a Phase 1 expansion cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 11(2), 129–135 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
62. Sleijfer S, Ouali M, van Glabbeke M et al. Prognostic and predictive factors for outcome to first-line ifosfamide-containing chemotherapy for adult patients with advanced soft tissue sarcomas: an exploratory, retrospective analysis on large series from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (EORTC-STBSG). Eur. J. Cancer. 46(1), 72–83 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
63. Maki RG, D'Adamo DR, Keohan ML et al. Phase II study of sorafenib in patients with metastatic or recurrent sarcomas. J. Clin. Oncol. 27(19), 3133–3140 (2009). •• Important trial on the efficacy of sorafenib for the treatment of patients with metastatic or recurrent SS.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
64. Sleijfer S, Ray-Coquard I, Papai Z et al. Pazopanib, a multikinase angiogenesis inhibitor, in patients with relapsed or refractory advanced soft tissue sarcoma: efficacy and safety of regorafenib study from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (EORTC study 62043). J. Clin. Oncol. 27(19), 3126–3132 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
65. Ray-Coquard I, Le Cesne A, Whelan JS et al. A Phase II study of gefitinib for patients with advanced HER-1 expressing synovial sarcoma refractory to doxorubicin-containing regimens. Oncologist 13(4), 467–473 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
66. Reichardt P, Nielsen OS, Bauer S et al. Exatecan in pretreated adult patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma: results of a Phase II-study of the EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group. Eur. J. Cancer 43(6), 1017–1022 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
67. Edmonson JH, Ryan LM, Falkson CI et al. Phase II study of ifosfamide+doxorubicin in patients with advanced synovial sarcomas (E1793): a trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Sarcoma 7(1), 9–11 (2003).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
68. Nielsen OS, Judson I, van Hoesel Q et al. Effect of high-dose ifosfamide in advanced soft tissue sarcomas. A multicentre Phase II study of the EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group. Eur. J. Cancer 36(1), 61–67 (2000).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
69. Amdahl J, Manson SC, Isbell R et al. Cost–effectiveness of pazopanib in advanced soft tissue sarcoma in the United Kingdom. Sarcoma 2014, 481071 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
70. Delea TE, Amdahl J, Nakhaipour HR et al. Cost-effectiveness of pazopanib in advanced soft-tissue sarcoma in Canada. Curr. Oncol. 21(6), e748–e759 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
71. Verboom MC, Gelderblom H, Kerst JM et al. Survival and cost–effectiveness of trabectedin compared to ifosfamide monotherapy in advanced soft tissue sarcoma patients. Sarcoma 2019, 3234205 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
72. Reichardt P, Leahy M, Garcia del Muro X et al. Quality of life and utility in patients with metastatic soft tissue and bone sarcoma: the Sarcoma Treatment and Burden of Illness in North America and Europe (SABINE) study. Sarcoma 2012, 740279 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
73. Gotzl R, Sterzinger S, Semrau S et al. Patients' quality of life after surgery and radiotherapy for extremity soft tissue sarcoma – a retrospective single-center study over ten years. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 17(1), 170 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
74. van der Graaf WTA, Blay JY, Chawla SP et al. Pazopanib for metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (PALETTE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3 trial. Lancet 379(9829), 1879–1886 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
75. Iura K, Maekawa A, Kohashi K et al. Cancer-testis antigen expression in synovial sarcoma: NY-ESO-1, PRAME, MAGEA4, and MAGEA1. Hum. Pathol. 61, 130–139 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
76. Krischer J, Cronholm PF, Burroughs C et al. Experience with direct-to-patient recruitment for enrollment into a clinical trial in a rare disease: a web-based study. J. Med. Internet Res. 19(2), e50 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar

Vol. 16, No. 35

Metrics

Downloaded 155 times

History

Received 3 June 2020

Accepted 5 August 2020

Published online 27 August 2020

Published in print December 2020

Information

Keywords

Author contributions

K Kogushi developed the concept, contributed to the review of literature and wrote the manuscript. M LoPresti contributed to the literature review and reviewed and edited the manuscript. S Ikeda contributed to data interpretation and critically reviewed the manuscript.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

K Kogushi is an employee of Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. M LoPresti is an employee of INTAGE Healthcare Inc. This review was sponsored by Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

Editorial and formatting assistance was provided by Cactus Life Sciences (part of Cactus Communications) and funded by Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

PDF download