Prognostic Factors Influencing Progression-Free Survival Determined From a Series of Sporadic Desmoid Tumors: A Wait-and-See Policy According to Tumor Presentation.

PURPOSE Desmoid tumors are mesenchymal fibroblastic/myofibroblastic proliferations with locoregional aggressiveness and high ability to recur after initial treatment. We present the results of the largest series of sporadic desmoid tumors ever published to determine the prognostic factors of these rare tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS Four hundred twenty-six patients with a desmoid tumor at diagnosis were included, and the following parameters were studied: age, sex, delay between first symptoms and diagnosis, tumor size, tumor site, previous history of surgery or trauma in the area of the primary tumor, surgical margins, and context of abdominal wall desmoids in women of child-bearing age during or shortly after pregnancy. We performed univariate and multivariate analysis for progression-free survival (PFS). Results In univariate analysis, age, tumor size, tumor site, and surgical margins (R2 v R0/R1) had a significant impact on PFS. PFS curves were not significantly different for microscopic assessment of surgical resection quality (R0 v R1). In multivariate analysis, age, tumor size, and tumor site had independent values. Three prognostic groups for PFS were defined on the basis of the number of independent unfavorable prognostic factors (0 or 1, 2, and 3). CONCLUSION This study clearly demonstrates that there are different prognostic subgroups of desmoid tumors that could benefit from different therapeutic strategies, including a wait-and-see policy.

PAX3/FOXO1 fusion gene status is the key prognostic molecular marker in rhabdomyosarcoma and significantly improves current risk stratification.

PURPOSE: To improve the risk stratification of patients with rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) through the use of clinical and molecular biologic data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two independent data sets of gene-expression profiling for 124 and 101 patients with RMS were used to derive prognostic gene signatures by using a meta-analysis. These and a previously published metagene signature were evaluated by using cross validation analyses. A combined clinical and molecular risk-stratification scheme that incorporated the PAX3/FOXO1 fusion gene status was derived from 287 patients with RMS and evaluated. RESULTS: We showed that our prognostic gene-expression signature and the one previously published performed well with reproducible and significant effects. However, their effect was reduced when cross validated or tested in independent data and did not add new prognostic information over the fusion gene status, which is simpler to assay. Among nonmetastatic patients, patients who were PAX3/FOXO1 positive had a significantly poorer outcome compared with both alveolar-negative and PAX7/FOXO1-positive patients. Furthermore, a new clinicomolecular risk score that incorporated fusion gene status (negative and PAX3/FOXO1 and PAX7/FOXO1 positive), Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study TNM stage, and age showed a significant increase in performance over the current risk-stratification scheme. CONCLUSION: Gene signatures can improve current stratification of patients with RMS but will require complex assays to be developed and extensive validation before clinical application. A significant majority of their prognostic value was encapsulated by the fusion gene status. A continuous risk score derived from the combination of clinical parameters with the presence or absence of PAX3/FOXO1 represents a robust approach to improving current risk-adapted therapy for RMS.