Background: Two national clinical trial groups, United Kingdom Children’s Cancer and Leukaemia Group (CCLG) and the German Paediatric Oncology and Haematology Group (GPOH) together undertook a randomised trial, EICESS-92, which addressed chemotherapy options for Ewing’s sarcoma. We sought the causes of unexpected survival differences between the study groups. Methods: 647 patients were randomised. Cox regression analyses were used to compare event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) between the two study groups. Results: 5-year EFS rates were 43% (95% CI 36–50%) and 57% (95% CI 52–62) in the CCLG and GPOH patients, respectively; corresponding 5-year OS rates were 52% (95% CI 45–59%) and 66% (95% CI 61–71). CCLG patients were less likely to have both surgery and radiotherapy (18 vs. 59%), and more likely to have a single local therapy modality compared to the GPOH patients (72 vs. 35%). Forty-five percent of GPOH patients had pre-operative radiotherapy compared to 3% of CCLG patients. In the CCLG group local recurrence (either with or without metastases) was the first event in 22% of patients compared with 7% in the GPOH group. After allowing for the effects of age, metastases, primary site, histology and local treatment modality, the risk of an EFS event was 44% greater in the CCLG cohort (95% CI 10–89%, p = 0.009), and the risk of dying was 30% greater, but not statistically significant (95% CI 3–74%, p = 0.08). Conclusions: Unexpected differences in EFS and OS occurred between two patient cohorts recruited within an international randomised trial. Failure to select or deliver appropriate local treatment modalities for Ewing’s sarcoma may compromise chances of cure. Trial registration Supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe (Grants No. DKH M43/92/Jü2 and DKH 70-2551 Jü3), and European Union Biomedicine and Health Programme (Grants No. BMH1-CT92-1341 and BMH4-983956), and Cancer Research United Kingdom. Clinical trial information can be found for the following: NCT0000251
Intracranial Ewing sarcoma (EwS) is rare and publications on primary or metastatic intracranial EwS are minimal. The aim of this study was to describe incidence, clinical behavior, treatment, and factors associated with outcome in patients with primary intracranial EwS or patients with a primary extracranial EwS and cerebral metastases at diagnosis. We reviewed all patients with primary or with metastatic intracranial EwS at diagnosis registered in the International Clinical Trial Euro-E.W.I.N.G.99 (EE99). In total, 17 of 1435 patients (1.2%) presented with primary intracranial EwS; 3 of them had metastatic disease. Four patients (0.3%) with primary extracranial EwS presented with intracranial metastatic lesions. The 3-year event-free survival (EFS) was 64% and overall survival (OS) was 70% in patients with a primary intracranial EwS. Local control in patients with primary intracranial EwS consisted of surgery (6%), radiotherapy (RT) (18%), or both modalities (76%). Univariate analysis showed that patients < 15 years of age had significantly better outcome (EFS: 72%; OS: 76%) compared to those aged above 15 years (EFS: 13%; OS: 25%). In conclusion, primary intracranial EwS and extracranial EwS with cerebral metastases at diagnosis is rare, yet survival is comparable with local and metastatic EwS elsewhere in the body. Age and stage of disease are important prognostic factors. Besides chemotherapeutic treatment, local control with surgical resection combined with RT is recommended whenever feasible.
Ewing sarcoma (EwS) is the second most common bone and soft tissue tumor, affecting primarily adolescents and young adults. Patients with secondary EwS are excluded from risk stratification in several studies and therefore do not benefit from new therapies. More knowledge about patients with EwS as secondary malignant neoplasms (SMN) is needed to identify at-risk patients and adapt follow-up strategies. Epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and survival analyses of EwS as SMN were analyzed in 3844 patients treated in the last three consecutive international EwS trials, EICESS 92, Euro-E.W.I.N.G. 99, and EWING 2008. Forty-two cases of EwS as SMN (approximately 1.1% of all patients) were reported, preceded by a heterogeneous group of malignancies, mainly acute lymphoblastic leukemias (n = 7) and lymphomas (n = 7). Three cases of EwS as SMN occurred in the presumed radiation field of the primary tumor. The median age at diagnosis of EwS as SMN was 19.4 years (range, 5.9–72) compared with 10.8 years (range, 0.9–51.2) for primary EwS. The median interval between first malignancy and EwS diagnosis was 7.4 years. The 3-year overall survival (OS)/event-free survival (EFS) was 0.69 (SE = 0.09)/0.53 (SE = 0.10) for localized patients and 0.36 (SE = 0.13)/0.29 (SE = 0.12) for metastatic patients (OS: p = 0.02; EFS: p = 0.03). Survival in patients with EwS as SMN did not differ between hematologic or solid primary malignancies. EwS as SMN is rare; however, survival is similar to that of primary EwS, and its risk-adjusted treatment should be curative, especially in localized patients.
Healthcare workers (HCWs) are playing a vital role in the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This study investigated how infection spreads within three local hospitals and an associated fire brigade in Germany by testing employees for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies over one year. The three observational periods corresponded to the initial three pandemic waves: first wave: June–September 2020, second wave: October 2020–January 2021, and third wave: February–June 2021. We analysed 3285 serum samples of 1842 employees, which represents 65.7% of all employees. Altogether, 13.2% employees were seropositive: 194/1411 HCWs (13.7%) and 49/431 non-HCWs (11.4%) with a clear increase of seroprevalence from the first (1.1%) to the second (13.2%) and third (29.3%) pandemic wave. HCWs presumably had an additional occupational risk for infection in the second and third wave due to an increase of infection pressure with more COVID-19 patients treated, showing possible weak points in the recommended infection prevention strategy.