Uterine sarcomas are very infrequent and heterogeneous entities. Due to its rarity, pathological diagnosis, surgical management, and systemic treatment are challenging. Treatment decision process in these tumors should be taken in a multidisciplinary tumor board. Available evidence is low and, in many cases, based on case series or clinical trials in which these tumors have been included with other soft tissue sarcoma. In these guidelines, we have tried to summarize the most relevant evidence in the diagnosis, staging, pathological disparities, surgical management, systemic treatment, and follow-up of uterine sarcomas.

Background: The clinical outcome of inoperable sarcoma patients treated with LATTICE (LRT) is limited and therefore the objective of our study was to report treatment response, overall survival (OS), local-recurrence free survival (LRFS) and toxicity. Methods: This retrospective observational study includes 15 histologically proven inoperable non-extremity sarcoma patients with no treatment options or no response to systemic therapy, treated at our institution between 2020 and 2024. The patients were treated with a combination of LRT and normo- or hypo-fractionated external beam radiotherapy. Treatment response was evaluated by RECIST1.1 criteria, toxicity by CTCAE 5.0 and OS and LRFS by Kaplan–Meier curves. Results: The median follow-up (F-UP) since the beginning of the treatment was 10 months (range 4–32). Nine patients were male and six female. Their mean age was 60 years. The median gross tumor volume (GTV) was 1058 cm³ (range 142–6103 cm³). The median number of spheres was 9 (4–30). All patients with symptoms reported symptoms’ relief. Based on RECIST1.1 criteria, 10 patients (67%) had stable local disease at 1–2 months F-UP on computed tomography (CT). Surgical resection was feasible in five patients. Three of them are alive without disease and two died due to metastatic progression. From 10 (67%) non operated patients, 5 patients died (50%) due to disease. The remaining five patients (50%) are alive, three with stable disease at 21, 22, and 32 months of F-UP and two with disease progression who are currently receiving palliative chemotherapy treatment. Reported G2 toxicity was as follows: gastrointestinal (2), asthenia (1). Two patients had G3 toxicity: esophagitis (1) and inguinal dermatitis (1). No acute or chronic G4–G5 toxicity was observed. Conclusions: LRT is a feasible and well-tolerated radiation technique for inoperable bulky soft-tissue sarcomas. Further studies are needed to establish protocols to determine which patients could benefit from palliative or preoperative treatment.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected cancer care worldwide, including radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer (BC), because of risk-based resource allocation. We report the evolution of international breast RT practices during the beginning of the pandemic, focusing on differences in treatment recommendations between countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between July and November 2020, a 58-question survey was distributed to radiation oncologists (ROs) through international professional societies. Changes in RT decision making during the first surge of the pandemic were evaluated across six hypothetical scenarios, including the management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), early-stage, locally advanced, and metastatic BC. The significance of changes in responses before and during the pandemic was examined using chi-square and McNemar-Bowker tests. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred three ROs from 54 countries completed the survey. Incomplete responses (254) were excluded from the analysis. Most respondents were from the United States (285), Japan (117), Italy (63), Canada (58), and Brazil (56). Twenty-one percent (230) of respondents reported treating at least one patient with BC who was COVID-19–positive. Approximately 60% of respondents reported no change in treatment recommendation during the pandemic, except for patients with metastatic disease, for which 57.7% (636/1,103; P < .0005) changed their palliative practice. Among respondents who noted a change in their recommendation during the first surge of the pandemic, omitting, delaying, and adopting short-course RT were the most frequent changes, with most transitioning to moderate hypofractionation for DCIS and early-stage BC. CONCLUSION: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, significant changes in global RT practice patterns for BC were introduced. The impact of published results from the FAST FORWARD trial supporting ultrahypofractionation likely confounded the interpretation of the pandemic's independent influence on RT delivery.