Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are rare tumours arising in mesenchymal tissues, and can occur almost anywhere in the body. Their rarity, and the heterogeneity of subtype and location means that developing evidence-based guidelines is complicated by the limitations of the data available. However, this makes it more important that STS are managed by teams, expert in such cases, to ensure consistent and optimal treatment, as well as recruitment to clinical trials, and the ongoing accumulation of further data and knowledge. The development of appropriate guidance, by an experienced panel referring to the evidence available, is therefore a useful foundation on which to build progress in the field. These guidelines are an update of the previous version published in 2010 (Grimer et al. in Sarcoma 2010:506182, 2010). The original guidelines were drawn up following a consensus meeting of UK sarcoma specialists convened under the auspices of the British Sarcoma Group (BSG) and were intended to provide a framework for the multidisciplinary care of patients with soft tissue sarcomas. This current version has been updated and amended with reference to other European and US guidance. There are specific recommendations for the management of selected subtypes of disease including retroperitoneal and uterine sarcomas, as well as aggressive fibromatosis (desmoid tumours) and other borderline tumours commonly managed by sarcoma services. An important aim in sarcoma management is early diagnosis and prompt referral. In the UK, any patient with a suspected soft tissue sarcoma should be referred to one of the specialist regional soft tissues sarcoma services, to be managed by a specialist sarcoma multidisciplinary team. Once the diagnosis has been confirmed using appropriate imaging, plus a biopsy, the main modality of management is usually surgical excision performed by a specialist surgeon. In tumours at higher risk of recurrence or metastasis pre- or post-operative radiotherapy should be considered. Systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) may be utilized in some cases where the histological subtype is considered more sensitive to systemic treatment. Regular follow-up is recommended to assess local control, development of metastatic disease, and any late-effects of treatment. For local recurrence, and more rarely in selected cases of metastatic disease, surgical resection would be considered. Treatment for metastases may include radiotherapy, or systemic therapy guided by the sarcoma subtype. In some cases, symptom control and palliative care support alone will be appropriate.

This document is an update of the British Sarcoma Group guidelines published in 2010. The aim is to provide a reference standard for the clinical care of patients in the UK with bone sarcomas. Recent recommendations by the European Society of Medical Oncology, The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence have been incorporated, and the literature since 2010 reviewed. The standards represent a consensus amongst British Sarcoma Group members in 2015. It is acknowledged that these guidelines will need further updates as care evolves. The key recommendations are that bone pain or a palpable mass should always lead to further investigation and that patients with clinico-radiological findings suggestive of a primary bone tumour at any site in the skeleton should be referred to a specialist centre and managed by a fully accredited bone sarcoma multidisciplinary team. Treatment recommendations are provided for the major tumour types and for localised, metastatic and recurrent disease. Follow up schedules are suggested.

This document is an update of the British Sarcoma Group guidelines (2016) and provides a reference standard for the clinical care of UK patients with primary malignant bone tumours (PMBT) and giant cell tumours (GCTB) of bone. The guidelines recommend treatments that are effective and should be available in the UK, and support decisions about management and service delivery. The document represents a consensus amongst British Sarcoma Group members in 2024. Key recommendations are that bone pain, or a palpable mass should always lead to further investigation and that patients with clinical or radiological findings suggestive of a primary bone tumour at any anatomic site should be referred to a specialist centre and managed by an accredited bone sarcoma multidisciplinary team. Treatment recommendations are provided for the major tumour types and for localised, metastatic and recurrent disease. Follow-up schedules are suggested.

Despite the clinical and financial implications, there is little evidence about how patients who have been treated for soft tissue sarcoma should be followed up. The purpose of this study was to determine current practice in the United Kingdom. 192 clinicians treating patients with soft tissue sarcoma were surveyed with a postal questionnaire enquiring about frequency and method of follow up and how patients would be followed up in each of 3 clinical scenarios: a patient with a trunk or extremity tumour at low risk of relapse; a patient with a trunk or extremity tumour at high risk of relapse; and a patient with a retroperitoneal or abdominal tumour. 155 (81%) clinicians responded. Clinic visits and X-rays were the most frequently used methods of follow up. Chest CT scans, local site imaging, and blood tests were used infrequently. The intensity and methods of follow up varied with each of the clinical scenarios. There was a seven-to-twenty fold variation in cost between the least and the most expensive regimes. Respondents were generally supportive of the development of the clinical trial in this area.

Osteosarcoma (OS) is the most common primary bone tumour in children and adolescents. Circulating free (cfDNA) and circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) are promising biomarkers for disease surveillance and prognostication in several cancer types; however, few such studies are reported for OS. The purpose of this study was to discover and validate methylation-based biomarkers to detect plasma ctDNA in patients with OS and explore their utility as prognostic markers. Candidate CpG markers were selected through analysis of methylation array data for OS, non-OS tumours and germline samples. Candidates were validated in two independent OS datasets (n = 162, n = 107) and the four top-performing markers were selected. Methylation-specific digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) assays were designed and experimentally validated in OS tumour samples (n = 20) and control plasma samples. Finally, ddPCR assays were applied to pre-operative plasma and where available post-operative plasma from 72 patients with OS, and findings correlated with outcome. Custom ddPCR assays detected ctDNA in 69% and 40% of pre-operative plasma samples (n = 72), based on thresholds of one or two positive markers respectively. ctDNA was detected in 5/17 (29%) post-operative plasma samples from patients, which in four cases were associated with or preceded disease relapse. Both pre-operative cfDNA levels and ctDNA detection independently correlated with overall survival (p = 0.0015 and p = 0.0096, respectively). Our findings illustrate the potential of mutation-independent methylation-based ctDNA assays for OS. This study lays the foundation for multi-institutional collaborative studies to explore the utility of plasma-derived biomarkers in the management of OS.