Osteosarcoma is the most common primary bone sarcoma and is often diagnosed in the 2nd–3rd decades of life. Response to the aggressive and highly toxic neoadjuvant methotrexate-doxorubicin-cisplatin (MAP) chemotherapy schedule is strongly predictive of outcome. Outcomes for patients with osteosarcoma have not significantly changed for over thirty years. There is a need for more effective treatment for patients with high risk features but also reduced treatment-related toxicity for all patients. Predictive biomarkers are needed to help inform clinicians to de-escalate or add therapy, including immune therapies, and to contribute to future clinical trial designs. Here, we review a variety of approaches to improve outcomes and quality of life for patients with osteosarcoma with a focus on incorporating toxicity reduction, immune therapy and molecular analysis to provide the most effective and least toxic osteosarcoma therapy.

Glutamine is a major dietary amino acid that is both a fuel and nitrogen donor for healing tissues damaged by chemotherapy and radiation. Evidence supports the benefit of oral (enteral) glutamine to reduce symptoms and improve and/or maintain quality of life of cancer patients. Benefits include not only better nutrition, but also decreased mucosal damage (mucositis, stomatitis, pharyngitis, esophagitis, and enteritis). Glutamine supplementation in a high protein diet (10 grams/day) + disaccharides, such as sucrose and/or trehalose, is a combination that increases glutamine uptake by mucosal cells. This increased topical effect can reduce painful mucosal symptoms and ulceration associated with chemotherapy and radiation in the head and neck region, esophagus, stomach and small intestine. Topical and oral glutamine seem to be the preferred routes for this amino acid to promote mucosal healing during and after cancer treatment.

Background: Cancer and its therapy is commonly associated with a variety of side effects that impact eating behaviors that reduce nutritional intake. This review will outline potential causes of chemotherapy and radiation damage as well as approaches for the amelioration of the side effects of cancer during therapy. Methods: Information for clinicians, patients, and their caregivers about toxicity mitigation including nausea reduction, damage to epithelial structures such as skin and mucosa, organ toxicity, and education is reviewed. Results: How to anticipate, reduce, and prevent some toxicities encountered during chemotherapy and radiation is detailed with the goal to improve eating behaviors. Strategies for health care professionals, caregivers, and patients to consider include (a) the reduction in nausea and vomiting, (b) decreasing damage to the mucosa, (c) avoiding a catabolic state and muscle wasting (sarcopenia), and (d) developing therapeutic alliances with patients, caregivers, and oncologists. Conclusions: Although the reduction of side effects involves anticipatory guidance and proactive team effort (e.g., forward observation, electronic interactions, patient reported outcomes), toxicity reduction can be satisfying for not only the patient, but everyone involved in cancer care.

Advances in the treatment of Ewing's sarcoma (EWS) are desperately needed, particularly in the case of metastatic disease. A deeper understanding of collateral sensitivity, where the evolution of therapeutic resistance to one drug aligns with sensitivity to another drug, may improve our ability to effectively target this disease. For the first time in a solid tumor, we produced a temporal collateral sensitivity map that demonstrates the evolution of collateral sensitivity and resistance in EWS. We found that the evolution of collateral resistance was predictable with some drugs but had significant variation in response to other drugs. Using this map of temporal collateral sensitivity in EWS, we can see that the path toward collateral sensitivity is not always repeatable, nor is there always a clear trajectory toward resistance or sensitivity. Identifying transcriptomic changes that accompany these states of transient collateral sensitivity could improve treatment planning for patients with EWS.

Background : Ten to fourteen percent of Ewing sarcoma (ES) study participants treated nationwide with IGF-1 receptor (IGF-1R)-targeted antibodies achieved tumor regression. Despite this success, low response rates and short response durations (approximately 7-weeks) have slowed the development of this therapy. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of five phase-1b/2 ES-oriented trials that evaluated the anticancer activity of IGF-1R antibodies +/− mTOR inhibitors (mTORi). Our meta-analysis provided a head-to-head comparison of the clinical benefits of IGF-1R antibodies vs. the IGF-1R/mTOR-targeted combination. Available pretreatment clinical samples were semi-quantitatively scored using immunohistochemistry to detect proteins in the IGF-1R/PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway linked to clinical response. Early PET/CT imaging, obtained within the first 2 weeks (median 10 days), were examined to determine if reduced FDG avidity was predictive of progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Among 56 ES patients treated at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) with IGF-1R antibodies, our analysis revealed a significant ~two-fold improvement in PFS that favored a combination of IGF-1R/mTORi therapy (1.6 vs. 3.3-months, p = 0.042). Low pIGF-1R in the pretreatment specimens was associated with treatment response. Reduced total-lesion glycolysis more accurately predicted the IGF-1R response than other previously reported radiological biomarkers. Conclusion: Synergistic drug combinations, and newly identified proteomic or radiological biomarkers of IGF-1R response, may be incorporated into future IGF-1R-related trials to improve the response rate in ES patients.

Purpose: Treatment options for recurrent or refractory Ewing's sarcoma (ES) are limited. Vigil is a novel autologous tumor cell therapy expressing bi-shRNA furin/GMCSF plasmid, which previously demonstrated monotherapy activity in advanced ES. Herein we report safety and evidence of benefit to Vigil for ES as potential treatment. Patients and Methods: In this pilot trial, eligible patients with recurrent or refractory ES who failed initial standard-of-care therapy received treatment with temozolomide (TEM) 100 mg/m2/day oral and irinotecan (IRI) 50 mg/m2/day oral, Days 1 to 5, in combination with Vigil (1 × 106–107 cells/mL/day intradermal, Day 15), every 21 days (Vigil/TEM/IRI). Objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST v1.1, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Circulating tumor (ct) DNA analysis was done by patient-specific droplet digital PCR on baseline and serially collected on-treatment samples. Results: Eight of 10 enrolled patients were evaluable for safety and efficacy (mean age 24.6; 12.6–46.1 years old); 2 did not receive Vigil. Seven of 8 patients previously received TEM/IRI. No Vigil-related adverse events were reported. Common ≥Grade 3 chemotherapy-related toxicity included neutropenia (50%) and thrombocytopenia (38%). We observed two partial response patients by RECIST; both showed histologic complete response without additional cancer therapy. Median PFS was 8.2 months (95% confidence interval, 4.3–NA). Five patients showed stable disease or better for ≥6 months. Patient-specific EWS/FLI1 ctDNA was detectable in all 8 evaluable patients at baseline. Changes in ctDNA levels corresponded to changes in disease burden. Conclusions: Results demonstrated safety of combination Vigil/TEM/IRI.