Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Feb;72(2):e31436.
doi: 10.1002/pbc.31436. Epub 2024 Nov 20.

Implications of Implementing Children's Oncology Group Risk Stratification to Patients With Rhabdomyosarcoma Treated on European Paediatric Soft Tissue Sarcoma Study Group Clinical Trial

Gianni Bisogno  1   2 , Veronique Minard-Colin  3 , Josephine Haduong  4 , Ilaria Zanetti  2 , Andrea Ferrari  5 , Julia Chisholm  6 , Christine M Heske  7 , Raquel Hladun  8 , Meriel Jenney  9 , Johannes Hendrikus Maria Merks  10   11 , Rajkumar Venkatramani  12
Affiliations

Implications of Implementing Children's Oncology Group Risk Stratification to Patients With Rhabdomyosarcoma Treated on European Paediatric Soft Tissue Sarcoma Study Group Clinical Trial

Gianni Bisogno et al. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2025 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Prognostic factors are crucial in tailoring treatments for patients with rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS). The European paediatric Soft tissue sarcoma Study Group (EpSSG) and the Children's Oncology Group (COG) employ similar prognostic factors, but utilize them differently resulting in diverse stratification systems. This diversity may result in dissimilar treatment approaches for comparable patients and hinder the comparison of clinical trial results.

Procedure: We reclassified 1993 patients enrolled in the EpSSG RMS 2005 and MTS 2008 studies based on the risk stratification used in current EpSSG and COG trials, and compared the type and cumulative doses of chemotherapy recommended to the different risk groups. Alkylating agents were compared using the cyclophosphamide equivalent dose formula. Metastatic RMS with high-risk features were excluded because no standard recommended treatment exists.

Results: Patients were variably distributed across EpSSG and COG risk stratifications. Notably, 34.2% of EpSSG standard-risk patients fell into three different COG risk groups (very low, low, and intermediate), and 66.8% of the total population, classified as standard, high, and very high risk by EpSSG, would all be considered intermediate risk by COG. Consequently, only 57.3% of the study population would receive comparable intensive chemotherapy under both EpSSG and COG protocols. Disparities emerged, with 16.5% undergoing more intensive and 17.2% receiving less intensive treatment in COG protocols compared to EpSSG studies.

Conclusions: Our study shows the complexities of the current RMS risk stratification systems, emphasizing the need for a global consensus. A unified approach would reduce the risk of disparate treatments for similar patients and facilitate more straightforward cross-study comparisons.

Keywords: cyclophosphamide equivalent dose; prognostic factors; rhabdomyosarcoma; stratification system.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. C. A. S. Arndt, G. Bisogno, and E. Koscielniak, “Fifty Years of Rhabdomyosarcoma Studies on Both Sides of the Pond and Lessons Learned,” Cancer Treatment Reviews 68 (2018): 94–101, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2018.06.013.
    1. J. H. Haduong, C. M. Heske, W. Allen‐Rhoades, et al., “An Update on Rhabdomyosarcoma Risk Stratification and the Rationale for Current and Future Children's Oncology Group Clinical Trials,” Pediatric Blood & Cancer 69, no. 4 (2022): e29511, https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.29511.
    1. C. Rodary, F. Flamant, and S. S. Donaldson, “An Attempt to Use a Common Staging System in Rhabdomyosarcoma: A Report of an International Workshop Initiated by the International Society of Pediatric Oncology (SIOP),” Medical and Pediatric Oncology 17, no. 3 (1989): 210–215, https://doi.org/10.1002/mpo.2950170308.
    1. G. Bisogno, V. Minard‐Colin, I. Zanetti, et al., “Nonmetastatic Rhabdomyosarcoma in Children and Adolescents: Overall Results of the European Pediatric Soft Tissue Sarcoma Study Group RMS 2005 Study,” Journal of Clinical Oncology 41, no. 13 (2023): 2342–2349, https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.22.02093.
    1. J. Treuner, E. Koscielniak, and M. Keim, “Comparison of the Rates of Response to Ifosfamide and Cyclophosphamide in Primary Unresectable Rhabdomyosarcomas,” Cancer Chemotheraphy and Pharmacology 24, Suppl 1 (1989): S48–S50, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00253241.

Substances

LinkOut - more resources