Sarcoma最新文献

Background: Time to treatment initiation (TTI) is a quality metric in cancer care. The purpose of this study is to determine the accuracy of TTI data from a single cancer center registry that reports to the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for sarcoma diagnoses.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of a single Commission on Cancer (CoC)-accredited cancer center's tumor registry between 2006 and 2016 identified 402 patients who underwent treatment of a musculoskeletal soft tissue sarcoma and had TTI data available. Registry-reported TTI was extracted from the tumor registry. Effective TTI was manually calculated by medical record review as the number of days from the date of tissue diagnosis to initiation of first effective treatment. Effective treatment was defined as oncologic surgical excision or initiation of radiation therapy or chemotherapy. Registry-reported TTI and effective TTI values were compared for concordance in all patients.

Results: In the entire cohort, 25% (99/402) of patients had TTI data discordance, all related to surgical treatment definition. For patients with a registry-reported value of TTI = 0 days, 74% (87/118) had a diagnostic surgical procedure coded as their first treatment event, with 73 unplanned incomplete excision procedures and 14 incisional biopsies. In these patients, effective TTI was on average 59 days (P < 0.001). For patients with a registry-reported value of TTI >0 days, only 4% (12/284) had discordant TTI values.

Conclusions: Nearly three-fourths of patients with a registry-reported value of TTI = 0 days in a large, CoC-accredited cancer center registry had a diagnostic procedure coded as their first treatment event, though their effective treatment had not yet started. These data suggest that TTI is likely longer than what is reported to the NCDB. Redefinition of what constitutes surgical treatment should be considered to improve the accuracy of data used in measuring TTI in sarcoma.

Introduction: Surgical excisions of upper and lower extremity malignancies are increasing annually, due in part to the rising incidence of sarcomas. The purpose of this study is to compare readmissions, reoperation rate, and complications following surgical excision of soft/connective tissue vs bone malignancies of the upper and lower extremities.

Methods: The Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) was queried from 2016-2017 to conduct a retrospective analysis of 16,435 patients diagnosed with malignant neoplasms of the long bone (ULLB, n = 1,433) and soft tissue (ULST, n = 2,049) of the upper limb and malignant neoplasms of the long bone (LLLB, n = 5,422) and soft tissue (LLST, n = 7,531) of the lower limb. Patients who underwent surgical excision of their neoplasms were included. Binomial multivariate logistic regression was used to compare complications, nonelective readmission rates, and reoperation rates between the two groups at 30 and 90 days.

Results: Average age of the ULST group was 61.88, with 36% female. Average age of the ULLB group was 44.97, with 41.90% female. Average age of the LLST group was 60.96, with 46.90% female. Average age of the LLLB group was 43.09, with 42.60% female. The ULST group had lower odds of readmission within 30 days (p=0.263), which became significant within 90 days of surgery (p=0.045). The LLST group had significantly higher odds of infection, reoperation within 30 to 90 days of the index surgery compared to the LLLB group (p < 0.0001). The LLST group had significantly lower odds of readmission within 30 (p=0.04) and 90 days (p=0.015) of the index surgery.

Conclusion: Patients in the ULST group had significantly lower odds of 90-day readmission compared to the ULLB group. There were also significantly lower odds of 30- and 90-day readmission in the LLST group compared to the LLLB group. However, the LLST group had significantly higher odds of infection and reoperation within 30 and 90 days compared to the LLLB group.

For pediatric malignant bone tumors located in the limbs, limb salvage surgery is the gold standard, but it requires adequate resection margins to avoid local recurrence. Primitive bone sarcomas of the forearm (radius or ulna) are very rare and the reconstruction remains challenging. We describe a method to ensure minimal but adequate resection bone margins with precision in four consecutive patients with primitive bone sarcomas of the forearm. During the preoperative planning, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to delineate the tumor and the tumor volume was transferred to computerized tomography (CT) by image fusion. A patient-specific instrument (PSI) was manufactured by 3D printing to allow the surgeon to perform the surgical cuts precisely according to the preoperative planning. The first PSI was used for the resection of the tumor, which adopted a unique position at the bony surface. A second PSI was intended for the cutting of the bone allograft so that it fitted perfectly with the bone defect. In all four cases, the safe margin obtained into the bone was free of tumor (R0: microscopically margin-negative resection). The functional result was very good in all four patients. This limb salvage surgical technique can be applied in forearm bone sarcoma and improves surgical precision while maintaining satisfactory local tumor control. It can also reduce the surgical time and allow a stable osteosynthesis.

Background: The first-line treatment for most giant cell tumors (GCTs) of bone is surgical; radiotherapy (RT) is reserved for inoperable or refractory cases. While RT techniques have undergone a dramatic change over the past few decades, with the higher energy megavoltage RT replacing orthovoltage RT, concerns for high rates of malignant transformation following RT have limited its use. Evidence suggests a lower incidence of secondary malignancy after treatment with megavoltage compared with orthovoltage RT, but this has not been studied in GCTs. Our main purpose was to compare the incidence of malignant transformation of GCTB between patients treated with orthovoltage vs. megavoltage RT.

Methods: A literature review was performed to identify studies reporting GCTBs treated with RT from 01/1900 through 12/2019. Studies that did not report RT modality or separate orthovoltage and megavoltage results were excluded. Included in the analysis were 6 patients from our institution. Primary outcome was the incidence of malignant transformation; secondary outcomes were time to transformation and incidence of local recurrence. Fisher's exact tests and independent sample t-tests were used, and significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results: Twenty-two studies were included, which reported on 168 GCTBs treated with orthovoltage and 393 treated with megavoltage RT. Transformation incidence was 14% (n = 24) for orthovoltage and 1.8% (n = 7) for megavoltage RT, an 8-fold difference (odds ratio (OR) 9.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.9-22, p < 0.001). Mean time to transformation was 8.7 years for orthovoltage and 11.2 years for megavoltage RT (p=0.28). Incidence of local recurrence was 38% (63/167) for orthovoltage and 17% (66/393) for megavoltage RT (OR 3.3, 95% CI 2.0-4.6, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: The risk of developing a malignancy after RT of GCTB is 8 times lower with megavoltage than with orthovoltage. Malignant transformation with megavoltage, while not zero, is lower than that in historical series. Use of modern RT techniques in inoperable or refractory GCTB may be appropriate.

Background: Radiation after resection of an atypical lipomatous tumor (ALT) is controversial. This study evaluates local control and complications after the first resection of ALTs of the extremity with or without adjuvant radiation.

Methods: A dual institution, retrospective review of patients treated from 1995 to 2020 with first-time resection of an ALT in the extremity was performed. In total, 102 patients underwent adjuvant radiation (XRT group) and 68 patients were treated with surgery alone (no-XRT group). The median follow-up time was 4.6 years (interquartile range (IQR) 2.0-7.3 years). The median radiation dose was 60 Gy (IQR 55-66 Gy). Univariable and multivariable analyses evaluated the association of patient, tumor, and treatment variables with recurrence and complications. Kaplan-Meier analysis evaluated local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and time to complication.

Results: The overall incidence of local recurrence was 1% (1/102) in the XRT group and 24% (16/68) in the no-XRT group (p < 0.001). The median time-to-recurrence was 8.2 years (IQR 6.5-10.5 years). In the XRT and the no-XRT groups, 5-yr LRFS was 98% and 92% (p=0.21) and 10-yr LRFS was 98% and 41% (p < 0.001), respectively. The absence of radiation (HR = 23.63, 95% CI (3.09-180.48); p < 0.001) and R2 surgical resection margins (HR = 11.04, 95% CI (2.07-59.03); p < 0.001) incurred a 23-fold and 11-fold increased risk of local recurrence, respectively, while tumor size, depth, location, and neurovascular involvement were not found to be independent predictors of recurrence. The complication rate was 37% (38/102) in the XRT group and 10% (7/68) in the no-XRT group (p < 0.001). Eight patients (8/102, 8%) required surgical management for complication in the XRT group compared with two patients (2/68, 3%) in the no-XRT group (p=0.10). Higher radiation dose had a modest correlation with increased severity of complication (ρ=0.24; p=0.02).

Conclusions: Adjuvant radiation after first-time resection of an ALT of the extremity was associated with a significantly reduced risk of local recurrence but a three-fold increase in complication rate. These data support a 10-year follow-up for these patients and inform a notable clinical trade-off if considering adjuvant radiation for this tumor with recurrent potential.

Objective: Malignancy in giant cell tumor of bone (mGCTB) is categorized as primary (concomitantly with conventional GCTB) or secondary (after radiotherapy or other treatment). Denosumab therapy has been suggested to play a role in the etiology of secondary mGCTB. In this case series from a tertiary referral sarcoma center, we aimed to find distinctive features for malignant transformation in GCTB on different imaging modalities. Furthermore, we assessed the duration of denosumab treatment and lag time to the development of malignancy.

Methods: From a histopathology database search, 6 patients were pathologically confirmed as having initial conventional GCTB and subsequently with secondary mGCTB.

Results: At the time of mGCTB diagnosis, 2 cases were treated with denosumab only, 2 with denosumab and surgery, 1 with multiple curettages and radiotherapy, and 1 with surgery only. In the 4 denosumab treated patients, the mean lag time to malignant transformation was 7 months (range 2-11 months). Imaging findings suspicious of malignant transformation related to denosumab therapy are the absence of fibro-osseous matrix formation and absent neocortex formation on CT, and stable or even increased size of the soft tissue component.

Conclusion: In 4 patients treated with denosumab, secondary mGCTB occurred within the first year after initiation of treatment. Radiotherapy-associated mGCTB has a longer lag time than denosumab-associated mGCTB. Close clinical and imaging follow-up during the first months of denosumab therapy is key, as mGCTB tends to have rapid aggressive behavior, similar to other high-grade sarcomas. Nonresponders should be (re) evaluated for their primary diagnosis of conventional GCTB.