Factors associated with local recurrence in operated osteosarcomas: A retrospective evaluation of 95 cases from a tertiary care center in a resource challenged environment

Barriers to care for musculoskeletal sarcoma patients: a public health perspective

Introduction

This study seeks to investigate the barriers to care that exist for patients presenting with sarcomas of musculoskeletal origin. Understanding the roots of delays in care for patients with musculoskeletal sarcoma is particularly important given the necessity of prompt treatment for oncologic diagnoses. Investigators reviewed relevant studies of publications reporting barriers to care in patients undergoing diagnosis and treatment of musculoskeletal tumors.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted using Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed-MEDLINE. Twenty publications were analyzed, including a total of 114,056 patients.

Results

Four barrier subtypes were identified: Socioeconomic Status, Geographic Location, Healthcare Quality, Sociocultural Factors. Socioeconomic status included access to health insurance and income level. Geographic location included distance traveled by patients, access to referral centers, type of hospital system and resource-challenged environments. Healthcare quality included substandard imaging, access to healthcare resources, and healthcare utilization prior to diagnosis. Sociocultural factors included psychological states, nutrition, education and social support.

Conclusion

After identifying the most significant barriers in this study, we can target specific public health issues within our community that may reduce delays in care. The assessment of barriers to care is an important first step for improving the delivery of oncologic patient care to this patient population.

Japanese orthopaedic association (JOA) clinical practice guidelines on the management of malignant bone tumors - Secondary publication

BACKGROUND

In Japan, there are currently no general guidelines for the treatment of primary malignant bone tumors. Therefore, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association established a committee to develop guidelines for the appropriate diagnosis and treatment of primary malignant bone tumors for medical professionals in clinical practice.

METHODS

The guidelines were developed in accordance with "Minds Clinical Practice Guideline Development Handbook 2014″ and "Minds Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual 2017". The Japanese Orthopaedic Association's Bone and Soft Tissue Tumor Committee established guideline development and systematic review committees, drawing members from orthopedic specialists leading the diagnosis and treatment of bone and soft tissue tumors. Pediatricians, radiologists, and diagnostic pathologists were added to both committees because of the importance of multidisciplinary treatment. Based on the diagnosis and treatment algorithm for primary malignant bone tumors, important decision-making points were selected, and clinical questions (CQ) were determined. The strength of recommendation was rated on two levels and the strength of evidence was rated on four levels. The recommendations published were selected based on agreement by 70% or more of the voters.

RESULTS

The guideline development committee examined the important clinical issues in the clinical algorithm and selected 22 CQs. The systematic review committee reviewed the evidence concerning each CQ and a clinical value judgment was added by experts. Eventually, 25 questions were published and the text of each recommendation was determined.

CONCLUSION

Since primary malignant bone tumors are rare, there is a dearth of strong evidence based on randomized controlled trials, and recommendations cannot be applied to all the patients. In clinical practice, appropriate treatment of patients with primary malignant bone tumors should be based on the histopathological diagnosis and degree of progression of each case, using these guidelines as a reference.

Prognosis of limb‑salvage treatment of osteosarcoma in adolescent patients: a meta‑analysis

To evaluate the effectiveness of limb-salvage treatment for osteosarcoma in adolescent patients, a comprehensive search on PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library was conducted. Studies with a clear diagnosis of osteosarcoma were included and duplicate publications, studies without full text or incomplete information, those with an inability to extract data, divergent definitions of exposure, animal experiments, reviews, and systematic reviews were excluded. The data were analyzed using STATA 15.1. The findings of the present study revealed that overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with osteosarcoma in the limb-salvage treatment group were significantly longer than those in the amputation treatment group [hazard ratio (HR)=0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.63-0.80; P=0.000 vs. HR=0.60; 95% CI: 0.48-0.76; P=0.000]. Additionally, the five-year OS rate for patients in the limb-salvage treatment group was higher than that in the amputation group [odds ratio (OR)=4.48; 95% CI: 2.74-7.31; P=0.000]. However, the local recurrence rate was notably higher in the limb-salvage treatment group compared with the amputation treatment group (OR=2.68; 95% CI: 1.50-4.77; P=0.001). Furthermore, the results indicated no significant difference in distant metastasis rates between the limb-salvage treatment group and the amputation treatment group (OR=0.32; 95% CI: 0.10-1.06; P=0.062). In conclusion, the present meta-analysis underscores the potential of limb-salvage therapy for adolescent patients with osteosarcoma. The OS and PFS of patients undergoing limb-salvage surgery are longer than those of amputation, with a higher five-year OS rate and a similar rate of distant metastasis. However, the local recurrence rate of limb-salvage surgery is significantly higher than that of amputation.

Determinants and impact of diagnostic interval in bone sarcomas: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic delays in cancers are frequent in developing countries due to poor health infrastructure. Existing literature from developed countries suggests that diagnostic interval in bone sarcomas is primarily dictated by tumour biology with no impact on survival. This study evaluates the social and biological determinants of the diagnostic interval in bone sarcomas in a resource-challenged setting and assesses its impact on treatment outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective single-institutional study was conducted on patients with high-grade bone sarcomas recorded in the sarcoma clinic database between 2003 and 2018. Baseline clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes were recorded. Logistic regression was performed to assess the impact of baseline clinical and social characteristics (distance from treating centre and rural vs. urban residence) on the diagnostic interval. Further, the impact of diagnostic interval on histologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, amputation requirement in extremity sarcomas and survival was evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 1227 patients were included for analysis. The median diagnostic interval was 4 months (3-7 months). Age above 18 years, Ewing sarcoma (ES) diagnosis, absence of fever at presentation and tumour size above 7.5 cm were predictors of a longer diagnostic interval (>4 months). The length of the diagnostic interval did not impact amputation requirement or survival outcomes. However, the proportion of patients with good necrosis post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy was lower among patients with longer diagnostic intervals (25% vs. 34·16%; p-value = .04).

CONCLUSION

Tumour characteristics rather than social factors determined the diagnostic interval. Diagnostic interval did not impact survival outcomes even in a resource-constrained setting.

Formulation and validation of a baseline prognostic score for osteosarcoma treated uniformly with a non-high dose methotrexate-based protocol from a low middle income healthcare setting: a single centre analysis of 594 patients

Introduction

The outcomes of osteosarcoma in low middle income countries (LMICs) are different due to patients presenting in advanced stages, resource constraints and the use of non-high-dose-methotrexate (HDMTX)-based regimens. This study derived and validated a prognostic score for osteosarcoma that integrates biologic and social factors and is tailored for patients from an LMIC setting using a non-HDMTX-based protocol.

Materials and methods

A retrospective study including osteosarcoma patients enrolled for treatment at a single tertiary care centre in India between 2003-19 was conducted. Baseline biologic and social characteristics were extracted from medical records and survival outcomes were noted. The cohort was randomised into a derivation and validation cohort. Multivariable Cox regression was used to identify baseline characteristics that were independently prognostic for survival outcomes in the derivation cohort. A score was derived from the prognostic factors identified in the derivation cohort and further validated in the validation cohort with estimation of its predictive ability.

Results

594 patients with osteosarcoma were eligible for inclusion in the study. Around one-third of the cohort had metastatic disease with 59% of the patients residing in rural areas. The presence of metastases at baseline (HR 3.39; p<0.001; score=3), elevated serum alkaline phosphatase (SAP) >450 IU/L (HR 1.57; p=0.001; score=1) and baseline tumour size > 10 cm (HR 1.68; p<0.001; score=1) were identified to be independent factors predicting inferior event free survival (EFS) and were included in development of the prognostic score. Patients were categorized as low risk (score 0), intermediate risk (score 1-3) and high risk (4-5). Harrell's c-indices for the score were 0.682, 0.608 and 0.657 respectively for EFS in the derivation, validation and whole cohort respectively. The timed AUC of ROC was 0.67 for predicting 18-month EFS in the derivation, validation and whole cohorts while that for 36-month EFS were 0.68, 0.66 and 0.68 respectively.

Conclusions

The study describes the outcomes among osteosarcoma patients from an LMIC treated uniformly with a non-HDMTX-based protocol. Tumor size, baseline metastases and SAP were prognostic factors used to derive a score with good predictive value for survival outcomes. Social factors did not emerge as determinants of survival.

Delay in Diagnosis and Treatment of Primary Bone Tumors during COVID-19 Pandemic in Poland

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all of the medical specialties, including orthopedic oncology. Therefore, the aim of the study was to assess how it influenced the diagnostic and therapeutic processes for patients with bone neoplasms.

METHODS

We evaluated 87 patients treated due for bone neoplasms before (Group I, n = 36) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (Group II, n = 51). A delay in diagnosis was defined as the period between the initial clinical symptoms and the date of referral to an oncology center. The patients from Group II were asked to complete a short questionnaire regarding the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

The median general delay in diagnosis before the pandemic was 7 months, while during the pandemic, it was 10 months (p = 0.728). The biopsy delay was lower in the pre-pandemic group: median-6.5 vs. 12 days (p = 0.025). The patients from Group II were diagnosed with larger tumors compared to those in Group I: the median values were 75 vs. 56 mm (p = 0.025), respectively. After an X-ray examination, the bone neoplasms were suspected more frequently in the Group II: 63% vs. 44% cases (p = 0.024), respectively. In Group II, 20 (60.8%) cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were reported, however, no respiratory failure cases were noticed.

CONCLUSION

The pandemic affected the diagnostic process of primary bone tumors, resulting in delays in performing biopsies. During the pandemic, the patients reported larger diameters of their bone lesions.

Controversies and Challenges in the Management of Osteosarcoma-an Indian Perspective

Osteosarcoma (OGS) is the most common primary bone tumor in children and adolescents which requires a multidisciplinary approach to management. Although chemotherapy and surgery can cure more than half of localized OGS cases, the unique challenges faced by resource-limited countries like India make this outcome difficult to achieve. Various questions in the management of OGS including role of high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) in neoadjuvant setting, triplet vs doublet chemotherapy, intensification of chemotherapy based on response in setting of doublet, and indigenous prosthesis in setting of limb salvage need to be defined. Similarly, in the metastatic and recurrent setting, questions regarding intent of treatment, indications of chemotherapy, timing of surgery, and role of targeted therapies need clarification. Lack of randomized trials from India makes definite conclusions difficult, but an attempt can be made to define the best approach in the Indian scenario from available evidence. Hence, a critical review of literature from India and the West was done to define possible management approaches and highlight the lacuna for future research.

Resource-appropriate selection of osteosarcoma treatment protocols in low- and middle-income countries

Osteosarcoma is a rare malignancy; however, it is still the most common primary bone tumor in adolescents and young adults. Chemotherapy improves survival indubitably in osteosarcoma; nevertheless, the concern is the stagnant progress since the last several decades. There are a handful of active agents and unresolved issues, especially in choosing the ideal chemotherapy regimen. The oncology community is in equipoise regarding the position of high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX), mandatory or adjunct. The choice of therapy becomes widely relevant, including in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), where HDMTX administration brings additional complexities. Research into novel non-HDMTX-based protocols adapted to the available resources is pivotal in improving disease outcomes, especially in LMIC. The current review focuses on real-world challenges in decision-making and provides a comprehensive overview of the evolution of treatment protocols in LMIC.

Biomaterials for Orthopaedic Diagnostics and Theranostics

Despite widespread use of conventional diagnostic methods in orthopaedic applications, limitations still exist in detection and diagnosing many pathologies especially at early stages when intervention is most critical. The use of biomaterials to develop diagnostics and theranostics, including nanoparticles and scaffolds for systemic or local applications, has significant promise to address these shortcomings and enable successful clinical translation. These developments in both modular and holistic design of diagnostic and theranostic biomaterials may improve patient treatments for myriad orthopaedic applications ranging from cancer to fractures to infection.

Bone sarcoma surgery in times of COVID-19 pandemic lockdown-early experience from a tertiary centre in India

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown has presented a unique challenge for sarcoma care. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the early results and feasibility of surgeries for bone sarcomas during the COVID-19 lockdown.

METHODS

Our prospectively collected orthopaedic oncological database was reviewed to include two groups of patients- those who underwent surgery in the immediate 4 weeks before lockdown (non-lockdown group) and those operated in the first 4 weeks of lockdown (lockdown group). All patients were followed-up clinically and telephonically to collect the outcome data.

RESULTS

Out of the 91 patients who qualified for inclusion, fifty were classified into the non-lockdown group while 41 patients formed the lockdown group. Both the groups were comparable with respect to baseline demographic parameters. However, during the lockdown period 37 patients (90%) had undergone a major surgical intervention as against 24 patients (48%) in the non-lockdown group (P < .001). There was no significant difference in type of anaesthesia, median estimated blood loss and procedure duration. None of the patients/health care workers had evidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 infection at 15 days follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Our study results suggest that appendicular bone tumours can be safely operated with adequate precautions during the lockdown period.

Preoperative surgical risk stratification in osteosarcoma based on the proximity to the major vessels

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine the risk of local recurrence and survival in patients with osteosarcoma based on the proximity of the tumour to the major vessels.

Patients and Methods

A total of 226 patients with high-grade non-metastatic osteosarcoma in the limbs were investigated. Median age at diagnosis was 15 years (4 to 67) with the ratio of male to female patients being 1.5:1. The most common site of the tumour was the femur (n = 103) followed by tibia (n = 66). The vascular proximity was categorized based on the preoperative MRI after neoadjuvant chemotherapy into four types: type 1 > 5 mm; type 2 ≤ 5 mm, > 0 mm; type 3 attached; type 4 surrounded.

Results

Limb salvage rate based on the proximity type was 92%, 88%, 51%, and 0% for types 1 to 4, respectively, and the overall survival at five years was 82%, 77%, 57%, and 67%, respectively (p < 0.001). Local recurrence rate in patients with limb-salvage surgery was 7%, 8%, and 22% for the types 1 to 3, respectively (p = 0.041), and local recurrence at the perivascular area was observed in 1% and 4% for type 2 and 3, respectively. The mean microscopic margin to the major vessels was 6.9 mm, 3.0 mm, and 1.4 mm for types 1 to 3, respectively. In type 3, local recurrence-free survival with limb salvage was significantly poorer compared with amputation (p = 0.025), while the latter offered no overall survival benefit. In this group of patients, factors such as good response to chemotherapy or limited vascular attachment to less than half circumference or longitudinal 10 mm reduced the risk of local recurrence.

Conclusion

The proximity of osteosarcoma to major blood vessels is a poor prognostic factor for local control and survival. Amputation offers better local control for tumours attached to the blood vessels but does not improve survival. Limb salvage surgery offers similar local control if the tumour attachment to blood vessels is limited. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1024–1031.

Treatment-Related Prognostic Factors in Managing Osteosarcoma around the Knee with Limb Salvage Surgery: A Lesson from a Long-Term Follow-Up Study

Purpose

The aim of this study was to assess the treatment-related factors associated with local recurrence and overall survival of patients with osteosarcoma treated with limb-salvage surgery.

Patients and Methods

Treatment-related factors were analyzed to evaluate their effects on local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and overall survival (OS) in 182 patients from 2004 to 2013.

Results

The mean length of follow-up was 73.4 ± 34.7 months (median, 68 months; range, 12-173 months), and 63 patients died by the end of the follow-up. The 5-year and 10-year overall survival rates were 68.6 ± 6.6% and 59.4 ± 10.6%, respectively. Univariate analysis showed that treatment-related prognostic factors for overall survival were prolonged symptom intervals >=60 days, biopsy/tumor resection performed by different centers, previous medical history, incomplete preoperative chemotherapy (<8 weeks), and prolonged postoperative interval >21 days. In the multivariate analysis, biopsy/tumor resection performed by different centers, incomplete implementation of planned new adjuvant chemotherapy, and delayed resumption of postoperative chemotherapy (>21 days) were risk factors for poor prognosis; biopsy/tumor resection performed by different centers and tumor necrosis <90% were independent predictors of local recurrence.

Conclusion

For localized osteosarcoma treated with limb-salvage surgery, it is necessary to optimize timely standard chemotherapy and to resume postoperative chemotherapy to improve survival rates. Biopsies should be performed at experienced institutions in cases of developing local recurrence.