Primary vertebral osteosarcoma: Five cases

Development and Validation of a Prognostic Model for Overall Survival in Patients with Primary Pelvis and Spine Osteosarcoma: A Population-Based Study and External Validation

Background: Primary pelvis and spine osteosarcoma (PSOS) is a specific type of osteosarcoma that is difficult to treat and has a poor prognosis. In recent years, the research on osteosarcoma has been increasing, but there have been few studies on PSOS; in particular, there have been a lack of analyses with a large sample size. This study aimed to construct and validate a model to predict the overall survival (OS) of PSOS patients, as currently there are no tools available for assessing their prognosis. Methods: Data including demographic information, clinical characteristics, and follow-up information on patients with PSOS were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, as well as from the Spine Tumor Center of Changzheng Hospital. Variable selection was achieved through a backward procedure based on the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). Prognostic factors were identified by univariate and multivariate Cox analysis. A nomogram was further constructed for the estimation of 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS. Calibration plots, the concordance index (C-index), and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) were used to evaluate the prediction model. Results: In total, 83 PSOS patients and 90 PSOS patients were separately collected from the SEER database and Changzheng Hospital. In the SEER cohort, liver metastasis, lung metastasis, and chemotherapy were recognized as independent prognostic factors for OS (p < 0.05) and were incorporated to construct the initial nomogram. However, the initial nomogram showed poor predictive accuracy in internal and external validation. Then, we shifted our focus to the Changzheng data. Lung metastasis involving segments, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) level, and en bloc resection were ultimately identified as independent prognostic factors for OS (p < 0.05) and were further incorporated to construct the current nomogram, of which the bias-corrected C-index was 0.834 (0.824–0.856). The areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) of the current nomogram regarding 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS probabilities were 0.93, 0.96, and 0.92, respectively. Conclusion: We have developed a predictive model with satisfactory performance and clinical practicability, enabling effective prediction of the OS of PSOS patients and aiding clinicians in decision-making.

Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Primary osteosarcoma of the spine is a rare osseous tumour. En bloc resection, in contrast to intralesional resection, is the only procedure able to provide Enneking appropriate (EA) margins, which has improved local control and survival of patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine. The objective of this study is to compare the risk of local recurrence, metastases development and survival in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine submitted to Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI) procedures.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed on EBSCO, PubMed and Web of Science, between 1966 and 2018, to identify studies evaluating patients submitted to resection of primary osteosarcoma of the spine. Two reviewers independently assessed all reports. The outcomes were local recurrence, metastases development and survival at 12, 24 and 60 months.

RESULTS

Five studies (108 patients) were included for systematic review. These studies support the conclusion that EA procedure has a lower local recurrence rate (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.17-0.66), a lower metastases development rate (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.89) and a higher survival rate at 24 months (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.24-2.55) and 60 months (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.14-3.42) of follow-up; however, at 12 months, there is a non-significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

EA procedure increases the ratio of remission and survival after 24 months of follow-up. Multidisciplinary oncologic groups should weigh the morbidity of an en bloc resection, knowing that in the first year the probability of survival is the same for EA and EI procedures. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Intradural osteogenic sarcoma in the lumbar spine

To our knowledge, this is the third reported case of spinal intradural osteogenic sarcoma. The two prior reported cases had a history of iophendylate injection whereas this patient did not. Other cases involved the cranial meninges, not the spine. This is the first reported case of intradural osteosarcoma in the absence of iophendylate injection. We report our workup, diagnosis, and treatment. We also include a video demonstrating the intraoperative invasion of tumor and dural erosion.

En bloc resection of a C-1 lateral mass osteosarcoma: technical note

Osteosarcoma is an aggressive primary bone tumor. It is currently treated with multimodality therapy including en bloc resection, which has been demonstrated to confer a survival benefit over intralesional resection. The authors present the case of an 8-year-old girl with a C-1 lateral mass osteosarcoma, which was treated with a 4-stage en bloc resection and spinal reconstruction. While technically complex, the feasibility of en bloc resection for spinal osteosarcoma should be explored in the pediatric population.

Osteosarcoma of the spine: prognostic variables for local recurrence and overall survival, a multicenter ambispective study

OBJECTIVE

Primary spinal osteosarcomas are rare and aggressive neoplasms. Poor outcomes can occur, as obtaining marginal margins is technically demanding; further Enneking-appropriate en bloc resection can have significant morbidity. The goal of this study is to identify prognostic variables for local recurrence and mortality in surgically treated patients diagnosed with a primary osteosarcoma of the spine.

METHODS

A multicenter ambispective database of surgically treated patients with primary spine osteosarcomas was developed by AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor. Patient demographic, diagnosis, treatment, perioperative morbidity, local recurrence, and cross-sectional survival data were collected. Tumors were classified in 2 cohorts: Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI), as defined by pathology margin matching Enneking-recommended surgical margins. Prognostic variables were analyzed in reference to local recurrence and survival.

RESULTS

Between 1987 and 2012, 58 patients (32 female patients) underwent surgical treatment for primary spinal osteosarcoma. Patients were followed for a mean period of 3.5 ± 3.5 years (range 0.5 days to 14.3 years). The median survival for the entire cohort was 6.7 years postoperative. Twenty-four (41%) patients died, and 17 (30%) patients suffered a local recurrence, 10 (59%) of whom died. Twenty-nine (53%) patients underwent EA resection while 26 (47%) patients underwent EI resection with a postoperative median survival of 6.8 and 3.7 years, respectively (p = 0.048). EI patients had a higher rate of local recurrence than EA patients (p = 0.001). Patient age, previous surgery, biopsy type, tumor size, spine level, and chemotherapy timing did not significantly influence recurrence and survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Osteosarcoma of the spine presents a significant challenge, and most patients die in spite of aggressive surgery. There is a significant decrease in recurrence and an increase in survival with en bloc resection (EA) when compared with intralesional resection (EI). The effect of adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapeutics, as well as method of biopsy, requires further exploration.