Chemotherapy and Survival in Patients with Primary High-Grade Extremity and Trunk Soft Tissue Sarcoma

A clinical tool to predict overall survival of elderly patients with soft tissue sarcoma after surgical resection

With the aging world population, the incidence of soft tissue sarcoma (STS) in the elderly gradually increases and the prognosis is poor. The primary goal of this research was to analyze the relevant risk factors affecting the postoperative overall survival in elderly STS patients and to provide some guidance and assistance in clinical treatment. The study included 2,353 elderly STS patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. To find independent predictive variables, we employed the Cox proportional risk regression model. R software was used to develop and validate the nomogram model to predict postoperative overall survival. The performance and practical value of the nomogram were evaluated using calibration curves, the area under the curve, and decision curve analysis. Age, tumor primary site, disease stage, tumor size, tumor grade, N stage, and marital status, are the risk variables of postoperative overall survival, and the prognostic model was constructed on this basis. In the two sets, both calibration curves and receiver operating characteristic curves showed that the nomogram had high predictive accuracy and discriminative power, while decision curve analysis demonstrated that the model had good clinical usefulness. A predictive nomogram was designed and tested to evaluate postoperative overall survival in elderly STS patients. The nomogram allows clinical practitioners to more accurately evaluate the prognosis of individual patients, facilitates the progress of individualized treatment, and provides clinical guidance.

Progressive Improvement in 5-Year Survival Rates for Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcomas from 1999 to 2019

Background

Extremity soft-tissue sarcoma (ESTS) is a group of rare, heterogeneous malignancies. Previous studies have demonstrated a progressive improvement in 5-year survival rate over time, but recent trends are unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to provide an update on the clinical characteristics and 5-year survival rate of ESTS from 1999 to 2019.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Overall, 5,654 patients over the age of 15 years with primary ESTS diagnosed between 1999 and 2019 were included. Data on patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and survival were extracted. Patients were grouped by year of diagnosis: 1999-2005, 2006-2012, and 2013-2019. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed.

Results

ESTS occurred primarily in the lower extremity (76.1%) and was frequently grade III (58.3%), >5 cm in size (69.9%), and without metastasis (77.9%) at diagnosis. Furthermore, there was a significant increase in the proportion of patients over age 60 (p < 0.001) and without metastasis (p < 0.001) over the study period. The 5-year survival rate successively improved, from 47% in 1999-2005, to 61% in 2006-2012, to 78% in 2013-2019. Similarly, in multivariate analysis, the mortality rate progressively declined from a hazard ratio (HR) of 3.4 in 1999-2005 to an HR of 2.1 in 2006-2012, with the 2013-2019 group having the best overall survival (p < 0.001). Age, tumor size, grade, and metastasis were negative prognostic factors for survival; radiation and surgery were positive prognostic factors.

Conclusions

The 5-year overall survival rate for ESTS progressively improved over the 20-year study period, perhaps due to an increasing proportion of older patients diagnosed with local disease. These findings may also be related to earlier detection or more effective treatment over the study period.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients undergoing neoadjuvant radiation for trunk and extremity soft tissue sarcoma

INTRODUCTION

Many patients with high-risk soft tissue sarcoma (STS) develop distant metastases. Meta-analyses suggest that chemotherapy confers a small survival benefit, though few studies focus on neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT). There has been more frequent use of neoadjuvant radiation therapy (NRT) in STS, but the utility of NCT for these patients remains unclear.

METHODS

Patients with stage II-III trunk/extremity STS who underwent NRT and resection were identified using the National Cancer Database (2006-2019). Predictors of NCT were analyzed using logistic regression. Change in rate of NCT use over time was assessed using log-linear regression modeling. Survival was examined using Kaplan-Meier (KM) and Cox proportional hazard modeling.

RESULTS

Of 5740 patients, 25% underwent NCT. The overall median age was 62, 55% of patients were male, and 67% had stage III disease. The most common histological subtypes were fibrosarcoma/myxofibrosarcoma (39%) and liposarcoma (16%). Use of NCT decreased by 4.0% per year throughout the study period (p < 0.01). Predictors of NCT included younger age (median 54, IQR 42-64 vs. median 65, IQR 53-75, p < 0.01), treatment at an academic center (odds ratio [OR] 1.5, p < 0.01), and stage III disease (OR 2.2, p < 0.01). Histologic predictors of NCT included synovial sarcoma (52%) and angiosarcoma (45%). With a median follow-up time of 77 months, NCT was associated with improved 5-year survival compared to NRT alone on KM analysis (70% vs. 63%, p < 0.01). This difference persisted on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio 0.86, p = 0.027) and after propensity matching (70% vs. 65%, p = 0.0064).

CONCLUSION

Despite risk of distant failure in high-risk STS, use of NCT has decreased over time in patients receiving NRT. In this retrospective analysis, NCT was associated with a modestly improved overall survival.

Is the Number of National Database Research Studies in Musculoskeletal Sarcoma Increasing, and Are These Studies Reliable?

BACKGROUND

Large national databases have become a common source of information on patterns of cancer care in the United States, particularly for low-incidence diseases such as sarcoma. Although aggregating information from many hospitals can achieve statistical power, this may come at a cost when complex variables must be abstracted from the medical record. There is a current lack of understanding of the frequency of use of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and the National Cancer Database (NCDB) over the last two decades in musculoskeletal sarcoma research and whether their use tends to produce papers with conflicting findings.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Is the number of published studies using the SEER and NCDB databases in musculoskeletal sarcoma research increasing over time? (2) What are the author, journal, and content characteristics of these studies? (3) Do studies using the SEER and the NCDB databases for similar diagnoses and study questions report concordant or discordant key findings? (4) Are the administrative data reported by our institution to the SEER and the NCDB databases concordant with the data in our longitudinally maintained, physician-run orthopaedic oncology dataset?

METHODS

To answer our first three questions, PubMed was searched from 2001 through 2020 for all studies using the SEER or the NCDB databases to evaluate sarcoma. Studies were excluded from the review if they did not use these databases or studied anatomic locations other than the extremities, nonretroperitoneal pelvis, trunk, chest wall, or spine. To answer our first question, the number of SEER and NCDB studies were counted by year. The publication rate over the 20-year span was assessed with simple linear regression modeling. The difference in the mean number of studies between 5-year intervals (2001-2005, 2006-2010, 2011-2015, 2016-2020) was also assessed with Student t-tests. To answer our second question, we recorded and summarized descriptive data regarding author, journal, and content for these studies. To answer our third question, we grouped all studies by diagnosis, and then identified studies that shared the same diagnosis and a similar major study question with at least one other study. We then categorized study questions (and their associated studies) as having concordant findings, discordant findings, or mixed findings. Proportions of studies with concordant, discordant, or mixed findings were compared. To answer our fourth question, a coding audit was performed assessing the concordance of nationally reported administrative data from our institution with data from our longitudinally maintained, physician-run orthopaedic oncology dataset in a series of patients during the past 3 years. Our orthopaedic oncology dataset is maintained on a weekly basis by the senior author who manually records data directly from the medical record and sarcoma tumor board consensus notes; this dataset served as the gold standard for data comparison. We compared date of birth, surgery date, margin status, tumor size, clinical stage, and adjuvant treatment.

RESULTS

The number of musculoskeletal sarcoma studies using the SEER and the NCDB databases has steadily increased over time in a linear regression model (β = 2.51; p < 0.001). The mean number of studies per year more than tripled during 2016-2020 compared with 2011-2015 (39 versus 13 studies; mean difference 26 ± 11; p = 0.03). Of the 299 studies in total, 56% (168 of 299) have been published since 2018. Nineteen institutions published more than five studies, and the most studies from one institution was 13. Orthopaedic surgeons authored 35% (104 of 299) of studies, and medical oncology journals published 44% (130 of 299). Of the 94 studies (31% of total [94 of 299]) that shared a major study question with at least one other study, 35% (33 of 94) reported discordant key findings, 29% (27 of 94) reported mixed key findings, and 44% (41 of 94) reported concordant key findings. Both concordant and discordant groups included papers on prognostic factors, demographic factors, and treatment strategies. When we compared nationally reported administrative data from our institution with our orthopaedic oncology dataset, we found clinically important discrepancies in adjuvant treatment (19% [15 of 77]), tumor size (21% [16 of 77]), surgery date (23% [18 of 77]), surgical margins (38% [29 of 77]), and clinical stage (77% [59 of 77]).

CONCLUSION

Appropriate use of databases in musculoskeletal cancer research is essential to promote clear interpretation of findings, as almost two-thirds of studies we evaluated that asked similar study questions produced discordant or mixed key findings. Readers should be mindful of the differences in what each database seeks to convey because asking the same questions of different databases may result in different answers depending on what information each database captures. Likewise, differences in how studies determine which patients to include or exclude, how they handle missing data, and what they choose to emphasize may result in different messages getting drawn from large-database studies. Still, given the rarity and heterogeneity of sarcomas, these databases remain particularly useful in musculoskeletal cancer research for nationwide incidence estimations, risk factor/prognostic factor assessment, patient demographic and hospital-level variable assessment, patterns of care over time, and hypothesis generation for future prospective studies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Re-excision After Unplanned Excision of Soft Tissue Sarcoma is Associated with High Morbidity and Limited Pathologic Identification of Residual Disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with unplanned excision (UPE) of trunk and extremity soft tissue sarcoma (STS) present a significant management challenge for sarcoma specialists. Oncologic re-resection has been considered standard practice after UPE with positive or uncertain margins. A strategy of active surveillance or "watch and wait" has been suggested as a safe alternative to routine re-excision. In this context, the current study sought to evaluate short-term outcomes and morbidity after re-resection to better understand the risks and benefits of this treatment strategy.

METHODS

A retrospective, single-institution study reviewed patients undergoing oncologic re-resection after UPE of an STS during a 5-year period (2015-2020), excluding those with evidence of gross residual disease. Short-term clinical outcomes were evaluated together with final pathologic findings.

RESULTS

The review identified 67 patients undergoing re-resection after UPE of an STS. Of these 67 patients, 45 (67%) were treated with a combination of external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and surgery. Plastic surgery was involved for reconstruction in 49 cases (73%). The rate of wound complications after re-resection was 45 % (n = 30), with 15 % (n = 10) of the patients experiencing a major wound complication. Radiation therapy and plastic surgery involvement were independently associated with wound complications. Notably, 45 patients (67%) had no evidence of residual disease in the re-resection specimen, whereas 13 patients (19 %) had microscopic disease, and 9 patients (13%) had indeterminate pathology.

CONCLUSION

Given the morbidity of re-resection and limited identification of residual disease, treatment plans and discussions with patients should outline the expected pathologic findings and morbidity of surgery.

Prediction tools for the personalized management of soft-tissue sarcomas of the extremity

Prediction tools are instruments which are commonly used to estimate the prognosis in oncology and facilitate clinical decision-making in a more personalized manner. Their popularity is shown by the increasing numbers of prediction tools, which have been described in the medical literature. Many of these tools have been shown to be useful in the field of soft-tissue sarcoma of the extremities (eSTS). In this annotation, we aim to provide an overview of the available prediction tools for eSTS, provide an approach for clinicians to evaluate the performance and usefulness of the available tools for their own patients, and discuss their possible applications in the management of patients with an eSTS.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(9):1011-1016.

The role of perioperative chemotherapy in primary high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma: a risk-stratified analysis using PERSARC

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to assess the effect of perioperative chemotherapy (CTX) in patients with grade II-III extremity soft tissue sarcoma (eSTS) on overall survival (OS) and evaluate whether the PERSARC prediction tool could identify patients with eSTS more likely to benefit from CTX.

METHODS

Patients (18-70 years) with primary high-grade eSTS surgically treated with curative intent were included in the retrospective cohort study. The effect of any perioperative CTX and anthracycline + ifosfamide (AI)-based CTX on OS was investigated in three PERSARC-risk groups (high/intermediate/low). The PERSARC-risk groups were defined by the 33% and 66% quantile of the predicted 5-year OS of the study population equal to a 5-year OS of 65.8% and 79.8%, respectively. The effect of CTX on OS was investigated with weighted Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox models with an interaction between risk group and CTX.

RESULTS

This study included 5683 patients. The weighted Kaplan-Meier curves did not demonstrate a beneficial effect of any CTX and AI-based CTX on OS in the overall population. However, in the high PERSARC-risk group the 5-year OS of AI-based CTX was significantly better than no CTX (69.8% vs 59.0%, respectively, p = 0.004) (HR 0.66, 95%CI 0.53-0.83).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated a beneficial effect of AI-based CTX on OS in a selected group of high-risk patients with an absolute survival benefit of 11% as stratified by the PERSARC prediction tool. However, no beneficial effect of CTX on OS was found in the overall population of patients with primary high-grade eSTS younger than 70 years.

Comparison of Different Systemic Therapeutic Regimes in Resectable Soft-Tissue Sarcoma-Results of a Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The standard treatment of high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma consists of surgical resection followed by risk-adapted radiation therapy. Further treatment options that may improve local and systemic tumor control, including chemotherapy, are not well established. Due to the heterogeneity of the disease, different systemic approaches as well as their application at different time points have been attempted.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search for randomized clinical trials in the treatment of localized, resectable high-risk adult soft-tissue sarcoma comparing different treatment modalities according to the PRISMA guidelines. We extracted published hazard ratios and number of events for the endpoints overall and disease-free survival (OS; DFS) as well as local and distant recurrence-free interval (LRFI; DRFI). The different modalities were compared in a network meta-analysis against the defined standard treatment surgery ± radiotherapy using the inverse-variance heterogeneity model.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 25 trials including 3453 patients. Five different treatment modalities were compared in the network meta-analysis. The addition of adjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved OS compared to surgery ± radiotherapy alone (HR = 0.86; CI-95%: 0.75-0.97; p = 0.017). Likewise, neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with regional hyperthermia (naCTx + HTx) also led to superior OS (HR = 0.45; CI-95%: 0.20-1.00; p = 0.049). Both neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (naCTx) and perioperative chemotherapy (periCTx) did not improve OS (HR = 0.61; CI-95%: 0.29-1.29; p = 0.195 and HR = 0.66; CI-95%: 0.30-1.48; p = 0.317, respectively). Histology-tailored chemotherapy (htCTx) also did not improve survival compared to surgery ± radiotherapy (HR = 1.08; CI-95%: 0.45-2.61; p = 0.868). The network analysis of DFS, LRFI, and DRFI revealed a similar pattern between the different treatment regimens. Adjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved DFS, LRFI, and DRFI compared to surgery ± radiotherapy. In direct comparison, this advantage of adjuvant chemotherapy was restricted to male patients (HR = 0.78; CI-95%: 0.65-0.92; p = 0.004) with no effect for female patients (HR = 1.08; CI-95%: 0.90-1.29; p = 0.410).

CONCLUSIONS

Standardized chemotherapy in high-risk soft-tissue sarcoma appears to be of added value irrespective of timing. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy seems to be restricted to male patients. The addition of regional hyperthermia to neodjuvant chemotherapy achieved the best effect sizes and might warrant further investigation.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk soft tissue sarcomas: A Sarculator-based risk stratification analysis of the ISG-STS 1001 randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) is not completely understood. This study investigated the benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to prognostic stratification based on the Sarculator nomogram for STS.

METHODS

This study analyzed data from ISG-STS 1001, a randomized study that tested 3 cycles of neoadjuvant anthracycline plus ifosfamide (AI) or histology-tailored (HT) chemotherapy in adult patients with STS. The 10-year predicted overall survival (pr-OS) was estimated with the Sarculator and was stratified into higher (10-year pr-OS < 60%) and lower risk subgroups (10-year pr-OS ≥ 60%).

RESULTS

The median pr-OS was 0.63 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.51-0.72) for the entire study population, 0.62 (IQR, 0.51-0.70) for the AI arm, and 0.64 (IQR, 0.51-0.73) for the HT arm. Three- and 5-year overall survival (OS) were 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-0.93) and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71-0.86) in lower risk patients and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.70-0.85) and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.51-0.72) in the higher risk patients (log-rank test, P = .004). In higher risk patients, the 3- and 5-year Sarculator-predicted and study-observed OS rates were 0.68 and 0.58, respectively, and 0.85 and 0.66, respectively, in the AI arm (P = .04); the corresponding figures in the HT arm were 0.69 and 0.60, respectively, and 0.69 and 0.55, respectively (P > .99). In lower risk patients, the 3- and 5-year Sarculator-predicted and study-observed OS rates were 0.85 and 0.80, respectively, and 0.89 and 0.82, respectively, in the AI arm (P = .507); the corresponding figures in the HT arm were 0.87 and 0.81, respectively, and 0.86 and 0.74, respectively (P = .105).

CONCLUSIONS

High-risk patients treated with AI performed better than predicted, and this adds to the evidence for the efficacy of neoadjuvant AI in STS.

LAY SUMMARY

People affected by soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities and trunk wall are at some risk of developing metastasis after surgery. Preoperative or postoperative chemotherapy has been tested in clinical trials to reduce the chances of distant metastasis. However, study findings have not been conclusive. This study stratified the risk of metastasis for people affected by sarcomas who were included in a clinical trial testing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Exploiting the prognostic nomogram Sarculator, it found a benefit for chemotherapy when the predicted risk, based on patient and tumor characteristics, was high.