A Comparison of Limb Salvage Versus Amputation for Nonmetastatic Sarcomas Using Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Outcomes

Trends in functional outcome measures in orthopedic oncology

The purpose of this study was to identify trends in the use of functional outcome measures within orthopedic oncology. The search engine, PubMed, was reviewed for all articles over an 11-year period from 2011 to 2021 from five major journals that publish in the field of orthopedic oncology. The functional outcome measures used in the articles were recorded along with study date, study design, clinical topic/pathology, and level of evidence. Out of 5968 musculoskeletal tumor-focused articles reviewed, 293 (4.9%) included at least one outcome measure. A total of 28 different outcome tools were identified. The most popular were Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score (61.1%) and Toronto Extremity Salvage (TESS) score (14.0%), followed by 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) (4.1%) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) (3.8%). The use of MSTS scores decreased by 0.7% each year, whereas PROMIS increased by 1.2% each year. Seventy-four articles used more than one outcome measure. Of these 74 articles, 61 had the MSTS as one of the outcome measures. Orthopedic oncology utilizes functional outcome measures less commonly in comparison to other orthopedic subspecialties. However, this may be due in large part to orthopedic oncologists putting more emphasis on outcomes such as local recurrence, implant failure, and mortality. MSTS score is the most widely used functional outcome measure, but the utilization of PROMIS has increased recently, and could be the next step in evaluating outcomes in orthopedic oncology as it is patient-derived rather than physician-derived.

Determining functional outcomes after resection and reconstruction of primary soft tissue sarcoma in the lower extremity: A review of current subjective and objective measurement systems

The surgical management of soft-tissue sarcoma has evolved significantly over the last two decades due to the routine use of adjunct therapies, with an increased focus on postoperative functional outcome. The literature suffers from methodological inconsistency and use of low quality outcome measures to assess an already heterogeneous population. This article aims to review the most frequently used subjective and objective methods of functional outcome assessment and highlight the current benefits and limitations of these.

How much is a leg worth following radical tumor resection in bone sarcomas? Literature review

Bone sarcomas of the lower extremities are rare malignancies occurring mostly amongst adolescents and young adults. Necessarily, the therapy conducted in sarcoma centers is multimodal and multidisciplinary. In certain cases, in a metastasis free situation with adequate therapy, an overall survival rate of 90% can be achieved. Two principal surgical procedures exit for the local control of the malignancy: 1. Limb salvage with biological with/or endoprosthetic reconstruction; and, 2. amputation with restoration of the function with exoprosthesis or endo-exoprosthesis. Currently, limb salvage procedures are performed in up to 95% of cases. In contrast, amputation is performed when the disease has reached an advanced stage or limb salvage has failed. Both of the surgical options have their risks and possible complications. According to the literature, there should be no significant difference between limb salvage and amputation with respect to long-term overall survival, overall quality of life, psycho-socio-economic outcomes, or patient satisfaction. An important advantage of limb salvage is greater everyday functionality. With the expanded indication of limb salvage and great survival rates, the cases of late complications in patients expecting to maintain their own leg continues to increase. In some cases, it requires multiple interventions, ranging from minor up to the most complex revisions, to maintain the functionality of the extremity. Despite the great costs, personal effort, and the possible complications, limb salvage could be a suitable method to achieve functionally beneficial outcomes and patient satisfaction in bone sarcomas of the lower extremities over the long-term even in cases involving complications.

What Outcomes Are Most Important to Patients Following a Lower Extremity Limb-threatening Injury?

OBJECTIVE

To determine what outcomes are most important to patients after a limb-threatening injury, and if those preferences vary based on the patients' treatment (salvage vs amputation), health, demographics, or time since injury.

BACKGROUND

The preferences that motivate the patients' choice of treatment following a limb-threatening injury are poorly understood. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are a robust survey methodology to quantify preferences.

METHODS

Patients with a history of traumatic limb-threatening injury, January 2010 to December 2020, completed a survey with our DCE and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) questionnaire. The DCE attributes included recovery time, function, appearance, cost, and time in hospital. We used conditional logit modeling to estimate the relative importance of each attribute on a scale of 0% to 100%, determine willingness to pay for improvements in the included attributes, and assess variation in preferences based on patient characteristics, including PROMIS score.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients completed the survey (104 limb salvage, 46 amputation; mean age, 48±16 years; 79% male). Regaining preinjury function [relative importance=41%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 37%-45%] and minimizing costs (24%; 95% CI, 21%-28%) were of greatest importance. Changes in appearance were least important (7%; 95% CI, 5%-9%). The hierarchy of preferences did not vary between those who had limb salvage or amputation, but patient age, physical and mental health, and income were associated with preference variation.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with limb-threatening injuries most valued gains in function and reduced out-of-pocket costs.

Amputation for Extremity Sarcoma: Indications and Outcomes

Simple Summary

Sarcomas are malignant tumors of soft tissues or bone. While limb salvage surgery (LSS) is the standard treatment, amputation is an option especially in local recurrence (LR) or complications after LSS. Two groups with primary amputations (n = 120) or secondary amputations after failed LSS due to LR or complications (n = 29) were compared. Five-year LR-free survival was 84% and 17 (16%) patients developed LR, of which 16 were in group I and only one in group II. Overall survival (OS) at five years was 44%, and the rate was identical in both groups. In those group II patients who had a secondary amputation after LSS due to contaminated margins or LR (n = 12) five-year OS was 33% compared to 48% in patients with complications (n = 17). This study indicates the worse oncological outcomes with respect to OS of sarcoma patients needing an amputation as compared to LSS. Patients with primary amputation or those who had a secondary amputation after failed LSS for whatever reason showed the same results.

Abstract

Background: Sarcomas are rare, malignant tumors of soft tissues or bone. Limb salvage surgery (LSS) is the standard treatment, but amputation is still an option, especially in local recurrence or complications after LSS. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed indications and oncological outcomes in patients who underwent an amputation. Two groups with either primary amputations (n = 120) or with secondary amputations after failed LSS with local recurrence or complications (n = 29) were compared with the main end points of LRFS and OS. Results: Five-year LRFS was 84% with 17 (16%) patients developing local recurrence, of which 16 (13%) occurred in group I. Forty-two (28%) patients developed metastatic disease and overall survival at five years was 44%. Overall survival (OS) was the same in both groups. In those group II patients who had a secondary amputation due to LR or insufficient margins after LSS (n = 12) the five-year OS was 33% compared to 48% in patients with amputation due to complications (n = 17) (n.s.). Conclusions: This study indicates the worse oncological outcomes with respect to OS of sarcoma patients requiring an amputation as compared to LSS. Patients with primary amputation or those who had a secondary amputation after failed LSS for whatever reason showed the same oncological results.

PROMIS scores of patients undergoing neoadjuvant and adjuvant radiation therapy for surgically excised soft tissue sarcoma

•

First to evaluate PROMIS for patients undergoing radiotherapy and surgery for sarcoma.

•

Patients exhibited meaningful change in PROMIS scores throughout the treatment.

•

Analyses show PROMIS scores were similar between pre- and post-operative radiotherapy.

•

Wound complications were associated with increases in anxiety and decreases in function.

•

These data should be considered when selecting ideal therapy.

Introduction

Few recent studies have examined patient reported outcomes (PROs) during pre- or post-operative radiation therapy (RT) for soft tissue sarcoma (STS), and none have used PROMIS. This study aims to examine PROMIS scores across peri-operative time points for patients receiving pre- or post-operative RT.

Methods

Anxiety, depression, pain interference, and physical function PROMIS domains were collected at the pre-operative (1), immediate post-operative (2), and post-treatment completion (3) timepoints for patients undergoing surgery and either pre-operative or post-operative RT. Median scores were compared between groups using the Kruskal-Wallis test. The reliable change index was used to determine minimum important change in PROMIS scores and to compare scores between timepoints.

Results

95 patients were included (19 pre-operative, 76 post-operative). Both groups had significant decreases in function during treatment. Patients with wound complications were more likely to have significant increases in anxiety (36.4% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.020) and decreases in physical function (57.1% vs. 16.2%; p = 0.011) independent of RT timing.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates minimum significant change thresholds to detect PROMIS changes in STS patients undergoing pre- and post-operative radiotherapy. As expected, more patients with pre-operative RT than post-operative RT had wound complications (p = 0.06), but patients with complications in both groups had worse anxiety and function at the completion of treatment compared with those that did not. The association of wound complications with worse anxiety and physical function at completion of treatment should be considered when making individualized treatment recommendations regarding the timing of RT.

Socioeconomic factors associated with limb salvage versus amputation for adult extremity bone sarcomas in patients with insurance coverage

BACKGROUND

Limb salvage (LS) has become the preferred treatment for adult patients with bone sarcoma of the extremities. The decision to perform LS versus an amputation is often dictated by tumor characteristics, however there may be socioeconomic factors associated with LS. Previously this has been linked to insurance status, however currently there is a paucity of data examining socioeconomic factors in patients with medical insurance at the time of sarcoma diagnosis. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to examine socioeconomic factors which could be associated with the decision to perform LS versus amputation for adult bone sarcoma patients.

METHODS

Data from Optum Labs Data Warehouse, a national administrative claims database, was analyzed to identify patients with extremity bone sarcomas from 2006 to 2017. Bivariate regression was used to identify factors associated with LS versus amputation.

RESULTS

Of 1,390 (743 males, 647 female) patients, 252 (18%) under amputation while 1,138 (82%) underwent LS. Lower extremity tumors (OR 4.72, p < 0.001), income <$75,000 (OR 1.85, p = 0.03), being treated a public hospital (OR 1.41, p = 0.04) and a hospital with <200 beds (OR 1.90, p = 0.006) were associated with amputation. Income ≥$125,000 (OR 0.62, 0.04) were associated with LS.

CONCLUSION

In adult patients with medical insurance at the time of diagnosis, socioeconomic and hospital factors were associated with an amputation for bone sarcoma, with poorer patients, and those treated at smaller, and public hospitals more likely to undergo amputation.

Unravelling the heterogeneity of soft tissue and bone sarcoma patients' health-related quality of life: a systematic literature review with focus on tumour location

Patients with sarcoma experience many physical and psychological symptoms, adversely affecting their health-related quality of life (HRQoL). HRQoL assessment is challenging due to the diversity of the disease. This review aims to unravel the heterogeneity of HRQoL of patients with sarcoma with regard to tumour location and to summarise the used measures in research. English-language literature from four databases published between January 2000 and April 2019 was reviewed. Studies that described adult sarcoma HRQoL outcomes were included and classified according to primary sarcoma location. Eighty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria covering sarcoma of the extremities (n=35), pelvis and axial skeleton (n=9), pelvis and extremities (n=5), head and neck (n=4), retroperitoneum (n=2) and multiple sarcoma locations (n=33), respectively. Urogenital and thoracic sarcoma were lacking. Fifty-four different questionnaires were used, most often cancer-generic or generic HRQoL questionnaires. Patients with sarcoma reported lower HRQoL than the general population. Distinctive patterns of HRQoL outcomes according to tumour location regarding symptoms, physical functioning, disability and psychosocial well-being were identified. In metastatic sarcoma, mostly constitutional symptoms were present. To comprehensively assess HRQoL, a sarcoma-specific measurement strategy should be developed and used covering the heterogeneity of sarcoma including location-specific issues to improve personalised HRQoL assessment in future research and clinical practice.

The need for improved patient reported outcome measures in patients with extremity sarcoma: A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Extremity sarcoma causes impairments to functionality and quality of life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) assess patient perspectives relating to domains of health and quality of life.

METHODS

To describe PROMs utilised in extremity sarcoma, the available literature was screened for studies that utilised PROMs to evaluate outcomes in extremity sarcoma following surgery.

RESULTS

Seventy articles met eligibility criteria; six PROMs were identified. The Toronto Extremity Salvage Score, The Short-Form 36, The EORTC QLQ-C30, The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, the Reintegration to Normal Living index and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System. Most sarcoma patients score well in these tools, with bone sarcoma, and extent of resection being predictors of poor outcomes.

CONCLUSION

TESS is the only sarcoma-specific PROM, and though a valid assessment of functionality, it has difficulty differentiating patients with minor functional impairments. The absence of a disease-specific measure of health is concerning, as generic tools do not account for the unique experiences sarcoma patients face and may impair their accuracy in analysing intervention effectiveness.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Sarcoma: A scoping review

PURPOSE

Sarcoma is a heterogeneous group of tumours, usually affecting young patients and related to both endogenous and exogenous risk factors. The importance of obtaining the patient's perspective of the illness experience is imperative. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are the outcomes that come directly from the patient. They include symptoms, functional health, well-being, quality of life, psychological issues, among other indicators reported by the patients. The objective of this scoping review was to map the PROs in sarcoma patients and how they are measured.

METHODS

The review process was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist for scoping reviews.

RESULTS

The search identified 116 potentially relevant studies, with 27 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. The most common PRO evaluated in the selected studies were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), followed by functional outcome, aspects of mental health, and specific symptoms. Generic HRQoL questionnaires were widely used. Quantitative studies usually applied more than one type of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) to measure different PROs.

CONCLUSIONS

PROs should be carefully analysed to better understand the sarcoma patient's needs. The PROMs used in the selected studies about sarcoma were not specific to sarcoma, therefore, to better reflect on the perceptions of sarcoma patients, a different new and specific measurement strategy should be considered.

Intercalary Allograft Reconstruction of the Proximal Tibia With and Without a Free Fibula Flap in Pediatric Patients

BACKGROUND

Limb salvage of the proximal tibia can be difficult due to the growth potential of and functional demands of the pediatric patients. Multiple reconstruction techniques exist, however, the ideal form of reconstruction is yet to be elucidated. The purpose of the current study is to evaluate outcomes in patients with an intercalary resection of the proximal tibia reconstructed with an allograft with or without a free vascularized fibula flap (FVF).

METHODS

Seventeen pediatric patients (9 males, 8 females) underwent lower extremity limb salvage with the use of intercalary cadaveric allograft at a mean age of 12±4 years. The most common diagnoses were osteosarcoma (n=6) and Ewing sarcoma (n=6). Patients were reconstructed with an allograft alone (n=6) or supplemented with an FVF (n=11).

RESULTS

All surviving patients had at least 2 years of clinical follow-up, with the mean follow-up of 12±7 years. The mean time to union of the allograft was 11±4 months, with 6 patients requiring additional bone grafting. There was no difference in the need for an additional bone graft (odds ratio=1.14, P=1.0) between patients with an FVF and those without. Four patients underwent an amputation, all with an allograft alone, due to disease recurrence (n=2) and due to infection (n=2). As such, there was a higher 10-year overall limb-salvage rate when the allograft was combined with an FVF compared with an allograft alone (100% vs. 33%, P=0.001). At last follow-up, the mean Mankin and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society rating was 86%, with a higher mean score in patients reconstructed with an FVF (94% vs. 70%, P=0.002).

CONCLUSION

Use of an intercalary allograft supplemented with an FVF to reconstruct the proximal tibia provides a durable means of reconstruction with an excellent functional outcome following oncologic proximal tibia resection in a pediatric population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III-therapeutic level.

A multidisciplinary approach to soft-tissue sarcoma of the extremities

INTRODUCTION

Soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) denotes a group of rare and highly heterogeneous malignant tumors of mesenchymal origin. Accurate histological diagnosis is critical for selecting appropriate treatment. Complete tumor resection is the primary treatment for STS, and the efficacies of radiotherapy and chemotherapy have been tested in the adjuvant setting to improve oncological outcomes. Because most STS lesions arise in the extremities, preserving limb function and managing limb impairment after radical local treatment represent significant challenges.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the current front-line treatments for patients with extremity STS and discusses the multidisciplinary team-based efforts needed to improve oncological outcomes and survivorship.

EXPERT OPINION

Given the rarity, variety, and complexity of STS, a multidisciplinary approach involving experts in various disciplines is vital for improving outcomes in patients ranging from diagnosis to survivorship. A major challenge is building a sustainable system in each region permitting all patients with extremity STS to be treated at high-volume centers with multidisciplinary teams dedicated to this rare and complex disease.

Assessments used to measure participation in life activities in individuals with cancer: a scoping review

PURPOSE

Individuals with cancer are at high risk for restricted participation in meaningful life activities such as work, school, and social activities. Evaluating participation in life activities is identified as a critical component of rehabilitation referral and triage systems. This scoping review investigates what assessments are used to measure participation in life activities in individuals with cancer.

METHODS

Six databases were systematically searched using keywords and controlled vocabulary through February 2020. Eligible studies used the term participation in the context of life situations and had an assessment with at least 5 participation-specific questions.

RESULTS

A total of 4604 unique articles were identified and screened for eligibility. Thirty-two studies were included; 20 unique assessments of participation were identified. Assessments were developed with the primary purpose of measuring participation (n = 8); global or physical function (n = 9); community integration (n = 1); social activity (n = 1); or occupational gaps (n = 1). Most assessments (12/20) were not developed with the purpose of measuring participation and only 4 assessments measured key components of participation other than frequency.

CONCLUSION

Measuring participation in life activities is a developing area in oncology research. Most studies do not accurately or comprehensively measure this construct. The heterogeneity in assessments used indicates no clear consensus on a gold-standard participation measure for use among cancer survivors. Comprehensively measuring participation will help identify individuals in need of rehabilitation services and is an essential first step to inform the development of targeted interventions to enhance participation.

Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma: Role of Local Control

OPINION STATEMENT

For localized extremity soft tissue sarcoma (eSTS), treatment is individualized and each patient needs to be evaluated by a multidisciplinary team at a referral sarcoma center specialized in the care of sarcoma. For a majority of patients, treatment for eSTS involves limb-salvage surgery, with or without the addition of radiation therapy. Surgery should only be performed by surgeons specifically fellowship trained in the resection of eSTS. Surgery alone may be considered for small, low-grade, and superficial tumors as long a wide (≥ 2 cm) margin can be achieved. In cases where a less than wide negative margin can be achieved, radiation therapy should be utilized to facilitate a planned close margin resection to preserve critical structures (such as nerves, blood vessels, and bone) without a significant impact on oncologic outcomes. Soft tissue sarcomas are rare, and as such patients often present following an inadvertent excision. In these situations, we recommend preoperative radiation and wide tumor bed re-excision, as rates of residual tumor can be high in this scenario. While there is large amount of evidence to support the use of radiotherapy to enhance local tumor control, the evidence to support the use of chemotherapy to enhance local tumor control is lacking, and as such cannot be recommended for all patients.

Targeted muscle reinnervation in oncologic amputees: Early experience of a novel institutional protocol

BACKGROUND

We describe a multidisciplinary approach for comprehensive care of amputees with concurrent targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) at the time of amputation.

METHODS

Our TMR cohort was compared to a cross-sectional sample of unselected oncologic amputees not treated at our institution (N = 58). Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (NRS, PROMIS) were used to assess postamputation pain.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients underwent amputation with concurrent TMR during the study; 27 patients completed pain surveys; 15 had greater than 1 year follow-up (mean follow-up 14.7 months). Neuroma symptoms occurred significantly less frequently and with less intensity among the TMR cohort. Mean differences for PROMIS pain intensity, behavior, and interference for phantom limb pain (PLP) were 5.855 (95%CI 1.159-10.55; P = .015), 5.896 (95%CI 0.492-11.30; P = .033), and 7.435 (95%CI 1.797-13.07; P = .011) respectively, with lower scores for TMR cohort. For residual limb pain, PROMIS pain intensity, behavior, and interference mean differences were 5.477 (95%CI 0.528-10.42; P = .031), 6.195 (95%CI 0.705-11.69; P = .028), and 6.816 (95%CI 1.438-12.2; P = .014), respectively. Fifty-six percent took opioids before amputation compared to 22% at 1 year postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary care of amputees including concurrent amputation and TMR, multimodal postoperative pain management, amputee-centered rehabilitation, and peer support demonstrates reduced incidence and severity of neuroma and PLP.