4.3 Review

Prognostic factors for survival in patients with high-grade osteosarcoma using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program database

Journal

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 39, Issue 4, Pages 593-599

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2015.05.001

Keywords

Bone neoplasms/mortality; Sarcoma, Osteosarcoma/mortality; SEER Program; Survival analysis; Risk factors

Funding

  1. NIH HHS [DP2 OD007483] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The current study aims to determine cause-specific survival in patients with high-grade osteosarcoma while reporting risk factors for decreased survival out to 10 years. Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program database was used to identify all patients diagnosed with high-grade osteosarcoma from 1991 to 2010. Patient, tumor, and county-level socioeconomic measures were analyzed to determine prognostic factors for survival. Results: Cause-specific 10-year survival for patients with local/regional disease at the time of diagnosis was 65.8%, compared to 24.0% for patients with metastatic disease. Multivariate analysis revealed metastatic disease at presentation, age >= 60 years, male sex, axial location, and size >= 10 cm as independent risk factors for decreased cause-specific survival at 10 years. Patients with the lowest socioeconomic status had a disproportionate frequency of metastatic disease and large tumors at presentation as compared to more affluent patients. Conclusions: Patients with high-grade osteosarcoma have decreased cause-specific survival at 10 years when metastatic at diagnosis, patient age >= 60 years, male sex, axial tumor location, and tumors measuring >= 10 cm. Patients living in low socioeconomic counties present more frequently with metastatic disease and large tumors. Public health efforts should focus on identifying patients with osteosarcoma prior to metastasis. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available