4.7 Article

Postoperative nomogram for survival of patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma treated with curative intent

Journal

ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages 397-402

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdp298

Keywords

postoperative nomogram; prognosis; retroperitoneal sarcoma; staging

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Current American Joint Committee on Cancer retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) staging is not representative of patients with RPS specifically and has limited discriminative power. Our objective was to develop a RPS disease-specific nomogram capable of stratifying patients based on probability of overall survival (OS) after resection. Patients and methods: In all, 1118 RPS patients were evaluated at our institution (1996-2006). Patients with resectable, nonmetastatic disease were selected (n = 343) and baseline, treatment and outcome variables were retrieved. A nomogram was created and its performance was evaluated by calculating its discrimination (concordance index) and calibration and by subsequent internal validation. Results: Median follow-up and OS were 50 and 59 months, respectively. Independent predictors of OS were included in the nomogram: age (>= 65), tumor size (>= 15 cm), type of presentation (primary versus recurrent), multifocality, completeness of resection and histology. The concordance index was 0.73 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.75] and the calibration was excellent, with all observed outcomes within the 95% CI of each predicted survival probability. Conclusions: A RPS-specific postoperative nomogram was developed. It improves RPS staging by allowing a more dynamic and robust disease-specific risk stratification. This prognostic tool can help in patient counseling and for selection of high-risk patients that may benefit from adjuvant therapies or inclusion into clinical trials.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available