4.6 Article

Factors associated with actual long-term survival following soft tissue sarcoma pulmonary metastasectomy

Journal

EJSO
Volume 35, Issue 4, Pages 356-361

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2008.01.004

Keywords

Sarcoma, soft tissue; Neoplasm metastasis; Pulmonary surgical procedures; Thoracic surgery; Disease-free survival; Survival analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims: To identify clinicopathologic and treatment variables associated with long-term overall survival (OS) in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) patients with lung metastases undergoing pulmonary metastasectomy (PM). Methods: Retrospective review of 94 STS PM patients with an actual follow-up >= 5 years. Data were collected on demographics, tumor features, treatment, and outcome. Results: Most primary tumors were intermediate/high grade and the common histopathologies were evenly distributed. Half of the primary tumors were located on the extremities. The mean disease-free interval (DFI) from time of original diagnosis until metastases was 25 months (median 15 months). Eighteen patients had synchronous metastatic disease. Bilateral pulmonary metastases and >1 metastasis were common. The median number of metastases resected was 2.5. Thirty-four patients had extrapulmonary tumor at the time of PM; all extrapulmonary disease was resected. Negative margin resection (RO) PM was performed in 74 patients. Actual 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and OS for all patients were 5% and 15%, respectively. For the RO group, actual 5-year DFS and OS were 7% and 18%, respectively. RO resection and it prolonged DFI were associated with improved OS. Patient characteristics, tumor features, local recurrence, and adjuvant therapy did not affect OS. Conclusions: Less than 20% of STS PM patients will survive 5 years. Complete resection and DF1 are the most predictive factors for prolonged survival. (C) 2008 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available