3.8 Article

Local recurrence is correlated with decreased overall survival in patients with intermediate high-grade localized primary soft tissue sarcoma of extremity and abdominothoracic wall

期刊

ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 14, 期 2, 页码 E109-E115

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ajco.12807

关键词

local recurrence; overall survival; soft tissue sarcoma

类别

资金

  1. Zhejiang medical and health science and technology program [2017171226]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AimThe aim of this study was to determine the effect of local recurrence on overall survival in patients with intermediate high-grade localized primary soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of extremity and abdominothoracic wall. MethodsThis retrospective study identified 133 consecutive patients with intermediate high-grade localized primary STS of extremity and abdominothoracic wall from January 2000 to July 2010. Survival curves were constructed by the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test was used to assess statistical significance. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated based on multivariable Cox logistic regression method. ResultsThe 5-year cumulative incidence of local recurrence was 26.0% with a median follow-up of 68 months (range, 5-127 months). The univariate analysis showed that local recurrence was associated with decreased overall survival, with 5-year overall survival of 80.5% and 53.6% in the no local recurrence patients and local recurrence patients, respectively (P=0.001). The multivariate analysis demonstrated that local recurrence was a negative prognostic factor for overall survival (HR=2.115, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.036-4.319, P=0.040). Radiotherapy significantly reduced local recurrence compared with surgery alone (HR=0.387, 95% CI 0.180-0.877, P=0.019), while larger tumor size (HR=3.184, 95% CI 1.351-7.506 P=0.008) was correlated with higher rate of local recurrence. ConclusionLocal recurrence in patients with intermediate high-grade localized primary STS is associated with decreased overall survival.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据