Effect of radiotherapy on local recurrence, distant metastasis and overall survival in 1200 extremity soft tissue sarcoma patients: retrospective analysis using IPTW-adjusted models

Background and purposeNeoadjuvant (NRTX) and adjuvant radiotherapy (ARTX) reduce local recurrence (LR) risk in extremity soft tissue sarcoma (eSTS), yet their impact on distant metastasis (DM) and overall survival (OS) is less well defined. This study aimed at analysing the influence of NRTX/ARTX on all three endpoints using a retrospective, multicentre eSTS cohort.Materials and methods1200 patients (mean age: 60.7 ± 16.8 years; 44.4 % females) were retrospectively included, treated with limb sparing surgery and curative intent for localised, high grade (G2/3) eSTS. 194 (16.2 %), 790 (65.8 %), and 216 (18.0 %) patients had received NRTX, ARTX and no RTX, respectively. For the resulting three groups (no RTX vs. NRTX, no RTX vs. ARTX, NRTX vs. ARTX) Fine&Gray models for LR and DM, and Cox-regression models for OS were calculated, with IPTW-modelling adjusting for imbalances between groups.ResultsIn the IPTW-adjusted analysis, NRTX was associated with lower LR-risk in comparison to no RTX (SHR [subhazard ratio]: 0.236; p = 0.003), whilst no impact on DM-risk (p = 0.576) or OS (p = 1.000) was found. IPTW-weighted analysis for no RTX vs. ARTX revealed a significant positive association between ARTX and lower LR-risk (SHR: 0.479, p = 0.003), but again no impact on DM-risk (p = 0.363) or OS (p = 0.534). IPTW-weighted model for NRTX vs. ARTX showed significantly lower LR-risk for NRTX (SHR for ARTX: 3.433; p = 0.003) but no difference regarding DM-risk (p = 1.000) or OS (p = 0.639).ConclusionNRTX and ARTX are associated with lower LR-risk, but do not seem to affect DM-risk or OS. NRTX may be favoured over ARTX as our results indicate better local control rates.Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Rehabilitatio

Age-related differences of oncological outcomes in primary extremity soft tissue sarcoma: a multistate model including 6260 patients

Abstract Purpose: No studies extensively compared the young adults (YA, 18e39 years), middle-aged (40e69 year

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Surgery for metachronous metastasis of soft tissue sarcoma - A magnitude of benefit analysis using propensity score methods

Development and application of statistical models for medical scientific researc

Comparison of the 7th and 8th version of the AJCC classification system for soft tissue sarcomas of extremities and trunk in patients with localised, intermediate or high-grade disease treated at European tertiary sarcoma centres

Background: The updated 8th version of the AJCC-staging system for soft tissue sarcomas (STS) has been criticised for omitting tumour depth as category-defining variable and eventually not improving prognostic accuracy in comparison to the 7th version. This study aimed at investigating the prognostic accuracy of both AJCC-versions in STS-patients treated at European tertiary sarcoma centres.Methods: 1032 patients (mean age: 60.7 +/- 16.3 years; 46.0% [n = 475] females; median follow-up: 38.6 months), treated at five tertiary sarcoma centres for localised, intermediate or high-grade STS of extremities and trunk were retrospectively included. Uni- and multivariate Cox-regression models and Harrell's C-indices were calculated to analyse prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and assess prognostic accuracy.Results: In univariate analysis, prognostic accuracy for OS was comparable for both AJCC-versions (C-index: 0.620 [8th] vs. 0.614 [7th]). By adding margins, age, gender, and histology to the multivariate models, prognostic accuracy of both versions could be likewise improved (C-index: 0.714 [8th] vs. 0.705 [7th]). Moreover, tumour depth did not significantly contribute to prognostic accuracy of the 8th version's multivariate model (C-index for both models: 0.714). Stratification into four main T-stages based on tumour size only, as implemented in the 8th version, significantly improved prognostic accuracy between each category. However, T-stages as defined in the 7th version had poorer discriminatory power (C-index: 0.625 [8th] vs. 0.582 [7th]).Conclusion: Both AJCC-versions perform equally well regarding prognostic accuracy. Yet, simplification of the 8th version by omitting tumour depth as T-stage-defining parameter, whilst emphasizing the importance of tumour size, should be considered advantageous. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Rehabilitatio

Incidence, treatment and outcome of abdominal metastases in extremity soft tissue sarcoma: Results from a multi-centre study

Background and Objectives Abdominal metastases (AM) from soft tissue sarcoma (STS) are rare and prognosis is poor. The aims of the study were to (a) identify risk factors for the development of AM and to (b) investigate the outcome of AM-patients. Methods Seven-hundred-sixty-nine STS-patients with localised disease at diagnosis treated at three tumour centres (2000-2016) were retrospectively included (409 males; mean age, 55.6 years [range, 8-96 years]; median follow-up, 4.1 years [interquartile-range, 2.5-6.6 years]). Results Two-hundred-two patients (26.3%) developed secondary metastases, and 24 of them AM (3.1%). Ten patients developed first AM (FAM) after a mean of 2.4 years and 14 patients late AM (LAM, after being diagnosed with metastases to other sites) after a mean of 2.0 years. Patients with liposarcoma had a significantly higher risk of developing AM (P = .007), irrespective of grading. There was no difference in post-metastasis-survival (PMS) between patients with AM at any time point and those with metastases to other sites (P = .585). Patients with LAM or FAM showed no difference in post-abdominal-metastasis-survival (P = .884). Conclusions Survival in patients with AM is poor, irrespective of whether they develop secondarily to other metastases or not. Patients at high-risk of AM (ie, liposarcoma) may be followed-up regularly by abdominal-ultrasound/CT.Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Rehabilitatio

Incidence, treatment and outcome of abdominal metastases in extremity soft tissue sarcoma: Results from a multi‐centre study

Background and Objectives Abdominal metastases (AM) from soft tissue sarcoma (STS) are rare and prognosis is poor. The aims of the study were to (a) identify risk factors for the development of AM and to (b) investigate the outcome of AM-patients. Methods Seven-hundred-sixty-nine STS-patients with localised disease at diagnosis treated at three tumour centres (2000-2016) were retrospectively included (409 males; mean age, 55.6 years [range, 8-96 years]; median follow-up, 4.1 years [interquartile-range, 2.5-6.6 years]). Results Two-hundred-two patients (26.3%) developed secondary metastases, and 24 of them AM (3.1%). Ten patients developed first AM (FAM) after a mean of 2.4 years and 14 patients late AM (LAM, after being diagnosed with metastases to other sites) after a mean of 2.0 years. Patients with liposarcoma had a significantly higher risk of developing AM (P = .007), irrespective of grading. There was no difference in post-metastasis-survival (PMS) between patients with AM at any time point and those with metastases to other sites (P = .585). Patients with LAM or FAM showed no difference in post-abdominal-metastasis-survival (P = .884). Conclusions Survival in patients with AM is poor, irrespective of whether they develop secondarily to other metastases or not. Patients at high-risk of AM (ie, liposarcoma) may be followed-up regularly by abdominal-ultrasound/CT.Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Rehabilitatio