Literature DB >> 28943041

Overall survival after resection of retroperitoneal sarcoma at academic cancer centers versus community cancer centers: An analysis of the National Cancer Data Base.

Nicholas G Berger1, Jack P Silva1, Harveshp Mogal1, Callisia N Clarke1, Manpreet Bedi2, John Charlson3, Kathleen K Christians1, Susan Tsai1, T Clark Gamblin4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Operative resection remains the definitive curative therapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma. Data published recently show a correlation between improved outcomes for complex oncologic operations and treatment at academic centers. For large retroperitoneal sarcomas, operative resection can be complex and require multidisciplinary care. We hypothesized that survival rates vary between type of treating center for patients undergoing resection for retroperitoneal sarcoma.
METHODS: Patients with stage I to III nonmetastatic retroperitoneal sarcomas who underwent operative resection were identified from the National Cancer Database during the years 2004-2013. Treating centers were categorized as academic cancer centers or community cancer centers. Overall survival was analyzed by log-rank test and graphed using Kaplan-Meier method.
RESULTS: A total of 2,762 patients were identified. A majority of patients (59.4%, n = 1,642) underwent resection at an academic cancer centers. Median age at diagnosis was 63 years old. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy was more common at academic cancer centers, while adjuvant radiotherapy was more common at community cancer centers. Improved overall survival was seen at academic cancer centers across all stages compared with community cancer centers (P = .014) but, after multivariable Cox regression analysis, was not a significant independent predictor of survival (hazard ratio = 0.91, 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.04, P = .171). Academic cancer centers exhibited a greater rate of R0 resection (55.9% vs 47.0%, P < .001) and a lesser odds of positive margins (odds ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.99, P = .044) after multivariable logistic regression.
CONCLUSION: Resection for retroperitoneal sarcoma performed at academic cancer centers was an independent predictor of margin-negative resection but was not a statistically significant factor for survival. This observation suggests that site of care may contribute to some aspect of improved oncologic resection for retroperitoneal sarcoma.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28943041     DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2017.07.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   3.982


  13 in total

1.  Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: Prognostic Factors and Outcomes of a Series of Patients Treated at a Single Institution.

Authors:  Shraddha Patkar; Abhay K Kattepur; Rajesh Shinde; Mahesh Goel
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-01-15

2.  An Evaluation of the Eighth Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Staging System for Retroperitoneal Sarcomas Using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB): Does Size Matter?

Authors:  Sarah B Fisher; Yi-Ju Chiang; Barry W Feig; Janice N Cormier; Kelly K Hunt; Keila E Torres; Christina L Roland
Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 2.339

3.  Facility Type is Associated with Margin Status and Overall Survival of Patients with Resected Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Grace C Lee; T Clark Gamblin; Zhi Ven Fong; Cristina R Ferrone; Lipika Goyal; Keith D Lillemoe; Lawrence S Blaszkowsky; Kenneth K Tanabe; Motaz Qadan
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Recurrence patterns after resection of retroperitoneal sarcomas: An eight-institution study from the US Sarcoma Collaborative.

Authors:  Konstantinos Chouliaras; Rebecca Senehi; Cecilia G Ethun; George Poultsides; Thuy Tran; Valerie Grignol; Thomas Clark Gamblin; Kevin K Roggin; Jennifer Tseng; Ryan C Fields; Sharon M Weber; Gregory B Russell; Edward A Levine; Kenneth Cardona; Konstantinos Votanopoulos
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-06-27       Impact factor: 3.454

Review 5.  Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: a Current Review on Management.

Authors:  Shraddha Patkar; Abhay K Kattepur; Nehal Khanna; Jyoti Bajpai
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-02-21

Review 6.  Landmark Series: A Review of Landmark Studies in the Treatment of Primary Localized Retroperitoneal Sarcoma.

Authors:  Megan Delisle; David Gyorki; Sylvie Bonvalot; Carolyn Nessim
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-09-10       Impact factor: 4.339

7.  Different quality of treatment in retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) according to hospital-case volume and surgeon-case volume: a retrospective regional analysis in Italy.

Authors:  Sergio Sandrucci; Agostino Ponzetti; Claudio Gianotti; Baudolino Mussa; Patrizia Lista; Giovanni Grignani; Marinella Mistrangelo; Oscar Bertetto; Daniela Di Cuonzo; Giovannino Ciccone
Journal:  Clin Sarcoma Res       Date:  2018-02-28

8.  Report of the First Patient Treated for Pelvic Sarcoma With a Directional 103Pd Brachytherapy Device.

Authors:  Serguei A Castaneda; Marian Khalili; Jacqueline Emrich; Veronica M Zoghbi; Michael S Weingarten; Mark J Rivard; Wilbur B Bowne; Jaganmohan Poli
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-07-26

9.  Overcoming a travel burden to high-volume centers for treatment of retroperitoneal sarcomas is associated with improved survival.

Authors:  Robin Schmitz; Mohamed A Adam; Dan G Blazer
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 2.754

10.  Incidence, Treatment and Outcome of Patients with Retroperitoneal Soft-Tissue Sarcoma in Switzerland 2005-2015: A Population-Based Analysis.

Authors:  Johanna C F Willburger; Marco von Strauss; Caspar J Peterson; Tracy R Glass; Christoph Kettelhack
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2021-11-09       Impact factor: 3.352

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.