Xiujian Ma1, Guolu Meng2, Ke Wang1, Da Li1, Liang Wang1, Huan Li1, Junting Zhang1, Liwei Zhang1, Zhen Wu3. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Beijing, China. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Beijing, China. Electronic address: wz_ttyy@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report differences in clinical features and outcomes between intracranial mesenchymal chondrosarcoma (MCS) and conventional chondrosarcoma (CCS). METHODS: Clinical data of patients with primary intracranial MCS and CCS were retrospectively extracted and analyzed to compare differences between MCS and CCS. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients with intracranial chondrosarcoma (61 cases with MCS and 13 cases with CCS) were included. Compared with patients with CCS, patients with MCS presented at a younger mean age (21.1 years vs. 34.5 years, P < 0.001) and had a poor mean preoperative Karnofsky performance scale score (64.6 vs. 77.8, P = 0.014). Compared with CCS, MCS was less often located in the skull base (38.5% vs. 96.7%, P < 0.001) and had a larger tumor volume (87.8 cm3 vs. 26.7 cm3, P < 0.001). Rates of gross total resection in MCS and CCS subgroups were 41.1% (n = 25) and 46.2% (n = 6), respectively; rates of adjuvant radiotherapy postoperatively were 44.2% (n = 27) and 46.2% (n = 6), respectively. After mean follow-up of 41.7 months, 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year overall survival and progression-free survival of MCS were significantly shorter than overall survival and progression-free survival of CCS. Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor pathology and extent of surgery were independent predictors for tumor recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical features of MCS are quite different from CCS. Treatment strategies used for CCS do not yield satisfactory outcomes for MCS. Treatment of MCS should be aggressive and individualized.
OBJECTIVE: To report differences in clinical features and outcomes between intracranial mesenchymal chondrosarcoma (MCS) and conventional chondrosarcoma (CCS). METHODS: Clinical data of patients with primary intracranial MCS and CCS were retrospectively extracted and analyzed to compare differences between MCS and CCS. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients with intracranial chondrosarcoma (61 cases with MCS and 13 cases with CCS) were included. Compared with patients with CCS, patients with MCS presented at a younger mean age (21.1 years vs. 34.5 years, P < 0.001) and had a poor mean preoperative Karnofsky performance scale score (64.6 vs. 77.8, P = 0.014). Compared with CCS, MCS was less often located in the skull base (38.5% vs. 96.7%, P < 0.001) and had a larger tumor volume (87.8 cm3 vs. 26.7 cm3, P < 0.001). Rates of gross total resection in MCS and CCS subgroups were 41.1% (n = 25) and 46.2% (n = 6), respectively; rates of adjuvant radiotherapy postoperatively were 44.2% (n = 27) and 46.2% (n = 6), respectively. After mean follow-up of 41.7 months, 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year overall survival and progression-free survival of MCS were significantly shorter than overall survival and progression-free survival of CCS. Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor pathology and extent of surgery were independent predictors for tumor recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical features of MCS are quite different from CCS. Treatment strategies used for CCS do not yield satisfactory outcomes for MCS. Treatment of MCS should be aggressive and individualized.
Authors: Hirotaka Hasegawa; Kunal Vakharia; Christopher S Graffeo; Matthew L Carlson; Bruce E Pollock; Paul D Brown; Avital Perry; Jamie J Van Gompel; Colin L W Driscoll; Michael J Link Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2021-04-27 Impact factor: 4.130