Dimosthenis Andreou1, Andreas Ranft2, Georg Gosheger1, Beate Timmermann3, Ruth Ladenstein4, Wolfgang Hartmann5, Sebastian Bauer6, Daniel Baumhoer7, Henk van den Berg8, P D Sander Dijkstra9, Hans Roland Dürr10, Hans Gelderblom11, Jendrik Hardes12, Lars Hjorth13, Justus Kreyer14, Jarmila Kruseova15, Andreas Leithner16, Sergiu Scobioala17, Arne Streitbürger12, Per-Ulf Tunn18, Eva Wardelmann5, Reinhard Windhager19, Heribert Jürgens20, Uta Dirksen2. 1. D. Andreou, G. Gosheger, Department of General Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, University Hospital Münster, Westfälische Wilhelms-University, Münster, Germany. 2. A. Ranft, U. Dirksen, Pediatrics III, Hematology/Oncology, West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany. 3. B. Timmermann, Clinic for Particle Therapy, West German Proton Therapy Center, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany. 4. R. Ladenstein, Department of Studies and Statistics on Integrated Research and Projects (S2IRP), Children's Cancer Research Institute, Vienna, Austria. 5. W. Hartmann, E. Wardelmann, Gerhard-Domagk-Institute for Pathology, University Hospital Münster, Westfälische Wilhelms-University, Münster, Germany. 6. S. Bauer, Department of Medical Oncology, Sarcoma Center, West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. 7. D. Baumhoer, Bone Tumor Reference Center, Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland. 8. H. van den Berg, Department of Pediatric Oncology, Emma Children's Hospital/Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 9. P. D. S. Dijkstra, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands. 10. H. R. Dürr, Orthopedic Oncology, Department of Orthopedics, Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Campus Grosshadern, Munich, Germany. 11. H. Gelderblom, Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands. 12. J. Hardes, A Streitbürger, Department of Tumor Orthopedics and Sarcoma Surgery, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany. 13. L. Hjorth, Department of Paediatrics, Skane University Hospital, Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 14. J. Kreyer, Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. 15. J. Kruseova, Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, 2nd Medical School, Charles University Prague, Prague, Czech Republic. 16. A. Leithner, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria. 17. S. Scobioala, Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Münster, Westfälische Wilhelms-University, Münster, Germany. 18. P-U. Tunn, Department of Orthopedic Oncology, HELIOS Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany. 19. R. Windhager, Department of Orthopedics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 20. H. Jürgens, Department of Paediatric Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital Münster, Westfälische Wilhelms-University, Münster, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Local treatment of pelvic Ewing's sarcoma may be challenging, and intergroup studies have focused on improving systemic treatments rather than prospectively evaluating aspects of local tumor control. The Euro-EWING99 trial provided a substantial number of patients with localized pelvic tumors treated with the same chemotherapy protocol. Because local control included surgical resection, radiation therapy, or a combination of both, we wanted to investigate local control and survival with respect to the local modality in this study cohort. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do patients with localized sacral tumors have a lower risk of local recurrence and higher survival compared with patients with localized tumors of the innominate bones? (2) Is the local treatment modality associated with local control and survival in patients with sacral and nonsacral tumors? (3) Which local tumor- and treatment-related factors, such as response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, institution where the biopsy was performed, and surgical complications, are associated with local recurrence and patient survival in nonsacral tumors? (4) Which factors, such as persistent extraosseous tumor growth after chemotherapy or extent of bony resection, are independently associated with overall survival in patients with bone tumors undergoing surgical treatment? METHODS: Between 1998 and 2009, 1411 patients with previously untreated, histologically confirmed Ewing's sarcoma were registered in the German Society for Pediatric Oncology and Hematology Ewing's sarcoma database and treated in the Euro-EWING99 trial. In all, 24% (339 of 1411) of these patients presented with a pelvic primary sarcoma, 47% (159 of 339) of which had macroscopic metastases at diagnosis and were excluded from this analysis. The data from the remaining 180 patients were reviewed retrospectively, based on follow-up data as of July 2016. The median (range) follow-up was 54 months (5 to 191) for all patients and 84 months (11 to 191) for surviving patients. The study endpoints were overall survival, local recurrence and event-free survival probability, which were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HRs) with their respective 95% CIs were estimated in a multivariate Cox regression model. RESULTS: Sacral tumors were associated with a reduced probability of local recurrence (12% [95% CI 1 to 22] versus 28% [95% CI 20 to 36] at 5 years, p = 0.032), a higher event-free survival probability (66% [95% CI 51 to 81] versus 50% [95% CI 41 to 58] at 5 years, p = 0.026) and a higher overall survival probability (72% [95% CI 57 to 87] versus 56% [95% CI 47 to 64] at 5 years, p = 0.025) compared with nonsacral tumors. With the numbers available, we found no differences between patients with sacral tumors who underwent definitive radiotherapy and those who underwent combined surgery and radiotherapy in terms of local recurrence (17% [95% CI 0 to 34] versus 0% [95% CI 0 to 20] at 5 years, p = 0.125) and overall survival probability (73% [95% CI 52 to 94] versus 78% [95% CI 56 to 99] at 5 years, p = 0.764). In nonsacral tumors, combined local treatment was associated with a lower local recurrence probability (14% [95% CI 5 to 23] versus 33% [95% CI 19 to 47] at 5 years, p = 0.015) and a higher overall survival probability (72% [95% CI 61 to 83] versus 47% [95% CI 33 to 62] at 5 years, p = 0.024) compared with surgery alone. Even in a subgroup of patients with wide surgical margins and a good histologic response to induction treatment, the combined local treatment was associated with a higher overall survival probability (87% [95% CI 74 to 100] versus 51% [95% CI 33 to 69] at 5 years, p = 0.009), compared with surgery alone.A poor histologic response to induction chemotherapy in nonsacral tumors (39% [95% CI 19 to 59] versus 64% [95% CI 52 to 76] at 5 years, p = 0.014) and the development of surgical complications after tumor resection (35% [95% CI 11 to 59] versus 68% [95% CI 58 to 78] at 5 years, p = 0.004) were associated with a lower overall survival probability in nonsacral tumors, while a tumor biopsy performed at the same institution where the tumor resection was performed was associated with lower local recurrence probability (14% [95% CI 4 to 24] versus 32% [95% CI 16 to 48] at 5 years, p = 0.035), respectively.In patients with bone tumors who underwent surgical treatment, we found that after controlling for tumor localization in the pelvis, tumor volume, and surgical margin status, patients who did not undergo complete (defined as a Type I/II resection for iliac bone tumors, a Type II/III resection for pubic bone and ischium tumors and a Type I/II/III resection for tumors involving the acetabulum, according to the Enneking classification) removal of the affected bone (HR 5.04 [95% CI 2.07 to 12.24]; p < 0.001), patients with a poor histologic response to induction chemotherapy (HR 3.72 [95% CI 1.51 to 9.21]; p = 0.004), and patients who did not receive additional radiotherapy (HR 4.34 [95% CI 1.71 to 11.05]; p = 0.002) had a higher risk of death. The analysis suggested that the same might be the case in patients with a persistent extraosseous tumor extension after induction chemotherapy (HR 4.61 [95% CI 1.03 to 20.67]; p = 0.046), although the wide CIs pointing at a possible sparse-data bias precluded any definitive conclusions. CONCLUSION: Patients with sacral Ewing's sarcoma appear to have a lower probability for local recurrence and a higher overall survival probability compared with patients with tumors of the innominate bones. Our results seem to support a recent recommendation of the Scandinavian Sarcoma Group to locally treat most sacral Ewing's sarcomas with definitive radiotherapy. Combined surgical resection and radiotherapy appear to be associated with a higher overall survival probability in nonsacral tumors compared with surgery alone, even in patients with a wide resection and a good histologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Complete removal of the involved bone, as defined above, in patients with nonsacral tumors may be associated with a decreased likelihood of local recurrence and improved overall survival. Persistent extraosseous tumor growth after induction treatment in patients with nonsacral bone tumors undergoing surgical treatment might be an important indicator of poorer overall survival probability, but the possibility of sparse-data bias in our cohort means that this factor should first be validated in future studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.
BACKGROUND: Local treatment of pelvic Ewing's sarcoma may be challenging, and intergroup studies have focused on improving systemic treatments rather than prospectively evaluating aspects of local tumor control. The Euro-EWING99 trial provided a substantial number of patients with localized pelvic tumors treated with the same chemotherapy protocol. Because local control included surgical resection, radiation therapy, or a combination of both, we wanted to investigate local control and survival with respect to the local modality in this study cohort. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do patients with localized sacral tumors have a lower risk of local recurrence and higher survival compared with patients with localized tumors of the innominate bones? (2) Is the local treatment modality associated with local control and survival in patients with sacral and nonsacral tumors? (3) Which local tumor- and treatment-related factors, such as response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, institution where the biopsy was performed, and surgical complications, are associated with local recurrence and patient survival in nonsacral tumors? (4) Which factors, such as persistent extraosseous tumor growth after chemotherapy or extent of bony resection, are independently associated with overall survival in patients with bone tumors undergoing surgical treatment? METHODS: Between 1998 and 2009, 1411 patients with previously untreated, histologically confirmed Ewing's sarcoma were registered in the German Society for Pediatric Oncology and Hematology Ewing's sarcoma database and treated in the Euro-EWING99 trial. In all, 24% (339 of 1411) of these patients presented with a pelvic primary sarcoma, 47% (159 of 339) of which had macroscopic metastases at diagnosis and were excluded from this analysis. The data from the remaining 180 patients were reviewed retrospectively, based on follow-up data as of July 2016. The median (range) follow-up was 54 months (5 to 191) for all patients and 84 months (11 to 191) for surviving patients. The study endpoints were overall survival, local recurrence and event-free survival probability, which were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HRs) with their respective 95% CIs were estimated in a multivariate Cox regression model. RESULTS: Sacral tumors were associated with a reduced probability of local recurrence (12% [95% CI 1 to 22] versus 28% [95% CI 20 to 36] at 5 years, p = 0.032), a higher event-free survival probability (66% [95% CI 51 to 81] versus 50% [95% CI 41 to 58] at 5 years, p = 0.026) and a higher overall survival probability (72% [95% CI 57 to 87] versus 56% [95% CI 47 to 64] at 5 years, p = 0.025) compared with nonsacral tumors. With the numbers available, we found no differences between patients with sacral tumors who underwent definitive radiotherapy and those who underwent combined surgery and radiotherapy in terms of local recurrence (17% [95% CI 0 to 34] versus 0% [95% CI 0 to 20] at 5 years, p = 0.125) and overall survival probability (73% [95% CI 52 to 94] versus 78% [95% CI 56 to 99] at 5 years, p = 0.764). In nonsacral tumors, combined local treatment was associated with a lower local recurrence probability (14% [95% CI 5 to 23] versus 33% [95% CI 19 to 47] at 5 years, p = 0.015) and a higher overall survival probability (72% [95% CI 61 to 83] versus 47% [95% CI 33 to 62] at 5 years, p = 0.024) compared with surgery alone. Even in a subgroup of patients with wide surgical margins and a good histologic response to induction treatment, the combined local treatment was associated with a higher overall survival probability (87% [95% CI 74 to 100] versus 51% [95% CI 33 to 69] at 5 years, p = 0.009), compared with surgery alone.A poor histologic response to induction chemotherapy in nonsacral tumors (39% [95% CI 19 to 59] versus 64% [95% CI 52 to 76] at 5 years, p = 0.014) and the development of surgical complications after tumor resection (35% [95% CI 11 to 59] versus 68% [95% CI 58 to 78] at 5 years, p = 0.004) were associated with a lower overall survival probability in nonsacral tumors, while a tumor biopsy performed at the same institution where the tumor resection was performed was associated with lower local recurrence probability (14% [95% CI 4 to 24] versus 32% [95% CI 16 to 48] at 5 years, p = 0.035), respectively.In patients with bone tumors who underwent surgical treatment, we found that after controlling for tumor localization in the pelvis, tumor volume, and surgical margin status, patients who did not undergo complete (defined as a Type I/II resection for iliac bone tumors, a Type II/III resection for pubic bone and ischium tumors and a Type I/II/III resection for tumors involving the acetabulum, according to the Enneking classification) removal of the affected bone (HR 5.04 [95% CI 2.07 to 12.24]; p < 0.001), patients with a poor histologic response to induction chemotherapy (HR 3.72 [95% CI 1.51 to 9.21]; p = 0.004), and patients who did not receive additional radiotherapy (HR 4.34 [95% CI 1.71 to 11.05]; p = 0.002) had a higher risk of death. The analysis suggested that the same might be the case in patients with a persistent extraosseous tumor extension after induction chemotherapy (HR 4.61 [95% CI 1.03 to 20.67]; p = 0.046), although the wide CIs pointing at a possible sparse-data bias precluded any definitive conclusions. CONCLUSION: Patients with sacral Ewing's sarcoma appear to have a lower probability for local recurrence and a higher overall survival probability compared with patients with tumors of the innominate bones. Our results seem to support a recent recommendation of the Scandinavian Sarcoma Group to locally treat most sacral Ewing's sarcomas with definitive radiotherapy. Combined surgical resection and radiotherapy appear to be associated with a higher overall survival probability in nonsacral tumors compared with surgery alone, even in patients with a wide resection and a good histologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Complete removal of the involved bone, as defined above, in patients with nonsacral tumors may be associated with a decreased likelihood of local recurrence and improved overall survival. Persistent extraosseous tumor growth after induction treatment in patients with nonsacral bone tumors undergoing surgical treatment might be an important indicator of poorer overall survival probability, but the possibility of sparse-data bias in our cohort means that this factor should first be validated in future studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.
Authors: M Paulussen; S Ahrens; J Dunst; W Winkelmann; G U Exner; R Kotz; G Amann; B Dockhorn-Dworniczak; D Harms; S Müller-Weihrich; K Welte; B Kornhuber; G Janka-Schaub; U Göbel; J Treuner; P A Voûte; A Zoubek; H Gadner; H Jürgens Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D Andreou; S S Bielack; D Carrle; M Kevric; R Kotz; W Winkelmann; G Jundt; M Werner; S Fehlberg; L Kager; T Kühne; S Lang; M Dominkus; G U Exner; J Hardes; A Hillmann; V Ewerbeck; U Heise; P Reichardt; P-U Tunn Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2010-10-28 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Mark Bernstein; Heinrich Kovar; Michael Paulussen; R Lor Randall; Andreas Schuck; Lisa A Teot; Herbert Juergens Journal: Oncologist Date: 2006-05
Authors: K Fizazi; N Dohollou; J Y Blay; S Guérin; A Le Cesne; F André; P Pouillart; T Tursz; B B Nguyen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1998-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Stéphanie Foulon; Bernadette Brennan; Nathalie Gaspar; Uta Dirksen; Lee Jeys; Anna Cassoni; Line Claude; Beatrice Seddon; Perrine Marec-Berard; Jeremy Whelan; Michael Paulussen; Arne Streitbuerger; Odile Oberlin; Heribert Juergens; Robert Grimer; Marie-Cécile Le Deley Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Daniel J Indelicato; Sameer R Keole; Amir H Shahlaee; Wenyin Shi; Christopher G Morris; C Parker Gibbs; Mark T Scarborough; Robert B Marcus Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-01-30 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: David Boyce-Fappiano; B Ashleigh Guadagnolo; Ravin Ratan; Wei-Lien Wang; Michael J Wagner; Shreyaskumar Patel; John A Livingston; Patrick P Lin; Kevin Diao; Devarati Mitra; Ahsan Farooqi; Alexander J Lazar; Christina L Roland; Andrew J Bishop Journal: Oncologist Date: 2020-12-14
Authors: Joaquim Soares do Brito; Miguel Esperança-Martins; André Abrunhosa-Branquinho; Cecilia Melo-Alvim; Raquel Lopes-Brás; João Janeiro; Dolores Lopez-Presa; Isabel Fernandes; José Portela; Luis Costa Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-05-22 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Martin F Orth; Tilman L B Hölting; Marlene Dallmayer; Fabienne S Wehweck; Tanja Paul; Julian Musa; Michaela C Baldauf; Didier Surdez; Olivier Delattre; Maximilian M L Knott; Laura Romero-Pérez; Merve Kasan; Florencia Cidre-Aranaz; Julia S Gerke; Shunya Ohmura; Jing Li; Aruna Marchetto; Anton G Henssen; Özlem Özen; Shintaro Sugita; Tadashi Hasegawa; Takayuki Kanaseki; Stefanie Bertram; Uta Dirksen; Wolfgang Hartmann; Thomas Kirchner; Thomas G P Grünewald Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Wiebke K Guder; Jendrik Hardes; Markus Nottrott; Anne Juliane Steffen; Uta Dirksen; Arne Streitbürger Journal: J Orthop Surg Res Date: 2020-11-16 Impact factor: 2.359