Shutao Zhao1, Yixuan Zhao1, Shuang Liu1, Chao Zhang1, Xudong Wang2. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Nutrition and Hernia Surgery, The Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130000, China. 2. Department of Gastrointestinal Nutrition and Hernia Surgery, The Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130000, China. wangxud@jlu.edu.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess conditional survival (CS) after resection of primary retroperitoneal tumors (RPTs). METHODS: The data of 1594 patients with primary RPTs who underwent surgery between 2004 and 2016 were retrieved from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Multivariate Cox analysis was used to identify prognostic factors affecting overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). CS was used to calculate the probability of survival for an additional 3 years after the patient had survived x years, according to the formulas: COS3 = OS (x + 3) /OS (x) and CCSS3 = CSS (x + 3)/CSS (x). RESULTS: The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates of all patients were 89.8, 71.8, and 60.8%, while the 1-, 3-, and 5-year CSS rates were 91.9, 77.1, and 67.8%, respectively. Age, sex, FNCLCC grade, size, multifocality, histology, and chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for OS and CSS. Among patients who survived for 1, 3, and 5 years, the COS3 rates were 72.9, 77.9, and 79.3%, and the CCSS3 rates were 78.1, 82.7, and 85.8%, respectively. Patients with poor clinicopathological characteristics achieved greater improvements in COS3 and CCSS3 rates, and the survival gaps between OS and COS3, as well as CSS and CCSS3 were more obvious. CONCLUSION: Postoperative CS of RPTs was dynamic and increased over time. CS increased more significantly in patients with poor clinicopathological characteristics.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess conditional survival (CS) after resection of primary retroperitoneal tumors (RPTs). METHODS: The data of 1594 patients with primary RPTs who underwent surgery between 2004 and 2016 were retrieved from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Multivariate Cox analysis was used to identify prognostic factors affecting overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). CS was used to calculate the probability of survival for an additional 3 years after the patient had survived x years, according to the formulas: COS3 = OS (x + 3) /OS (x) and CCSS3 = CSS (x + 3)/CSS (x). RESULTS: The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates of all patients were 89.8, 71.8, and 60.8%, while the 1-, 3-, and 5-year CSS rates were 91.9, 77.1, and 67.8%, respectively. Age, sex, FNCLCC grade, size, multifocality, histology, and chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for OS and CSS. Among patients who survived for 1, 3, and 5 years, the COS3 rates were 72.9, 77.9, and 79.3%, and the CCSS3 rates were 78.1, 82.7, and 85.8%, respectively. Patients with poor clinicopathological characteristics achieved greater improvements in COS3 and CCSS3 rates, and the survival gaps between OS and COS3, as well as CSS and CCSS3 were more obvious. CONCLUSION: Postoperative CS of RPTs was dynamic and increased over time. CS increased more significantly in patients with poor clinicopathological characteristics.
Authors: P G Casali; N Abecassis; H T Aro; S Bauer; R Biagini; S Bielack; S Bonvalot; I Boukovinas; J V M G Bovee; T Brodowicz; J M Broto; A Buonadonna; E De Álava; A P Dei Tos; X G Del Muro; P Dileo; M Eriksson; A Fedenko; V Ferraresi; A Ferrari; S Ferrari; A M Frezza; S Gasperoni; H Gelderblom; T Gil; G Grignani; A Gronchi; R L Haas; B Hassan; P Hohenberger; R Issels; H Joensuu; R L Jones; I Judson; P Jutte; S Kaal; B Kasper; K Kopeckova; D A Krákorová; A Le Cesne; I Lugowska; O Merimsky; M Montemurro; M A Pantaleo; R Piana; P Picci; S Piperno-Neumann; A L Pousa; P Reichardt; M H Robinson; P Rutkowski; A A Safwat; P Schöffski; S Sleijfer; S Stacchiotti; K Sundby Hall; M Unk; F Van Coevorden; W T A van der Graaf; J Whelan; E Wardelmann; O Zaikova; J Y Blay Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Myles J F Smith; Paul F Ridgway; Charles N Catton; Amanda J Cannell; Brian O'Sullivan; Lynn A Mikula; Julia J Jones; Carol J Swallow Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2014-01-07 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Johan L Dikken; Raymond E Baser; Mithat Gonen; Michael W Kattan; Manish A Shah; Marcel Verheij; Cornelis J H van de Velde; Murray F Brennan; Daniel G Coit Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2012-11-10 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Alessandro Cucchetti; Fabio Piscaglia; Matteo Cescon; Giorgio Ercolani; Eleonora Terzi; Luigi Bolondi; Matteo Zanello; Antonio D Pinna Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-06-27 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: M Toulmonde; S Bonvalot; I Ray-Coquard; E Stoeckle; O Riou; N Isambert; E Bompas; N Penel; C Delcambre-Lair; E Saada; A Lecesne; C Le Péchoux; J Y Blay; S Piperno-Neumann; C Chevreau; J O Bay; V Brouste; P Terrier; D Ranchère-Vince; A Neuville; A Italiano Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2014-02-03 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: E R C Hagens; M L Feenstra; W J Eshuis; M C C M Hulshof; H W M van Laarhoven; M I van Berge Henegouwen; S S Gisbertz Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2020-02-03 Impact factor: 6.939