These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Osteosarcoma of the pelvis: experience of the Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group.
    Author: Ozaki T, Flege S, Kevric M, Lindner N, Maas R, Delling G, Schwarz R, von Hochstetter AR, Salzer-Kuntschik M, Berdel WE, Jürgens H, Exner GU, Reichardt P, Mayer-Steinacker R, Ewerbeck V, Kotz R, Winkelmann W, Bielack SS.
    Journal: J Clin Oncol; 2003 Jan 15; 21(2):334-41. PubMed ID: 12525527.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To define patients and tumor characteristics as well as therapy results, patients with pelvic osteosarcoma who were registered in the Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group (COSS) were analyzed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-seven patients with a high-grade pelvic osteosarcoma were eligible for this analysis. Fifteen patients had primary metastases. All patients received chemotherapy according to COSS protocols. Thirty-eight patients underwent limb-sparing surgery, 12 patients underwent hemipelvectomy, and 17 patients did not undergo definitive surgery. Eleven patients received irradiation to the primary tumor site: four postoperatively and seven as the only form of local therapy. RESULTS: Local failure occurred in 47 of all 67 patients (70%) and in 31 of 50 patients (62%) who underwent definitive surgery. Five-year overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival rates were 27% and 19%, respectively. Large tumor size (P =.0137), primary metastases (P =.0001), and no or intralesional surgery (P <.0001) were poor prognostic factors. In 30 patients with no or intralesional surgery, 11 patients with radiotherapy had better OS than 19 patients without radiotherapy (P =.0033). Among the variables, primary metastasis, large tumor, no or intralesional surgery, no radiotherapy, existence of primary metastasis (relative risk [RR] = 3.456; P =.0009), surgical margin (intralesional or no surgical excision; RR = 5.619; P <.0001), and no radiotherapy (RR = 4.196; P =.0059) were independent poor prognostic factors. CONCLUSION: An operative approach with wide or marginal margins improves local control and OS. If the surgical margin is intralesional or excision is impossible, additional radiotherapy has a positive influence on prognosis.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]