Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Shared Resource, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
J Am Coll Surg. 2018 Sep;227(3):357-366.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.05.009. Epub 2018 Jun 12.
Multi-institutional collaborations provide granularity lacking in epidemiologic data sets to enable in-depth study of rare diseases. For patients with superficial, high-grade soft tissue sarcomas of the trunk and extremity, the value of radiation therapy (RT) is not clear. We aimed to use the 7-institution US Sarcoma Collaborative (USSC) and the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to investigate this issue.
All adult patients with superficial truncal and extremity high-grade soft tissue sarcomas who underwent primary curative-intent resection from 2000 to 2016 at USSC institutions or were included in the NCDB from 2004 to 2013 were analyzed. Propensity score matching was performed. End points were locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), overall survival (OS), and disease-specific survival (DSS).
Of 4,153 patients in the USSC, 169 patients with superficial high-grade tumors underwent primary curative-intent resection, 38% of which received RT. On multivariable Cox-regression analysis, RT was not associated with improved LRFS (p = 0.56), OS (p = 0.31), or DSS (p = 0.20). On analysis of 51 propensity score-matched pairs, RT was still not associated with increased LRFS, OS, or DSS. Analysis of 631 propensity score-matched pairs in the NCDB demonstrated improved 5-year OS rate associated with RT (80% vs 70%; p = 0.02). The LRFS and DSS rates were not evaluable.
Granular data afforded by collaborative research enables in-depth analysis of patient outcomes. The NCDB, although powered with large numbers, cannot assess many relevant outcomes (eg recurrence, DSS, or complications). In this study, the approaches yielded conflicting results. The USSC data suggested no value of radiation and the NCDB demonstrated improved OS, contradicting all randomized controlled trials in sarcoma. The pros and cons of either approach must be considered when applying results to clinical practice, and underscore the importance of randomized controlled trials.
多机构合作提供了流行病学数据集中缺乏的粒度,从而能够深入研究罕见疾病。对于躯干和四肢的浅表、高级软组织肉瘤患者,放疗(RT)的价值尚不清楚。我们旨在利用美国肉瘤协作组(USSC)和国家癌症数据库(NCDB)来研究这个问题。
分析了 2000 年至 2016 年期间在 USSC 机构接受原发性根治性切除术的所有躯干和四肢浅表高级软组织肉瘤的成年患者,或 2004 年至 2013 年期间纳入 NCDB 的患者。进行了倾向评分匹配。终点是局部区域无复发生存(LRFS)、总生存(OS)和疾病特异性生存(DSS)。
在 4153 名 USSC 患者中,有 169 名浅表高级肿瘤患者接受了原发性根治性切除术,其中 38%接受了 RT。多变量 Cox 回归分析显示,RT 与改善 LRFS(p=0.56)、OS(p=0.31)或 DSS(p=0.20)无关。在分析 51 对倾向评分匹配的患者后,RT 仍与增加 LRFS、OS 或 DSS 无关。在 NCDB 中分析 631 对倾向评分匹配的患者后,发现 RT 与改善 5 年 OS 率相关(80%比 70%;p=0.02)。LRFS 和 DSS 率不可评估。
协作研究提供的粒度数据能够深入分析患者的结局。尽管 NCDB 数量众多,但无法评估许多相关结局(例如复发、DSS 或并发症)。在这项研究中,两种方法得出了相互矛盾的结果。USSC 数据表明放疗没有价值,而 NCDB 则显示 OS 改善,与肉瘤的所有随机对照试验相矛盾。在将结果应用于临床实践时,必须考虑这两种方法的利弊,并强调随机对照试验的重要性。