Tumor grade and symptoms at presentation are survival risk factors in Chinese patients with primary retroperitoneal sarcoma
Background and aim: No cohort studies have been performed on Chinese primary retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) patients. Data derived from Western cohort studies may not be directly superimposable on Asian counterparts. Furthermore, the risk factors for survival of RPS are currently unknown for Chinese patients. The objectives were therefore to (1) gain insight into RPS incidence and patient demographics and clinical details; (2) determine the risk factors for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS); and (3) critically appraise the Asian cohort data in relation to information obtained in Wester cohort studies.
Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, the health records of patients that had been diagnosed with primary localized RPS with curative intent between 2009 and 2020 were analyzed. Cox proportional hazards analysis was conducted to evaluate the risk factors for OS and DFS.
Results: A total of 261 patients met the inclusion criteria. Ninety-six (36.8%) patients had been diagnosed with well-differentiated liposarcoma, 63 patients (24.1%) with dedifferentiated liposarcoma, 41 patients (15.7%) with leiomyosarcoma (LMS), 22 patients (8.4%) with solitary fibroma, 7 patients (2.7%) with malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST), and 32 patients (12.3%) with another type of RPS. The study further revealed that (1) the 5-y OS and DFS in RPS patients was 67.8% and 51.3%, respectively, with the highest OS and DFS observed in MPNST (100% and 100%, respectively) and the lowest 5-y OS and DFS attributed to LMS (42.6% and 28.9%, respectively); (2) symptoms at presentation, FNCLCC grade, and number of combined resections are independent risk factors in OS; (3) symptoms at presentation, FNCLCC grade, chemotherapy, and hospital length of stay are independent risk factors for DFS; and (4) patients at high risk (symptoms at presentation and high-grade tumors) have less than half the chance of survival at 5 y post-diagnosis than patients with a low-risk profile.
Conclusions: Symptoms at presentation constitute a risk factor for OS and DFS. When combined with tumor grade - another risk factor for both OS and DFS - patients can be classified into a high-risk and low-risk category to gauge a patient’s prognosis and, accordingly, frame an optimal clinical trajectory. Moreover, the clinicopathology and overall prognosis of RPS in Asian and Western populations are comparable and hence superimposable.
Relevance for patients: The present study identifies the risk factors of survival in RPS and suggests symptoms at presentation should be considered in the preoperative consultation and added in prognostic grouping.
[1] Mastrangelo G, Coindre JM, Ducimetiere F, Dei Tos AP, Fadda E, Blay JY, et al. Incidence of Soft Tissue Sarcoma and Beyond: A Population-based Prospective Study in 3 European Regions. Cancer 2012;118:5339-48.
[2] Tan MC, Brennan MF, Kuk D, Agaram NP, Antonescu CR, Qin LX, et al. Histology-based Classification Predicts Pattern of Recurrence and Improves Risk Stratification in Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcoma. Ann Surg 2016;263:593-600.
[3] Gronchi A, Strauss DC, Miceli R, Bonvalot S, Swallow CJ, Hohenberger P, et al. Variability in Patterns of Recurrence after Resection of Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcoma (rps): A Report on 1007 Patients from the Multiinstitutional Collaborative rps Working Group. Ann Surg 2016;263:1002-9.
[4] Gronchi A, Lo Vullo S, Fiore M, Mussi C, Stacchiotti S, Collini P, et al. Aggressive Surgical Policies in a Retrospectively Reviewed Single-Institution Case Series of Retroperitoneal Soft Tissue Sarcoma Patients. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:24-30.
[5] Bonvalot S, Rivoire M, Castaing M, Stoeckle E, Le CesneA, Blay JY, et al. Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: A Multivariate Analysis of Surgical Factors Associated with Local Control. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:31-7.
[6] Diessner BJ, Weigel BJ, Murugan P, Zhang L, Poynter JN, Spector LG. Associations of Socioeconomic Status, Public vs Private Insurance, and Race/Ethnicity with Metastatic Sarcoma at Diagnosis. JAMA Netw Open 2020;3:e2011087.
[7] Lazarides AL, Visgauss JD, Nussbaum DP, Green CL, Blazer DG 3rd, Brigman BE, et al. Race is an Independent Predictor of Survival in Patients with Soft Tissue Sarcoma of the Extremities. BMC Cancer 2018;18:488.
[8] Chou YS, Liu CY, Chang YH, King KL, Chen PC, Pan CC, et al. Prognostic Factors of Primary Resected Retroperitoneal Soft Tissue Sarcoma: Analysis from a Single Asian Tertiary Center and External Validation of Gronchi’s Nomogram. J Surg Oncol 2016;113:355-60.
[9] Ng DW, Tan GH, Chia CS, Chee SK, Quek R, Farid M, et al. Tumor Biology Remains the Main Determinant of Prognosis in Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: A 14-Year Single-Center Experience. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 2017;13: e458-65.
[10] Lim HJ, Ong CJ, Skanthakumar T, Mak LY, Wasudevan SD, et al. Retrospective Quality of Life Study in Patients with Retroperitoneal Sarcoma in an Asian Population. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2020;18:270.
[11] Wong RX, Koh YS, Ong F, Farid M, Tay TK, Teo M. Applicability of the Sarculator and MSKCC Nomograms to Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Prognostication in an Asian Tertiary Center. Asian J Surg 2020;43:1078-85.
[12] Polanco D, Pinilla L, Gracia-Lavedan E, Mas A, Bertran S, Fierro G, et al. Prognostic Value of Symptoms at Lung Cancer Diagnosis: A Three-year Observational Study. J Thorac Dis 2021;13:1485-94.
[13] Stephens MR, Lewis WG, White S, Blackshaw GR, Edwards P, Barry JD, et al. Prognostic Significance of Alarm Symptoms in Patients with Gastric Cancer. Br J Surg 2005;92:840-6.
[14] Ishii K, Yokoyama Y, Nishida Y, Koike H, Yamada S, Kodera Y, et al. Characteristics of Primary and Repeated Recurrent Retroperitoneal Liposarcoma: Outcomes After Aggressive Surgeries at a Single Institution. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2020;50:1412-8.
[15] Xiao J, Liu J, Chen M, Liu W, He X. Diagnosis and Prognosis of Retroperitoneal Liposarcoma: A Single Asian Center Cohort of 57 Cases. J Oncol 2021;2021:7594027.
[16] Taguchi S, Kume H, Fukuhara H, Morikawa T, Kakutani S, Takeshima Y, et al. Symptoms at Diagnosis as Independent Prognostic Factors in Retroperitoneal Liposarcoma. Mol Clin Oncol 2016;4:255-60.
[17] Luo P, Wu Z, Chen S, Yang L, Cai W, Chen Y, et al. Outcome of Patients with Primary Retroperitoneal Solitary Fibrous Sarcoma. Int J Clin Oncol 2020;25:921-8.
[18] An JY, Heo JS, Noh JH, Sohn TS, Nam SJ, Choi SH, et al. Primary Malignant Retroperitoneal Tumors: Analysis of a Single Institutional Experience. Eur J Surg Oncol 2007;33:376-82.
[19] Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of Surgical Complications: A New Proposal with Evaluation in a Cohort of 6336 Patients and Results of a Survey. Ann Surg 2004;240:205-13.
[20] Kotilingam D, Lev DC, Lazar AJ, Pollock RE. Staging Soft Tissue Sarcoma: Evolution and Change. CA Cancer J Clin 2006;56:282-91; quiz 314-285.
[21] Strauss DC, Renne SL, Gronchi A. Adjacent, Adherent, Invaded: A Spectrum of Biologic Aggressiveness Rather than a Rationale for Selecting Organ Resection in Surgery of Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcomas. Ann Surg Oncol 2018;25:13-6.
[22] Ikoma N, Roland CL, Torres KE, Chiang YJ, Wang WL, Somaiah N, et al. Concomitant Organ Resection does not Improve Outcomes in Primary Retroperitoneal WellDifferentiated Liposarcoma: A Retrospective Cohort Study at a Major Sarcoma Center. J Surg Oncol 2018;117: 1188-94.
[23] Trojani M, Contesso G, Coindre JM, Rouesse J, Bui NB, de Mascarel A, et al. Soft-tissue Sarcomas of Adults; Study of Pathological Prognostic Variables and Definition of a Histopathological Grading System. Int J Cancer 1984;33:37-42.
[24] Nessim C, Raut CP, Callegaro D, Barretta F, Miceli R, Fairweather M, et al. Analysis of Differentiation Changes and Outcomes at Time of First Recurrence of Retroperitoneal Liposarcoma by Transatlantic Australasian Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Working Group (TARPSWG). Ann Surg Oncol 2021;28:7854-63.
[25] Perhavec A, Provenzano S, Baia M, Sangalli C, Morosi C, Barisella M, et al. Inoperable Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: Clinical Characteristics and Reasons Against Resection at a Single Referral Institution. Ann Surg Oncol 2021;28:1151-7.