4.3 Article

Clinical outcomes of patients with epithelioid sarcomas: impact and management of nodal metastasis

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages 181-188

Publisher

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s10147-017-1179-x

Keywords

Epithelioid sarcoma; Clinical outcome; Lymph node metastasis; Prognosis

Categories

Funding

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16H02676] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An epithelioid sarcoma is a rare histological subtype of a soft tissue sarcoma with a high local recurrence rate, which frequently shows lymph node metastasis. However, because of the rarity of this tumor, the impact of nodal metastasis and its appropriate management remain unclear. The present study investigated the clinical outcomes of patients with epithelioid sarcomas, with a focus on lymph node metastasis. We retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of 27 patients with epithelioid sarcomas treated between 1985 and 2015. The log-rank test was used to assess the prognostic variables. The overall local recurrence rate was 33%, and the estimated overall 5-year survival rate was 62%. Hand and foot locations were associated with favorable overall survival. During the follow-up period, new nodal metastasis was noted in 14 patients (52%). The incidence of local recurrence was higher in patients with new nodal metastasis than in patients who did not develop nodal metastasis. The development of new nodal metastasis had a tendency to worsen survival; however, this association was not statistically significant. Lymphadenectomy did not affect overall survival. Peripheral tumor location is associated with a better prognosis. The development of new nodal metastasis tends to be associated with poor prognosis; however, among patients with nodal metastasis, resection of the metastatic lesions has a low impact on survival.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available