The Use of Radiation Therapy in Localized High-Grade Soft Tissue Sarcoma and Potential Impact on Survival

Background It is a consensus that radiation therapy (RT) should be applied for all large, deep, high-grade soft tissue sarcomas (STS). Therefore, we investigated the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to study how these guidelines are being followed, to determine what factors may be associated with the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of surgical oncology 2015-09, Vol.22 (9), p.2831-2838
Hauptverfasser: Hou, Chun-Han, Lazarides, Alexander L., Speicher, Paul J., Nussbaum, Daniel P., Blazer, Daniel G., Kirsch, David G., Brigman, Brian E., Eward, William C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background It is a consensus that radiation therapy (RT) should be applied for all large, deep, high-grade soft tissue sarcomas (STS). Therefore, we investigated the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to study how these guidelines are being followed, to determine what factors may be associated with the decision not to use RT, and to see whether there was an association of RT use and survival. Methods We retrospectively analyzed localized high-grade STS patients in the NCDB from 1998 through 2006. They were further stratified into two groups: no radiation (NRT) group and radiation (RT) group. Then, long-term survival between the two groups was evaluated using the Kaplan–Meier (KM) method with comparisons based on the log-rank test. Multiple variables were analyzed between the two groups. Propensity matching was performed secondarily to minimize the influence of confounding variables. Results A total of 3982 of 10,290 patients (37.8 %) did not receive RT and 6,308 patients (62.2 %) did receive RT. Patients in the NRT group were more likely to have a below-median education level (median 58.2 % vs. 60.7 %; p  = 0.015) and a below-median income level (65.1 % vs. 68.6 %; p  
ISSN:1068-9265
1534-4681
DOI:10.1245/s10434-015-4639-4