Cancers (Mar 2024)

Improved Metastatic-Free Survival after Systematic Re-Excision Following Complete Macroscopic Unplanned Excision of Limb or Trunk Soft Tissue Sarcoma

  • Francois Gouin,
  • Audrey Michot,
  • Mehrdad Jafari,
  • Charles Honoré,
  • Jean Camille Mattei,
  • Alexandre Rochwerger,
  • Mickael Ropars,
  • Dimitri Tzanis,
  • Philippe Anract,
  • Sébastien Carrere,
  • Dimitri Gangloff,
  • Agnès Ducoulombier,
  • Céleste Lebbe,
  • Jérôme Guiramand,
  • Denis Waast,
  • Frédéric Marchal,
  • François Sirveaux,
  • Sylvain Causeret,
  • Pierre Gimbergues,
  • Fabrice Fiorenza,
  • Brice Paquette,
  • Pauline Soibinet,
  • Jean-Marc Guilloit,
  • Louis R. Le Nail,
  • Franck Dujardin,
  • David Brinkert,
  • Claire Chemin-Airiau,
  • Magali Morelle,
  • Pierre Meeus,
  • Marie Karanian,
  • François Le Loarer,
  • Gualter Vaz,
  • Jean-Yves Blay

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16071365
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 16, no. 7
p. 1365

Abstract

Read online

Background: Whether re-excision (RE) of a soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of limb or trunk should be systematized as adjuvant care and if it would improve metastatic free survival (MFS) are still debated. The impact of resection margins after unplanned macroscopically complete excision (UE) performed out of a NETSARC reference center or after second resection was further investigated. Methods: This large nationwide series used data from patients having experienced UE outside of a reference center from 2010 to 2019, collected in a French nationwide exhaustive prospective cohort NETSARC. Patient characteristics and survival distributions in patients reexcised (RE) or not (No-RE) are reported. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard model was conducted to adjust for classical prognosis factors. Subgroup analysis were performed to identify which patients may benefit from RE. Results: Out of 2371 patients with UE for STS performed outside NETSARC reference centers, 1692 patients were not reviewed by multidisciplinary board before treatment decision and had a second operation documented. Among them, 913 patients experienced re-excision, and 779 were not re-excised. Characteristics were significantly different regarding patient age, tumor site, size, depth, grade and histotype in patients re-excised (RE) or not (No-RE). In univariate analysis, final R0 margins are associated with a better MFS, patients with R1 margins documented at first surgery had a better MFS as compared to patients with first R0 resection. The study identified RE as an independent favorable factor for MFS (HR 0.7, 95% CI 0.53–0.93; p = 0.013). All subgroups except older patients (>70 years) and patients with large tumors (>10 cm) had superior MFS with RE. Conclusions: RE might be considered in patients with STS of limb or trunk, with UE with macroscopic complete resection performed out of a reference center, and also in originally defined R0 margin resections, to improve LRFS and MFS. Systematic RE should not be advocated for patients older than 70 years, or with tumors greater than 10 cm.

Keywords