Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ UCL Discoveryarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
European Journal of Cancer
Article . 2023 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

Primary retroperitoneal sarcoma: A comparison of survival outcomes in specialist and non-specialist sarcoma centres

Authors: Fabio Tirotta; Andrew Bacon; Shane Collins; Anant Desai; Hanhua Liu; Lizz Paley; Dirk Strauss; +1 Authors

Primary retroperitoneal sarcoma: A comparison of survival outcomes in specialist and non-specialist sarcoma centres

Abstract

Consensus guidelines outline that patients with primary retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) should be managed within specialist sarcoma centres (SSC). There is, however, a paucity of population-based data detailing incidence and outcomes in these patients. Hence, we aimed to evaluate patterns of care among RPS patients in England and compare outcomes for those undergoing surgery in high-volume specialist sarcoma centres (HV-SSC), low-volume SSC (LV-SSC), and non-SSC (N-SSC).Data on patients diagnosed with primary RPS between 2013 and 2018 were extracted from NHS Digital's National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service using the national cancer registration dataset. Diagnostic pathways, treatment, and survival outcomes were compared between HV-SSC, LV-SSC, and N-SSC. Uni- and multivariate analyses were calculated.Of 1878 patients diagnosed with RPS, 1120 (60%) underwent surgery within 12 months of diagnosis, with 847 (76%) operated on at SSC; of these, 432 patients (51%) were operated on in HV-SSC, and 415 (49%) in LV-SSC. One- and 5-year estimated overall survival (OS) rates for patients undergoing surgery in N-SSC were 70.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 64.8-75.7) and 42.0% (CI: 35.9-47.9), compared to 85.0% (CI: 81.1-88.1) and 51.7% (CI: 46.6-56.6) in LV-SSC (p < 0.01), and 87.4% (CI: 83.9-90.2) and 62.8% (CI: 57.9-67.4) in HV-SSC, (p < 0.01). After adjusting for patient- and treatment-related factors, patients treated in HV-SSC were found to have significantly longer OS than those treated at LV-SSC, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.78 (CI: 0.62-0.96, p < 0.05).Patients with RPS undergoing surgery in HV-SSC have significantly better survival outcomes than those treated in N-SSC and L-SSC.

Country
United Kingdom
Keywords

Centralisation, Survival Rate, England, High-volume centres, Sarcoma specialist centres, Retroperitoneal sarcoma, Humans, Sarcoma, Soft Tissue Neoplasms, Retroperitoneal Neoplasms, Proportional Hazards Models, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    30
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
30
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 1%
Green
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research