The impact of multimodality therapies in marginally inoperable soft tissue sarcomas (STS): The Toronto Sarcoma Program (TSP) experience.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
11548 Background: The mainstay therapy of operable STS remains surgery, which may include (neo)adjuvant therapies. Within the TSP, marginally inoperable STS are often treated with sequential chemo (CTX) and radiation (RT) therapy, followed by surgery (SX). Herein we present our experience of multi-modality therapies for marginally inoperable STS patients (pts). Methods: This was a dual-center, single program, retrospective review. Pts were included if deemed to have marginally inoperable primary or recurrent STS, as determined at the TSP tumor board. Pts included must have had CTX with the intent of having RT and SX after. Pts demographics, treatment details and clinical outcomes data were collected. Relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analysis of the influence of disease characteristics and treatment on outcomes was assessed using Cox regression. Results: From June 2005 to May 2019, 75 pts were identified. Median age was 52 years (range 16-72). Pts were predominantly male (55%). Histological subtypes included dedifferentiated liposarcoma (29%), leiomyosarcoma (27%), synovial sarcoma (19%) and others (25%). Primary tumor was located in the retroperitoneum (48%), extremity (23%), pelvis (12%), thorax (9%), and other sites (8%). All pts had doxorubicin and ifosfamide CTX (median 4 cycles; range 1-6), while RT dose delivered was 50.4Gy/28 fractions in 58 (77%) of cases. Twenty three pts (31%) achieved partial response, 40 pts (53%) had stable disease and 12 pts (16%) had progression of disease (PD) on CTX, of which half (8%) did not undergo further treatment. Nine pts (12%) underwent CTX followed by SX due to significant response, 9 pts (12%) underwent CTX and RT without SX due to persistent tumor unresectability or PD. The final 50 pts (67%) completed multi-modality treatment (CTX, RT & SX). Overall, 59 pts (79%) had SX; negative margins were achieved in 53 (71%). 19 pts (25%) had postoperative complications, causing death in 2 pts (2.7%). With a median follow-up of 72 months, median RFS and OS were 26.9 months (95% CI: 0-86.0), and 65 months (95% CI: 13.5-116.4). Extremity location was associated with superior RFS (median not reached [NR], HR 0.28 95% CI 0.09-0.83, p = 0.022), and OS (median NR, HR 0.29 95% CI 0.09-0.90, p = 0.032). Receipt of RT was associated with superior RFS (median NR, HR 0.23 95% CI 0.10-0.52, p < 0.001); and OS (median NR, HR 0.21 95% CI 0.09-0.50, p < 0.001). Pts who had PD after CTX were associated with poor outcomes - RFS (median 4.7 months, HR 2.03 95% CI 0.61-6.76, p = 0.24); and OS (median 21.9 months, HR 2.48 95% CI 0.73-8.47, P = 0.144). Conclusions: Multi-modality approach resulted in successful resection for most pts with marginally inoperable STS. Extremity location and RT administration were associated with better RFS and OS, while progression on CTX confers worse survival outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".