Comparative evaluation of local control strategies in localized Ewing sarcoma of bone: A report from the Children's Oncology Group. Issue 3 (23rd September 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: DuBois, Steven G.; Krailo, Mark D.; Gebhardt, Mark C.; Donaldson, Sarah S.; Marcus, Karen J.; Dormans, John; Shamberger, Robert C.; Sailer, Scott; Nicholas, Richard W.; Healey, John H.; Tarbell, Nancy J.; Randall, R. Lor; Devidas, Meenakshi; Meyer, James S.; Granowetter, Linda; Womer, Richard B.; Bernstein, Mark; Marina, Neyssa; Grier, Holcombe E.
• Is Part Of: Cancer. Volume 121:Issue 3(2015)
• Page Start: 467
• Page End: 475
• Publication Date: 2014-09-23
• Subjects: Cancer -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Cytopathology -- Periodicals; 616.99405
• DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29065
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0008-543X

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec id="cncr29065-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>BACKGROUND</title> <p>Patients with Ewing sarcoma require local primary tumor control with surgery, radiation, or both. The optimal choice of local control for overall and local disease control remains unclear.</p> </sec> <sec id="cncr29065-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>METHODS</title> <p>Patients with localized Ewing sarcoma of bone who were treated on 3 consecutive protocols with standard‐dose, 5‐drug chemotherapy every 3 weeks were included (n=465). Propensity scores were used to control for differences between local control groups by constructing multivariate models to assess the impact of local control type on clinical endpoints (event‐free survival [EFS], overall survival, local failure, and distant failure) independent of differences in their propensity to receive each local control type.</p> </sec> <sec id="cncr29065-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>RESULTS</title> <p>Patients who underwent surgery were younger (<italic>P</italic>=.02) and had more appendicular tumors (<italic>P</italic><.001). Compared with surgery, radiation had higher unadjusted risks of any event (hazard ratio [HR], 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18‐2.44), death (HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.18‐2.85), and local failure (HR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.37‐4.83). On multivariate analysis, compared with surgery, radiation had a higher risk of local failure (HR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.24‐4.68), although there were no significant differences in EFS (HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.94‐2.14), overall survival (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.83‐2.26), or distant failure (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.70‐1.84) between local control groups.</p> </sec> <sec id="cncr29065-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> <p>In this large group of similarly treated patients, choice of the mode of local control was not related significantly to EFS, overall survival, or distant failure, although the risk of local failure was greater for radiation compared with surgery. These data support surgical resection when appropriate, whereas radiotherapy remains a reasonable alternative in selected patients. <bold><italic>Cancer</italic> 2015;121:467–475.</bold> © <italic>2014 American Cancer Society</italic>.</p> </sec> </abstract>