Miceli, Rosalba

Abstract Background This study aimed to assess the performance of currently available risk calculators in a cohort of patients with malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST) and to create an MPNST-specific prognostic model including type-specific predictors for overall survival (OS). Methods This is a retrospective multicenter cohort study of patients with MPNST from 11 secondary or tertiary centers in The Netherlands, Italy and the United States of America. All patients diagnosed with primary MPNST who underwent macroscopically complete surgical resection from 2000 to 2019 were included in this study. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model for OS was estimated with prespecified predictors (age, grade, size, NF-1 status, triton status, depth, tumor location, and surgical margin). Model performance was assessed for the Sarculator and PERSARC calculators by examining discrimination (C-index) and calibration (calibration plots and observed-expected statistic; O/E-statistic). Internal–external cross-validation by different regions was performed to evaluate the generalizability of the model. Results A total of 507 patients with primary MPNSTs were included from 11 centers in 7 regions. During follow-up (median 8.7 years), 211 patients died. The C-index was 0.60 (95% CI 0.53–0.67) for both Sarculator and PERSARC. The MPNST-specific model had a pooled C-index of 0.69 (95%CI 0.65–0.73) at validation, with adequate discrimination and calibration across regions. Conclusions The MPNST-specific MONACO model can be used to predict 3-, 5-, and 10-year OS in patients with primary MPNST who underwent macroscopically complete surgical resection. Further validation may refine the model to inform patients and physicians on prognosis and support them in shared decision-making.

Background: In patients with neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NELM), liver transplantation (LT) is an alternative to liver resection (LR), although the choice of therapy remains controversial. In this multicenter study, we aim to provide novel insight in this dispute. Methods: Following a systematic literature search, 15 large international centers were contacted to provide comprehensive data on their patients after LR or LT for NELM. Survival analyses were performed with the Kaplan-Meier method, while multivariable Cox regression served to identify factors influencing survival after either transplantation or resection. Inverse probability weighting and propensity score matching was used for analyses with balanced and equalized baseline characteristics. Results: Overall, 455 patients were analyzed, including 230 after LR and 225 after LT, with a median follow-up of 97 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 85–110 months]. Multivariable analysis revealed G3 grading as a negative prognostic factor for LR [hazard ratio (HR)=2.22, 95% CI: 1.04–4.77, P=0.040], while G2 grading (HR=2.52, 95% CI: 1.15–5.52, P=0.021) and LT outside Milan criteria (HR=2.40, 95% CI: 1.16–4.92, P=0.018) were negative prognostic factors in transplanted patients. Inverse probability-weighted multivariate analyses revealed a distinct survival benefit after LT. Matched patients presented a median overall survival (OS) of 197 months (95% CI: 143–not reached) and a 73% 5-year OS after LT, and 119 months (95% CI: 74–133 months) and a 52.8% 5-year OS after LR (HR=0.59, 95% CI: 0.3–0.9, P=0.022). However, the survival benefit after LT was lost if patients were transplanted outside Milan criteria. Conclusions: This multicentric study in patients with NELM demonstrates a survival benefit of LT over LR. This benefit depends on adherence to selection criteria, in particular low-grade tumor biology and Milan criteria, and must be balanced against potential risks of LT.

Background In this series from the Transatlantic Australasian Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Working Group (TARPSWG), the authors examined longitudinal outcomes of patients with a second recurrence of retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) after complete resection of a first local recurrence (LR). Methods Data from patients undergoing resection of a first LR from January 2002 to December 2011were collected from 22 sarcoma centers. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) after second recurrence. Results Second recurrences occurred in 400 of 567 patients (70.5%) after an R0/R1 resection of a first locally recurrent RPS. Patterns of disease recurrence were LR in 323 patients (80.75%), distant metastases (DM) in 55 patients (13.75%), and both LR and DM in 22 patients (5.5%). The main subtype among the LR group was liposarcoma (77%), whereas DM mainly were leiomyosarcomas (43.6%). In patients with a second LR only, a total of 200 patients underwent re‐resection (61.9%). The 5‐year OS rate varied significantly based on the pattern of failure ( P < .001): 45.6% for the LR group, 25.5% for the DM group, and 0% for the group with LR and DM. The only factors found to be associated with improved OS on multivariable analysis were both time between second surgery and the development of the second recurrence (32 months vs 8 months: hazard ratio, 0.44 [ P < .001]) and surgery for second recurrence (yes vs no: hazard ratio, 3.25 [ P < .001]). The 5‐year OS rate for patients undergoing surgery for a second LR was 59% versus 18% in the patients not deemed suitable for surgical resection. Conclusions Survival rates after second recurrence of RPS varied based on patterns of disease recurrence and treatment. Durable disease‐free survivors were identified after surgery for second LR in patients selected for this intervention.

Abstract Purpose: The role of surgery for first relapse locally recurrent retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS-LR1) is uncertain. We report outcomes of the largest RPS-LR1 series and propose a new prognostic nomogram. Experimental Design: Patients with consecutive RPS-LR1 without distant metastases who underwent resection at 22 centers (2002–2011) were included. Endpoints were disease-free and overall survival (DFS, OS) and crude-cumulative-incidence (CCI) of local/distant recurrence from second surgery. Nomograms predicting DFS and OS from second surgery were developed and validated (calibration plots); discrimination was assessed (Harrell C index). Results: Of 684 patients identified, full prognostic variable data were available for 602. Initial surgery for primary RPS was performed at our institutions in 188 patients (31%) and elsewhere in 414 (69%). At a median follow-up of 119 months [Interquartile range (IQR), 80–169] from initial surgery and 75 months (IQR 50–105) from second surgery, 6-year DFS and OS were 19.2% [95% confidence interval (CI), 16.0–23.0%] and 54.1% (95% CI, 49.8–58.8%), respectively. Recurrence patterns and survival probability were histology-specific, with liposarcoma subtypes having the highest 6-year CCI of second local recurrence (LR, 60.2%–70.9%) and leiomyosarcoma (LMS) having higher 6-year CCI of distant metastasis (DM, 36.3%). Nomograms included age at second surgery, multifocality, grade, completeness of second surgery, histology, chemotherapy/radiotherapy at first surgery, and number of organs resected at first surgery. OS and DFS nomograms showed good calibration and discriminative ability (C index 0.70 and 0.67, respectively). Conclusions: We developed nomograms to predict DFS and OS for patients undergoing RPS-LR1 resection. Nomograms provide individualized, disease-relevant estimations of survival for RPS-LR1 patients and assist in clinical decisions.