Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31053897›Full record

ReviewDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2019

[Multimodal treatment of sarcomas: standards and new aspects in pharmacological and radio-oncological treatment].

L H Lindner

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

L H LindnerMedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III, Klinikum der Universität München, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, München, Deutschland. lars.lindner@med.uni-muenchen.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with localized high-risk soft tissue sarcoma are at high risk for both local recurrence and distant metastases despite optimal surgical treatment.

objectiveImportance of preoperative or postoperative chemotherapy and hyperthermia.

methodsEvaluation and overview of published study results.

resultsPreoperative or postoperative radiotherapy is considered as standard for patients with localized high-risk soft tissue sarcoma. The results of two randomized studies on neoadjuvant chemotherapy showed a survival benefit. As both studies did not have a control arm without chemotherapy but in one case the superiority of anthracycline/ifosfamide-based chemotherapy in combination with hyperthermia over chemotherapy alone and in the other case the superiority of anthracycline/ifosfamide-based chemotherapy over histology-specific chemotherapy were shown, the formal proof of the superiority of this treatment is still missing. Stratifying the patients treated in the so far largest randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial according to current risk criteria ( http://www.sarculator.com ) revealed a significant survival benefit for patients at high risk of recurrence.

conclusionFor high-risk soft tissue sarcomas, multimodal treatment strategies involving perioperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy and, if possible, hyperthermia should be considered in addition to tumor resection. Preoperative chemotherapy should be given preference over postoperative chemotherapy based on available data.

Indexed as

SarcomaSoft Tissue NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsChemotherapy, AdjuvantCombined Modality TherapyHumansIfosfamideNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicIfosfamideAdjuvant chemotherapyHigh-risk soft tissue sarcomaHyperthermiaNeoadjuvant chemotherapySarculator

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.