ArticleThe oncologist2023
Efficacy and Safety of Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Re-excised Soft-tissue Sarcoma After Unplanned Resection.
Article in The oncologist, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Navigating the Role of Radiotherapy for Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcomas.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Neoadjuvant or Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Soft-Tissue Sarcoma?Current oncology reports · 2025Review
- Unplanned Excision in Soft Tissue Sarcoma: Current Knowledge and Remaining Gaps.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) in patients with soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) re-excised after unplanned tumor resection (UPR). MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom 2000 to 2015, we retrospectively evaluated patients with STS of limb or trunk who underwent post-UPR re-excision in our expert center and received or not aRT.
resultsMedian follow-up was 121 months (IQR 94-165). Among the 145 patients, 37 were not treated with aRT (no-RT) and 108 received aRT with a median radiation dose of 50 Gy (IQR 50-60). At 10 years, patients in the aRT and no-RT groups showed a cumulative incidence of local failure (10y-LF) of 14.7% and 37.7%, and a local recurrence-free survival (10y-LRFS) of 61.3% and 45.8%, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified aRT and age ≥70 years as independent predictors of both LF and LRFS, while grade 3 and deep-seated tumor were independent predictors of LRFS. In overall population, 10-year distant metastasis-free survival (10y-DMFS) and overall survival (10y-OS) were 63.7% and 69.4%. In multivariate analyses, age ≥70 years, grade 3, and deep-seated lesion were associated with shorter DMFS and OS. Acute severe adverse events were not significantly increased in aRT group (14.8% vs. 18.1%, P = .85) but dramatically increased if radiation dose exceeded 50 Gy (risk ratio 2.96 compared to ≤50 Gy, P = .04).
conclusionIn STS patients re-excised after UPR, 50 Gy aRT was safe and associated with reduced LF and longer LRFS. It seems to be beneficial even in absence of residual disease or in absence of initial adverse prognostic factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.