ArticleCancer medicine2024
The impact of margins and re-resection in pediatric synovial sarcoma.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Multicenter Retrospective Outcomes Analysis of Patients with Localized Synovial Sarcoma.Cancer research communications · 2026Article
- Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in Tumor-Related Amputations: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 132 Cases over Two Decades.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- The Prognostic Impact of the Tumor Immune Microenvironment in Synovial Sarcoma: An Immunohistochemical Analysis Using Digital Pathology and Conventional Interpretation.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Pediatric tonsillar synovial sarcoma: extremely rare case report.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- The impact of margins and re-resection in pediatric synovial sarcoma.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSynovial sarcoma is one of the most common soft tissue sarcomas in children. Guidelines regarding the adequate extent of resection margins and the role of re-resection are lacking. We sought to evaluate the adequate resection margin and the role of re-resection in predicting outcomes in children with synovial sarcomas.
methodsA cohort of 36 patients less than 18 years of age at diagnosis who were treated for localized synovial sarcoma at three tertiary pediatric hospitals between January 2004 and December 2020 were included in this study. Patient and tumor demographics, treatment information, and margin status after surgical resection were collected from the medical record. Clinical, treatment, and surgical characteristics, as well as outcomes including hazard ratios (HRs), event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared by resection margins group and re-resection status.
resultsPatients in the R1 resection group were significantly more likely to relapse or die compared to patients in the R0 resection group. However, there was no significant difference in EFS (HR 0.52, p = 0.54) or OS (HR 1.56, p = 0.719) in R0 patients with less than 5 mm margins compared to R0 patients with more than 5 mm margins. Patients with R1 on initial or re-resection had significantly worse OS than patients who had R0 resection on initial or re-resection (HR = 10.12, p = 0.005).
conclusionThis study re-affirms that R0 resection is an independent prognostic predictor of better OS/EFS in pediatric synovial sarcoma. Second, our study extends this finding to report negative margins on initial resection or re-resection is associated with better OS/EFS than positive margins on initial resection or re-resection. Lastly, we found that there is no difference in outcomes associated with re-resection or <5 mm margins for R0 patients, indicating that re-resection and <5 mm margins are acceptable if microscopic disease is removed.
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.