ArticleScientific reports2025
Survival profiles and associated factors for overall and cancer specific survival in patients with chondroblast and fibroblastic osteosarcoma.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We aimed to compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) between patients with chondroblastic osteosarcoma and fibroblastic osteosarcoma, and to identify prognostic risk factors for these subtypes. Clinical and demographic data from 723 patients with either chondroblastic osteosarcoma or fibroblastic osteosarcoma were extracted from the SEER database. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the association of these two types of osteosarcoma with OS, while Fine-Gray competing risk models evaluated CSS, with adjustments for covariates in both unweighted and inverse probability treatment-weighted (IPTW) samples. Subsequent univariate and multivariate analyses identified prognostic factors specific to each subtype. We did not observe any statistically significant differences in terms of the association of the two pathological types of osteosarcomas with OS and CSS using either unweighted or weighted samples. For chondroblastic osteosarcoma, OS was significantly associated with age ≥ 30 years, non-Hispanic Black race, first cancer, primary site, T2-4 stage, M1 stage, and having chemotherapy and surgery were significantly associated with the OS. CSS was associated with age ≥ 30 years, T2-4 stage, M1 stage, and having surgery were associated factors for CSS. In patients with fibroblastic osteosarcoma, OS was significantly associated with primary site, M1 stage, and having radiation and surgery. While CSS was associated with primary site, T2-T4 and TX stage, N1 and M1 stage, and having radiation and surgery. The present study demonstrated the survival profiles of patients with chondroblastic and fibroblastic osteosarcoma. Patients with fibroblastic osteosarcoma do not have better OS or CSS compared with those with chondroblastic osteosarcoma. Multiple risk factors for a poor prognosis were identified, and they can be used to refine the therapeutic approach.
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.