SynthesisBritish journal of cancer2025
Prognostic factors in patients with relapsed high-grade osteosarcoma: a systematic review.
Synthesis in British journal of cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- URGCP promotes osteosarcoma progression by regulating the ESCRT-III subunit CHMP4B.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Radiobiotherapy in Osteosarcoma: A State-Based Educational Framework for Strategy Selection and Trial Design.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
- Immunotherapy for pediatric solid tumors: overcoming biological barriers through rational multimodal combinations.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2026Review
- Identification of Key Bioactive Compounds of Medicine-Food Homologous Substances and Their Multi-Target Intervention Effects in Osteosarcoma Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Time-dependent evolution of osteosarcoma recurrence risk across clinical risk stratification and its prognostic value.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
- Celastrol overcomes 5-fluorouracil resistance in osteosarcoma cells through p53-mediated apoptotic pathway modulation and P-glycoprotein inhibition: A comprehensive mechanistic study.BioImpacts : BI · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe outcome of patients with osteosarcoma after relapse is very poor, with a 5-year overall survival (OS) below 30%. Prognostic factors in this setting remain poorly defined, limiting treatment decisions. This study identifies key clinical and biological prognostic factors to guide future trials.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis included studies published between 1976 and 2022 with ≥35 patients. Searches were performed in MEDLINE/PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane. Study quality was assessed using QUIPS tool. Studies reporting any clinical outcomes in the post-relapse setting were included.
resultsNineteen studies involving 3245 patients were analysed. Nine prognostic factors were identified: relapse-free interval, site, number and size of lesions, resectability, sex, age, alkaline phosphatase levels and response to chemotherapy. Meta-analysis confirmed bilateral lung metastases worsened OS (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.42-1.99). A relapse-free interval >24 months and complete surgical resection were consistently associated with better outcomes. Results on chemotherapy use were inconsistent. Substantial heterogeneity and low methodological quality were noted across studies.
conclusionsKey prognostic factors should address clinical trial design. Stratification by resectability, number and site of lesions and relapse-free interval is essential to evaluate treatment efficacy. Standardised protocols are needed to improve outcomes and provide tailored strategies for relapsed osteosarcoma.
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.