ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2026
Predictors of survival in alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma in the US.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (ARMS) is an aggressive subtype of rhabdomyosarcoma with generally poorer outcomes than embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma. We analyzed a large contemporary cohort to characterize survival outcomes and prognostic factors for ARMS. Methods: We identified patients with histologically confirmed ARMS from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Demographics, tumor characteristics (stage, primary site), and treatments (surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy) were extracted. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was estimated with Kaplan-Meier methods and compared using log-rank tests. Cox proportional hazards models were used for univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors, with results reported as hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: A total of 592 ARMS patients were included [median age 14 years (interquartile range 7-25); 52% male; 73% White]. Primary tumors most commonly arose in extremities or trunk (64%), followed by head and neck sites (26%) and genitourinary locations (5%). Most patients received multimodal therapy: 44% underwent surgical resection, 70% received radiotherapy, and 92% received chemotherapy. The 5-year CSS for the entire cohort was approximately 43%. Distant metastasis was the strongest independent adverse prognostic factor (aHR: 2.9, 95% CI 2.13-3.92, Conclusions: In this large population-based study, ARMS survival remains poor, especially for patients with metastatic disease or in older age groups. Distant metastases and age ≥20 were associated with markedly inferior outcomes, while local therapy with surgery and radiation conferred significant survival benefit.
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.