Do Children With Osteosarcoma Benefit From Pulmonary Metastasectomy?: A Systematic Review of Published Studies and "Real World" Outcomes.

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Annals of surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-20 DOI:10.1097/SLA.0000000000006239
Tristan Boam, Bethan G Rogoyski, Wajid Jawaid, Paul D Losty
{"title":"Do Children With Osteosarcoma Benefit From Pulmonary Metastasectomy?: A Systematic Review of Published Studies and \"Real World\" Outcomes.","authors":"Tristan Boam, Bethan G Rogoyski, Wajid Jawaid, Paul D Losty","doi":"10.1097/SLA.0000000000006239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To critically examine the evidence-base for survival benefit of pulmonary metastasectomy (PM) for osteosarcoma (OS) in the pediatric population.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>PM for OS is recommended as the standard of care in both pediatric and adult treatment protocols. Recent results from the \"Pulmonary Metastasectomy in Colorectal Cancer\" trial demonstrate no survival benefit from PM in colorectal cancer in adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was undertaken according to \"Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis\" guidelines. Medline, Embase, and 2 clinical trial registers were searched for all studies detailing pediatric patients with OS (<18 years) undergoing PM with a comparison cohort group that did not receive PM.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eleven studies met inclusion criteria dating from 1984 to 2017. All studies were retrospective and none directly compared PM versus no PM in pediatric patients as its main objective(s). Three-year survival rates ranged from 0% to 54% for PM and 0% to 16% for no PM. No patients receiving PM were usually those with unresectable disease and/or considered to have a poor prognosis. All studies were at high risk of bias and there was marked heterogeneity in the patient selection.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is a weak evidence base (level IV) for a survival benefit of PM for OS in pediatric patients likely due to selection bias of \"favorable cases.\" The included studies many of which detailed outdated treatment protocols were not designed in their reporting to specifically address the questions directly. A randomized controlled trial-while ethically challenging in a pediatric population-incorporating modern OS chemotherapy protocols is needed to crucially address any \"survival benefit.\"</p>","PeriodicalId":8017,"journal":{"name":"Annals of surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006239","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To critically examine the evidence-base for survival benefit of pulmonary metastasectomy (PM) for osteosarcoma (OS) in the pediatric population.

Background: PM for OS is recommended as the standard of care in both pediatric and adult treatment protocols. Recent results from the "Pulmonary Metastasectomy in Colorectal Cancer" trial demonstrate no survival benefit from PM in colorectal cancer in adults.

Methods: A systematic review was undertaken according to "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis" guidelines. Medline, Embase, and 2 clinical trial registers were searched for all studies detailing pediatric patients with OS (<18 years) undergoing PM with a comparison cohort group that did not receive PM.

Results: Eleven studies met inclusion criteria dating from 1984 to 2017. All studies were retrospective and none directly compared PM versus no PM in pediatric patients as its main objective(s). Three-year survival rates ranged from 0% to 54% for PM and 0% to 16% for no PM. No patients receiving PM were usually those with unresectable disease and/or considered to have a poor prognosis. All studies were at high risk of bias and there was marked heterogeneity in the patient selection.

Conclusions: There is a weak evidence base (level IV) for a survival benefit of PM for OS in pediatric patients likely due to selection bias of "favorable cases." The included studies many of which detailed outdated treatment protocols were not designed in their reporting to specifically address the questions directly. A randomized controlled trial-while ethically challenging in a pediatric population-incorporating modern OS chemotherapy protocols is needed to crucially address any "survival benefit."

骨肉瘤患儿是否受益于肺转移切除术?- 对已发表研究和 "真实世界 "结果的系统回顾。
目的批判性地研究肺转移切除术(PM)治疗骨肉瘤(OS)在儿科人群中的生存获益的证据基础:在儿科和成人治疗方案中,骨肉瘤肺转移切除术都被推荐为标准治疗方法。PulMiCC试验的最新结果表明,成人结直肠癌肺转移切除术(PM)对生存无益:方法:根据 PRISMA 指南进行了系统综述。在 Medline、Embase 和 2 个临床试验登记册中搜索了所有关于儿科 OS 患者的研究(结果:11项研究符合纳入标准,时间跨度为1984年至2017年。所有研究均为回顾性研究,没有一项研究以直接比较儿科患者的 PM 与否作为主要目标。PM 的三年生存率为 0-54%,无 PM 的三年生存率为 0-16%。无预防性切除术的患者通常是那些无法切除的疾病和/或预后较差的患者。所有研究均存在较高的偏倚风险,而且在患者选择方面存在明显的异质性:结论:儿科患者的OS生存率从PM中获益的证据基础薄弱(IV级),这可能是由于 "有利病例 "的选择偏倚造成的。在纳入的研究中,许多研究都详细介绍了过时的治疗方案,但这些研究的报告并不是为了直接解决这些问题而设计的。需要进行随机对照试验--虽然在儿科人群中具有伦理挑战性--结合现代OS化疗方案,以解决任何 "生存获益 "的关键问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of surgery
Annals of surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
4.40%
发文量
687
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: The Annals of Surgery is a renowned surgery journal, recognized globally for its extensive scholarly references. It serves as a valuable resource for the international medical community by disseminating knowledge regarding important developments in surgical science and practice. Surgeons regularly turn to the Annals of Surgery to stay updated on innovative practices and techniques. The journal also offers special editorial features such as "Advances in Surgical Technique," offering timely coverage of ongoing clinical issues. Additionally, the journal publishes monthly review articles that address the latest concerns in surgical practice.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信