High-Dose Proton Beam-Based Radiation Therapy in the Management of Extracranial Chondrosarcomas

The management of sacral tumours

Tumours of the sacrum are difficult to manage. The sacrum provides the structural connection between the torso and lower half of the body and is subject to both axial and rotational forces. Thus, tumours or their treatment can compromise the stability of the spinopelvic junction. Additionally, nerves responsible for lower limb motor groups as well as bowel, bladder, and sexual function traverse or abut the sacrum. Preservation or sacrifice of these nerves in the treatment of sacral tumours has profound implications on the function and quality of life of the patient. This annotation will discuss current treatment protocols for sacral tumours.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1284–1291.

Chondrosarcoma

Chondrosarcoma is the second most common primary bone tumor, with >90% of cases representing the primary conventional subtype. In addition to arising de novo, conventional chondrosarcoma can arise secondary to a benign underlying lesion, such as enchondroma or osteochondroma. Symptoms are often characterized by focal, dull, aching pain to the affected region. Grade is a well-recognized prognostic factor in these tumors. Grade I lesions/atypical cartilaginous tumors rarely metastasize, rarely recur, and have a 10-year survival rate of >80%. By contrast, grade III lesions are associated with a poor prognosis with the highest local recurrence rates, a lung metastasis rate of >50%, and a 10-year survival rate of <30%. The standard treatment of high-grade conventional chondrosarcoma is complete surgical resection with wide margin. However, low-grade lesions may be amenable to curettage plus or minus adjuvant local treatment. Conventional chondrosarcoma does not respond to chemotherapy or standard radiation doses. Adjuvant treatment can be beneficial for some subtypes such as chemotherapy for dedifferentiated and mesenchymal chondrosarcoma and radiation additionally for mesenchymal chondrosarcoma. Emerging radiation technologies may also play a useful role in treating tumors in anatomically complex areas such as the spine or pelvis.

Chondrosarcoma-from Molecular Pathology to Novel Therapies

Chondrosarcoma (CHS) is the second most common primary malignant bone sarcoma. Overall survival and prognosis of this tumor are various and often extreme, depending on histological grade and tumor subtype. CHS treatment is difficult, and surgery remains still the gold standard due to the resistance of this tumor to other therapeutic options. Considering the role of differentiation of CHS subtypes and the need to develop new treatment strategies, in this review, we introduced a multidisciplinary characterization of CHS from its pathology to therapies. We described the morphology of each subtype with the role of immunohistochemical markers in diagnostics of CHS. We also summarized the most frequently mutated genes and genome regions with altered pathways involved in the pathology of this tumor. Subsequently, we discussed imaging methods and the role of currently used therapies, including surgery and the limitations of chemo and radiotherapy. Finally, in this review, we presented novel targeted therapies, including those at ongoing clinical trials, which can be a potential future target in designing new therapeutics for patients with CHS.

Does the SORG Algorithm Predict 5-year Survival in Patients with Chondrosarcoma? An External Validation

BACKGROUND

We developed a machine learning algorithm to predict the survival of patients with chondrosarcoma. The algorithm demonstrated excellent discrimination and calibration on internal validation in a derivation cohort based on data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry. However, the algorithm has not been validated in an independent external dataset.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Does the Skeletal Oncology Research Group (SORG) algorithm accurately predict 5-year survival in an independent patient population surgically treated for chondrosarcoma?

METHODS

The SORG algorithm was developed using the SEER registry, which contains demographic data, tumor characteristics, treatment, and outcome values; and includes approximately 30% of the cancer patients in the United States. The SEER registry was ideal for creating the derivation cohort, and consequently the SORG algorithm, because of the high number of eligible patients and the availability of most (explanatory) variables of interest. Between 1992 to 2013, 326 patients were treated surgically for extracranial chondrosarcoma of the bone at two tertiary care referral centers. Of those, 179 were accounted for at a minimum of 5 years after diagnosis in a clinical note at one of the two institutions, unless they died earlier, and were included in the validation cohort. In all, 147 (45%) did not meet the minimum 5 years of followup at the institution and were not included in the validation of the SORG algorithm. The outcome (survival at 5 years) was checked for all 326 patients in the Social Security death index and were included in the supplemental validation cohort, to also ascertain validity for patients with less than 5 years of institutional followup. Variables used in the SORG algorithm to predict 5-year survival including sex, age, histologic subtype, tumor grade, tumor size, tumor extension, and tumor location were collected manually from medical records. The tumor characteristics were collected from the postoperative musculoskeletal pathology report. Predicted probabilities of 5-year survival were calculated for each patient in the validation cohort using the SORG algorithm, followed by an assessment of performance using the same metrics as used for internal validation, namely: discrimination, calibration, and overall performance. Discrimination was calculated using the concordance statistic (or the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve) to determine how well the algorithm discriminates between the outcome, which ranges from 0.5 (no better than a coin-toss) to 1.0 (perfect discrimination). Calibration was assessed using the calibration slope and intercept from a calibration plot to measure the agreement between predicted and observed outcomes. A perfect calibration plot should show a 45° upwards line. Overall performance was determined using the Brier score, ranging from 0 (excellent prediction) to 1 (worst prediction). The Brier score was compared with the null-model Brier score, which showed the performance of a model that ignored all the covariates. A Brier score lower than the null model Brier score indicated greater performance of the algorithm. For the external validation an F1-score was added to measure the overall accuracy of the algorithm, which ranges between 0 (total failure of an algorithm) and 1 (perfect algorithm).The 5-year survival was lower in the validation cohort than it was in the derivation cohort from SEER (61.5% [110 of 179] versus 76% [1131 of 1544] ; p < 0.001). This difference was driven by higher proportion of dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma in the institutional population than in the derivation cohort (27% [49 of 179] versus 9% [131 of 1544]; p < 0.001). Patients in the validation cohort also had larger tumor sizes, higher grades, and nonextremity tumor locations than did those in the derivation cohort. These differences between the study groups emphasize that the external validation is performed not only in a different patient cohort, but also in terms of disease characteristics. Five-year survival was not different for both patient groups between subpopulations of patients with conventional chondrosarcomas and those with dedifferentiated chondrosarcomas.

RESULTS

The concordance statistic for the validation cohort was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.80-0.91). Evaluation of the algorithm's calibration in the institutional population resulted in a calibration slope of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.68-1.3) and calibration intercept of -0.58 (95% CI, -0.20 to -0.97). Finally, on overall performance, the algorithm had a Brier score of 0.152 compared with a null-model Brier score of 0.237 for a high level of overall performance. The F1-score was 0.836. For the supplementary validation in the total of 326 patients, the SORG algorithm had a validation of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.85-0.93). The calibration slope was 1.13 (95% CI, 0.87-1.39) and the calibration intercept was -0.26 (95% CI, -0.57 to 0.06). The Brier score was 0.11, with a null-model Brier score of 0.19. The F1-score was 0.901.

CONCLUSIONS

On external validation, the SORG algorithm retained good discriminative ability and overall performance but overestimated 5-year survival in patients surgically treated for chondrosarcoma. This internet-based tool can help guide patient counseling and shared decision making.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic study.