Treatment of pelvic Ewing’s sarcoma: Pros and cons of chemotherapy plus definitive radiotherapy versus surgery

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorKaçmaz, İsmail Eralp
dc.contributor.authorKeçeci, Burçin
dc.contributor.authorBasa, Can Doruk
dc.contributor.authorSabah, Dündar
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-12T20:32:30Z
dc.date.available2023-01-12T20:32:30Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.departmentN/A/Departmenten_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: The aim of this study was to compare the results of chemotherapy or combined chemotherapy-radiation therapy with surgical intervention following neodjuvant therapy in pelvic Ewing’s sarcoma patients. Methods: The study population consisted of 39 patients with pelvic Ewing’s sarcoma treated in our clinic between 1994 and 2014. Of these patients, 28 patients (11 boys and 17 girls; mean age: 19.57±6.8 years) were treated with chemotherapy and radiation therapy and the remaining 11 patients (9 boys and 2 girls; mean age: 18.64±8.1 years) patients underwent surgical intervention after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus radiation therapy. Internal hemipelvectomy was performed in 10 patients, and external hemipelvectomy was performed in one patient. Survival rates were compared between the surgical and non-surgical treatment groups. Predictive factors, such as treatment protocol (surgery, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, definitive radiotherapy), mass localisation, mass size, presence of metastasis at the time of diagnosis, and presence of late metastases were compared between the groups. T he effects of each variable on survival were also examined. Results: The overall 3- and 5-year survival rates of the 28 non-surgical patients were 41.4% and 26.1%, respectively, while those of the surgical patients were 53% and 35.4%, respectively (p=0.777). Large mass size, presence of metastasis at the time of diagnosis, and presence of late metastases were significantly associated with lower survival rates. Conclusion: The survival rates of the patients who underwent surgery were higher than those of non-surgical patients, although the difference was not statistically significant. Definitive radiation and chemotherapy would be preferable in selected cases, such as patients with sacral localisation, without surgical intervention.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.5152/j.aott.2020.01.601
dc.identifier.endpage48en_US
dc.identifier.issn1017-995X
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage42en_US
dc.identifier.trdizinid378350en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5152/j.aott.2020.01.601
dc.identifier.urihttps://search.trdizin.gov.tr/yayin/detay/378350
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11454/81151
dc.identifier.volume54en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakTR-Dizinen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofActa Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcicaen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Ulusal Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.titleTreatment of pelvic Ewing’s sarcoma: Pros and cons of chemotherapy plus definitive radiotherapy versus surgeryen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

TR-Dizin İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu