Pulmonary metastasectomy in bone and soft tissue sarcoma with metastasis to the lung

 Open in a separate windowOBJECTIVESThis study investigated the outcomes of sarcoma patients with lung metastases who underwent pulmonary metastasectomy (PM), compared to patients who underwent medical management alone. The secondary objective was to compare survival after PM between variables of interest.METHODSThis was a retrospective review of 565 sarcoma patients with confirmed, isolated pulmonary metastasis identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database between 2010 and 2015. 1:4 propensity score matching was used to select PM and non-PM groups. The multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyse prognostic factors of disease-free survival (DFS).RESULTSOf the eligible 565 patients, 59 PM patients were matched to 202 non-PM patients in a final ratio of 3.4. After propensity matching, there were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between PM and non-PM patients. The median DFS after PM was 32 months (interquartile range 18–59), compared to 20 months (interquartile range 7–40) in patients without PM (P = 0.032). Using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, metastasectomy (hazard ratio 0.536, 95% confidence interval 0.33–0.85; P = 0.008) was associated with improved DFS. In a subset analysis of patients who underwent PM only, the median DFS was longer in males compared to females (P = 0.021), as well as in bone sarcoma compared to soft tissue sarcoma (P = 0.014).CONCLUSIONSFor sarcoma patients with metastatic lung disease, PM appears to improve the prognosis compared to medical management. Furthermore, there may be a survival association with gender and tumour origin in patients who underwent PM. These data may be used to inform the surgical indications and eligibility criteria for metastasectomy in this setting.