PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16925491

Radiation therapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma.

Ching-Wei D Tzeng·John B Fiveash·Martin J Heslin
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Retroperitoneal soft-tissue sarcoma is an uncommon cancer of mesodermal origin, which is difficult to treat owing to its location and proximity to vital structures. Complete gross resection, often involving en bloc resection, is the standard of care as it represents the only treatment that improves overall survival. Unlike extremity sarcoma, retroperitoneal soft-tissue sarcoma tumor mortality is from local recurrence. Radiation therapy is the only adjuvant treatment that has improved local control in several institutional series. However, there remains no definitive prospective, randomized trial that establishes the role of adjuvant radiation versus no radiation. Owing to significant radiation morbidity with adjacent organs, especially the small bowel, there exists no consensus on radiation timing, delivery method or dosing. Recent and current protocols use preoperative external-beam radiation with or without a method of focal boost dosing. Methods of boost dosing include brachytherapy, intraoperative radiation therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Further studies are needed to definitively include radiation therapy in the standard treatment of retroperitoneal soft-tissue sarcoma and to find the optimal balance between acceptable radiation toxicity and effective local control in treatment protocols.

Explore related subjects

Clinical Trials as TopicCombined Modality TherapyHumansRadiotherapy DosageRetroperitoneal NeoplasmsSarcomaJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ching-Wei D Tzeng, John B Fiveash, Martin J Heslin. 2006. Radiation therapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma.. https://doi.org/10.1586/14737140.6.8.1251

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2008

On the exact interval estimation for the difference in paired areas under the ROC curves.

An important measure for comparison of accuracy between two diagnostic procedures is the difference in paired areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Non-parametric and maximum likelihood methods have been proposed for interval estimation for the difference in paired areas under ROC curves. However, these two methods are asymptotic procedures and their performance in finite sample sizes has not been thoroughly investigated. We propose to use the concept of generalized pivotal quantities (GPQs) to construct an exact confidence interval for the difference in paired areas under ROC curves. A simulation study is conducted to empirically investigate the probability coverage and expected length of the three methods for various combinations of sample sizes, values of the area under the ROC curve and correlations. Simulation results demonstrate that the exact confidence interval based on the concept of GPQs provides not only sufficient probability coverage but also reasonable expected length. Numerical examples using published data sets illustrate the proposed method.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2007

An efficient test for the analysis of dichotomized variables when the reliability is known.

A difference in an outcome variable between the treatment groups in a trial does not necessarily mean that there is a difference in the number of patients who experience relevant improvement on that variable. When the relevant improvement corresponds with an outcome or change in outcome that exceeds a certain threshold, the outcome variable can be dichotomized. A responder is a patient whose outcome exceeds the threshold. Comparisons can be made between the number of responders in the two treatment groups using logistic regression, or some other method to evaluate binary outcomes. An important disadvantage of this approach is the loss of power. In general, it is more efficient to test the difference between the mean values. We developed a statistical test that compares response rates for a dichotomized variable. It requires that an estimate of the reliability of the outcome variable is available. Simulations showed that the test was valid and robust over a wide range of distributions and sample sizes. The power was greater than the power of a chi(2) test, which would enable substantial reduction in the sample size.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2007

Sample size determination for logistic regression revisited.

There is no consensus on the approach to compute the power and sample size with logistic regression. Some authors use the likelihood ratio test; some use the test on proportions; some suggest various approximations to handle the multivariate case. We advocate the use of the Wald test since the Z-score is routinely used for statistical significance testing of regression coefficients. The null-variance formula became popular from early studies, which contradicts modern software, which utilizes the method of maximum likelihood estimation (MLE), when the variance of the MLE is estimated at the MLE, not at the null. We derive general Wald-based power and sample size formulas for logistic regression and then apply them to binary exposure and confounder to obtain a closed-form expression. These formulas are applied to minimize the total sample size in a case-control study to achieve a given power by optimizing the ratio of controls to cases. Approximately, the optimal number of controls to cases is equal to the square root of the alternative odds ratio. Our sample size and power calculations can be carried out online at www.dartmouth.edu/ approximately eugened.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗