Post-Systemic Chemotherapy Prognoses of Recurrent/Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcoma Patients with Retroperitoneal/Intra-Abdominal Origin versus Those with Extremities/Trunk Origin.

Background: The clinical benefit of systemic chemotherapy for recurrent/metastatic retroperitoneal/intra-abdominal soft tissue sarcoma (STS) compared to its benefits for other primary lesions has not been known or sufficiently evaluated. Methods and Patients: We retrospectively reviewed the cases of the STS patients who consulted a department of medical oncology in Tokyo between June 2011 and March 2018, and we extracted the cases of patients with primary sites at the retroperitoneum/intra-abdomen (cohort R) or extremities/trunk (cohort E) who received systemic chemotherapy in a recurrent/metastatic setting, comparing the cohorts' characteristics, chemotherapy details, and prognoses. Results: Of all 337 STS patients, we enrolled 49 patients in cohort R and 75 patients in cohort E. Liposarcoma was more frequently observed in cohort R (51.0%) than cohort E (22.7%). The median chemotherapy treatment line was two lines (range: 1–6) in cohort R and three lines (range: 1–9) in cohort E. The doxorubicin usage rates differed in recurrent/metastatic settings (90.0% in cohort R and 55.0% in cohort E), due mainly to the higher rate of a perioperative chemotherapy treatment history in cohort E (52.0% vs. 6.1% in cohort R). The median overall survival from the start of salvage chemotherapy was 31.9 months (cohort R; 95% CI: 20.9–42.8) and 27.1 months (cohort E; 95% CI: 21.6–32.5) (p = 0.549). Conclusion: There were differences in the distributions of pathology and antitumor drugs used in a salvage setting between retroperitoneal/intra-abdominal and extremities/trunk STS patients in recurrent/metastatic settings, but the prognoses with salvage chemotherapy were similar in the two cohorts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]