Skip to content
← Childhood Soft Tissue Sarcoma

HEALTH PROFESSIONAL · SOURCE READING

Surgery

Source: Childhood Soft Tissue Sarcoma Treatment (PDQ®)–Health Professional Version, National Cancer Institute.

Source updated: April 21, 2025 · Captured 2026-09-09.

Selected source text with whitespace normalised. This Triangle page is not an NCI PDQ summary.

Context: Treatment Option Overview for Childhood Soft Tissue Sarcoma

Surgical resection of the primary tumor is the predominant therapy for most NRSTS. In the COG ARST0332 (NCT00346164) study, approximately 37% of patients younger than 30 years were treated with surgery alone.[1] Another 36% of patients had surgical resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Involvement of a surgeon with special expertise in the resection of soft tissue sarcomas is highly desirable.

Source links and citations

After an appropriate biopsy and pathological diagnosis, every attempt is made to resect the primary tumor. Completeness of resection predicts outcome. In the COG ARST0332 study, complete resections with negative microscopic margins (R0) resulted in the best outcomes.[1]

Source links and citations

The 5-year EFS rates for patients treated with surgery and other modalities were the following:

The 5-year EFS rates for patients treated with surgery and other modalities were the following:

84% for patients who had R0 resections.

The 5-year EFS rates for patients treated with surgery and other modalities were the following:

66% for patients who had R1 resections.

The 5-year EFS rates for patients treated with surgery and other modalities were the following:

49% for patients who had R2 resections.

The 5-year OS rates for patients treated with surgery and other modalities were the following:

The 5-year OS rates for patients treated with surgery and other modalities were the following:

93% for patients who had R0 resections.

The 5-year OS rates for patients treated with surgery and other modalities were the following:

80% for patients who had R1 resections.

The 5-year OS rates for patients treated with surgery and other modalities were the following:

63% for patients who had R2 resections.

The 5-year EFS rates for patients treated with surgery only were the following:

The 5-year EFS rates for patients treated with surgery only were the following:

96% for patients with low-grade tumors who had R0 resections.

The 5-year EFS rates for patients treated with surgery only were the following:

81% for patients with low-grade tumors who had R1 resections.

The 5-year EFS rates for patients treated with surgery only were the following:

84% for patients with high-grade tumors that were smaller than 5 cm and had R0 resections.

The COG reported results for the subset of patients with low-grade NRSTS enrolled in the ARST0332 study.[2] Low-risk patients were treated with surgery alone. Intermediate- and high-risk patients received ifosfamide/doxorubicin and radiation therapy, with definitive resection either before or after 12 weeks of chemotherapy and radiation therapy.

Source links and citations
Table 10. Survival Results From the ARST0332 Study
Risk Group5-Year Event-Free Survival Rate5-Year Overall Survival Rate
Low risk90%100%
Intermediate risk55%78%
High risk25%25%

In low-risk patients, local-only recurrences were seen in 10% of patients. No patients with margins of resection greater than 1 mm had local recurrences.

Sixteen of 17 intermediate- and high-risk patients who completed neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy underwent gross-total tumor resection, and 80% had negative margins.

In the intermediate- and high-risk groups, events included one local recurrence and seven metastatic recurrences.

The timing of surgery depends on an assessment of the feasibility and morbidity of surgery. In the COG ARST0332 study, if the central review surgeon deemed the tumor unresectable without loss of limb, form, or function, the patient was treated in arm C with neoadjuvant radiation therapy. Surgery was performed 4 to 6 weeks after the completion of radiation therapy. This early surgery allowed for decreased morbidity, better wound healing, and more complete surgical resection. The outcomes in the COG ARST0332 study were nearly identical for intermediate-risk patients who achieved an R0 or R1 resection with up-front surgery or surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (70% vs. 71%, respectively). An R0 resection was more likely to occur after neoadjuvant therapy.[1] These observations are true even for high-grade tumors, where the ability to achieve R0 or R1 resections was the major predictor of EFS. Treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy resulted in lower doses of radiation therapy and achieved greater rates of R0 resections.[3] Resectability should be determined at the time of diagnosis. While there should be an emphasis on achieving negative margins without loss of form or function, given the variability of chemosensitivity of such diverse tumors, it may be better to tailor the resection to histology for each patient.

Source links and citations

If the initial operation fails to achieve pathologically negative tissue margins or if the initial surgery was done without the knowledge that cancer was present, a re-excision of the affected area is performed to obtain clear, but not necessarily wide, margins.[4-7] This surgical tenet is true even if no mass is detected by magnetic resonance imaging after initial surgery.[8]; [9][Level of evidence C1]

Source links and citations

Regional lymph node metastases at diagnosis are unusual and are most often seen in patients with epithelioid and clear cell sarcomas.[10,11] Sentinel lymph node biopsy as a staging procedure in soft tissue sarcoma remains controversial. However, it may help manage selected cases in adults with clear cell sarcoma and epithelioid sarcoma. There are insufficient data to support the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in the management of pediatric patients with other NRSTS.[12-17]

Source links and citations

Studies cited in this source section

Source citation is not a determination that a study applies to you.

Publication references

Read the original reference and check its publication notices.

Preserved source evidence · Not medical advice