Skip to content
← Childhood Soft Tissue Sarcoma

HEALTH PROFESSIONAL · SOURCE READING

Prognostic factors and prognosis

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 of Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumors / Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumor (MPNST) NOS

Factors associated with a favorable prognosis include the following:[1,8-10]

Source links and citations

Smaller tumor size. In a multivariate analysis, only tumor size and nuclear TP53 expression were found to be independent predictors of disease-specific survival.[9]

Source links and citations

Male sex.[11]

Source links and citations

Non-Hispanic White race.[11]

Source links and citations

Lower stage.

Lower histological grade.

Extremity as the primary site.

Factors associated with an unfavorable prognosis include the following:[12]

Source links and citations

High grade.

Deep tumor location.

Locally advanced stage at diagnosis.

Presence of metastasis at diagnosis. A retrospective review of 140 patients with MPNST from the MD Anderson Cancer Center included children and adolescents. The disease-specific survival at 10 years was 32%. In this series, presence of metastatic disease was associated with a much worse prognosis.[9]

Source links and citations

Macroscopically incomplete resection (R2).

Inactivation of TP53, either by variant or amplification of MDM2.[13]

Source links and citations

High expression of TP53 and cyclin D1. These markers were identified as adverse prognostic factors using immunohistochemical staining of diagnostic biopsy tissue.[14][Level of evidence C2]

Source links and citations

Presence of NF1 appears to be associated with an unfavorable prognosis, but the data are mixed.[4,15]

Source links and citations

For patients with localized disease in the MD Anderson Cancer Center study, there was no significant difference in outcome between patients with and without NF1.[9] In other studies, it was not clear whether the absence of NF1 was a favorable prognostic factor as it has been associated with both favorable [8] and unfavorable outcomes.[1,8,10]

Source links and citations

In the French Sarcoma Group study, NF1 was associated with other adverse prognostic features, but was not an independent predictor of poor outcome.[12] A retrospective analysis of cancer registry data from the Netherlands identified 784 patients with MPNST; 70 of the patients were aged 18 years or younger.[16][Level of evidence C1] In children with NF1, large tumor size was more common (>5 cm, 92.3% vs. 59.1%). Overall, the estimated 5-year survival rate was 52.4% (standard error [SE], 10.1%) for patients with localized MPNST and NF1, compared with 75.8% (SE, 7.1%) for patients without NF1.

Source links and citations

The Cooperative Weichteilsarkom Studiengruppe (CWS) reported a retrospective review of patients with MPNST who were treated on five consecutive CWS trials.[17] A total of 159 patients were analyzed. NF1 was reported in 38 patients (24%). Nodal involvement was documented in 15 patients (9%) at diagnosis, and distant metastases was noted in 15 patients (9%) at diagnosis. Overall, the event-free survival (EFS) rate was 40.5% at 5 years and 36.3% at 10 years. The overall survival (OS) rate was 54.6% at 5 years and 47.1% at 10 years. Older age, positive NF1 status, primary tumor site other than extremity, larger tumor size, higher Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study (IRS) group, presence of metastatic disease, and failure to achieve first complete remission were identified as adverse prognostic factors for EFS and/or OS in the univariate analysis.

Source links and citations

Publication references

Read the original reference and check its publication notices.

Preserved source evidence · Not medical advice