BACKGROUND Angiosarcomas (AS) are rare, aggressive tumors. Optimal treatment has not been well defined. The authors undertook a retrospective review of patients seen at their institution with the intent of identifying prognostic factors and optimal treatment strategies. METHODS Between 1955 and 1990, 67 patients with AS were seen at the University of California, at Los Angeles Medical Center. Follow‐up ranged from 1 to 173 months with a median of 30 months. RESULTS The overall prognosis was poor. The actuarial 2‐ and 5‐year disease free survivals (DFS) were 44% and 24%, respectively. Of 52 recurrences after primary treatment, 81% (42 of 52) had a component of local failure. Twenty‐eight patients had developed distant metastases at last follow‐up. Of patients who received surgery (S) and radiation therapy (RT), with or without chemotherapy (CT), 5‐year actuarial DFS was 43%, compared with 17% for patients who underwent S+/−CT as initial treatment (P = 0.03). Only 9% of patients (1 of 11) treated with RT+/−CT were rendered free of disease. CONCLUSIONS Patients with AS usually present with high grade histology, and with multifocal disease. There is a propensity for both local recurrence and distant metastases. Our results and a review of the literature, suggest that S plus RT offers the best chance for long term control of this aggressive tumor. The role of CT remains undefined. Cancer 1996;77:2400‐6.

The authors reviewed 164 cases of head and neck sarcoma from adult patients seen at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), between 1955 and 1988. The median follow‐up was 70 months. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that tumor grade, size, and surgical margin status were the most important independent prognostic factors. Thirty‐one percent (27 of 85) of patients with high‐grade lesions were free of disease versus 81% (44 of 55) with low‐grade lesions at last follow‐up. Sixty‐seven percent (50 of 76) of patients with lesions smaller than 5 cm were free of disease versus; 38% (33 of 88) with lesions larger than 5 cm. In 16 patients, low‐grade lesions, measuring less than 5 cm and with negative margins histologically, were controlled with surgery alone. For the 94 patients whose primary tumors were treated at UCLA, local control was achieved in 52% (26 of 50) of patients treated with surgery alone and 90% (20 of 22) with combined therapy (surgery and radiation therapy [RT] with or without chemotherapy). Seventy‐five percent (6 of 8) of patients with positive surgical margins treated with post‐operative RT achieved local control versus 26% (5 of 19) of patients receiving no additional treatment. In conclusion, surgery alone appears to be adequate treatment for small, low‐grade tumors and negative surgical margins. Patients with incomplete resection or high‐grade tumors should receive aggressive treatment–surgery and RT.

No abstract

Background. With improvement in survival after cancer treatment, it is becoming increasingly important to examine treatment‐related morbidity and mortality. Sarcomas can develop in the irradiated field after radiation therapy (RT). The authors undertook a study to estimate the risk, and compared the risk of postirradiation sarcoma (PIS) with other treatment modalities used against cancer. Methods. Since 1987 the authors have reviewed the records of 1089 patients with head and neck, gynecologic, gastrointestinal, and extremity sarcomas. Of these 1089 patients, 37 had a prior history of RT. Results. Conditions for which these patients received RT included: Hodgkin's disease (2 patients), retinoblastoma (3), non‐Hodgkin's lymphoma (2), acne (1), astrocytoma (1), multiple recurrent mixed parotid tumor (1), laryngeal cancer (1), papillary adenocarcinoma of the thyroid (1), bony fibrous dysplasia (1), lymphangioma (1), squamous cell carcinoma of the nasopharynx (1), Ewing's sarcoma (1), choriocarcinoma (1), menorrhagia (4), cervical cancer (6), ovarian cancer (2), breast cancer (7), and hypoplasia (1). RT doses ranged from 3000 to 12,440 cGy. Latency time from RT to the development of PIS averaged 12 years. More than 15,000 patients have received RT for various conditions at our institution since 1955. Conclusions. From our data and a review of the literature, we estimate the risk of PIS with long‐term follow‐up to be 0.03–0.8%. From a review of the literature that compared mortality risks of chemotherapy, general surgery, and anesthesia, the risk of PIS appears no worse. Thus, given the large number of patients who can be cured or receive palliative treatment with RT, concern regarding PIS should not be a major factor influencing treatment decisions in patients with cancer.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background. With improvement in survival after cancer treatment, it is becoming increasingly important to study treatment‐related morbidity and mortality. Sarcoma can develop in the irradiated field after radiation therapy. The authors performed a study to estimate the risk, and compared the risk of sarcoma after radiation therapy with that of other treatment modalities used against cancer. Methods. Between 1955 and 1988, 229 patients with sarcoma of the head and neck were seen at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Medical Center. Of these, 13 (6%) had a previous history of radiation therapy to the head and neck. Results. Radiation doses were known in 10 of 13 patients and ranged from 30 to 124.4 Gy. The latency time from radiation therapy to the development of postirradiation sarcoma (PIS) ranged from 3 months to 50 years, with a median of 12 years. More than 2000 patients have received radiation therapy to the head and neck for various conditions at the UCLA Medical Center since 1955. Conclusions. The authors conclude that most head and neck sarcomas are not radiation related and that the risk of PIS after head and neck irradiation for other diseases is low. From a review of the literature comparing mortality risks of chemotherapy, general surgery, and anesthesia, the risk of PIS appears no worse. Given the large number of patients who can be cured or receive palliation with radiation therapy, concern about PIS should not be a major factor influencing treatment decisions in patients with cancer.