Resectable Well-Differentiated versus Dedifferentiated Liposarcomas: Two Different Diseases Possibly Requiring Different Treatment Approaches

Lahat, Guy; Anaya, Daniel A.; Wang, X.; Tuvin, Daniel; Lev, Dina; Pollock, Raphael E.

doi:10.1245/s10434-007-9805-x

Cited by 114 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A dedifferentiated tumor tends to present more often as a recurrence, requires multi-organ resection more frequently, and has a shorter disease-free interval compared to those of well differentiated subtypes. Lahat et al [9] reported that 5-year relapse free survival of dedifferentiated liposarcoma was 7.8% compared to well differentiated type (41.9%), and overall survival rate of dedifferentiated and well differentiated type was 36.5% versus 92.1%. Therefore, in the cases of dedifferentiated liposarcoma, close follow up and careful surveillance are warranted for the detection of recurrence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Giant Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma of the Retroperitoneum

Kim¹,

Chae²

2017

J Gastrointest Dig Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A retroperitoneal liposarcoma is a rare tumor. It is classified as several subtypes according to the quantity of lipid, mucoid lipid, and the differentiation of cells. When a tumor is histologically composed of well to poorly differentiated liposarcoma and non-lipomatous sarcoma, it is called a dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Although the prognosis of most liposarcomas are better than other sarcomas, dedifferentiated liposarcoma could be life-threatening because of its higher malignant potential. A dedifferentiated retroperitoneal liposarcoma is a rare disease and there are only a few studies reported, especially in Korea and Asian countries. Despite the relative rarity, these tumors can cause significant morbidity and mortality in affected patients, and complete resection is only the principal treatment. Therefore, we report a case of a giant dedifferentiated liposarcoma of the retroperitoneum in a 66-year-old man who underwent complete resection.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Giant Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma of the Retroperitoneum

Kim¹,

Chae²

2017

J Gastrointest Dig Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some authors advocate a more conservative approach when dealing with pure atypical lipomatous tumor given the very indolent biology of this disease. 13,14 In contrast, most authors agree that extended surgery is the treatment of choice for dedifferentiated liposarcoma. More liberal use of RT as well as chemotherapeutic agents, such as anthracyclines and/or trabectedin, is usually proposed for the few patients affected by primary myxoid/ round cell retroperitoneal liposarcoma given the observed sensitivity of this tumor to both RT and chemotherapy in large, retrospective series.…”

Section: Histological Subtypementioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of Local Treatment or Biology of the Tumor: Which are the Trump Cards for Loco-regional Control of Retroperitoneal Sarcoma?

Gronchi

Pollock

2013

Ann Surg Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surgery remains the mainstay of curative therapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS). Local control is critical to achieve this objective, yet is not possible to achieve even initially in as many as 50 % of patients. Unlike sarcoma arising at other sites, anatomical constraints in the retroperitoneum limit the ability to achieve wide resection margins. As a consequence, local recurrences in RPS are more frequent than in extremity sarcoma and comprise the leading cause of death especially for low-to-intermediate grade tumors, e.g., liposarcoma, the histopathological subtype of approximately one-half of sarcomas arising at this site. Conceptually, adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) is attractive, but this modality also is limited by anatomical constraints as well as the typically large size of these tumors at presentation. RT benefits in RPS remain to be conclusively demonstrated; its application is reserved for selected cases. In the report by McBride et al.1 an interesting approach is proposed, consisting of external preoperative therapy followed by intraoperative dose escalation with brachytherapy. This is an appealing concept, with the caveat that the justification for this strategy is tempered by the retrospective nature of their analysis and the small numbers of patients in their series. Moreover, patients presenting with recurrent tumor whose outcome is usually worse and less likely to be affected by any treatment modalities were nonetheless included in this study. With recurrence, the likelihood of definitive local control reduces to the anecdotal; therefore, the initial therapeutic intervention is critical if durable control (let alone cure) is to result. McBride and colleagues used this opportunity to investigate possible predictors of survival, identifying multifocality as the only determinant of outcome. This finding is not surprising in that multifocality may be a reflection of an especially unfavorable underlying biology of RPS, with obvious prognostic impact, as we and others also have reported.2 Understanding the relative contributions of the effectiveness of local therapy against the inherent biology of specific RPS subtypes will be critical if we are to move a new set-point in RPS, in which specifically useful treatment options can be tailored to the individual patient. QUALITY OF LOCAL THERAPY Surgical StrategySome authors have advocated for the widest possible surgical resection at presentation, a strategy at variance with past recommendations advocating grossly complete extirpation in which the need or utility of resecting adjacent organs was limited to unequivocal direct tumor involvement.3,4 These retrospective analyses have favored a more aggressive adjacent organ resection approach, reporting greater than 75 % local control at 5 years. The need to standardize these seemingly disparate surgical strategies has been addressed recently by a panel of European and North American experts who have described how these tumors might be optimally approached. In essence, this surgical strategy consists of l...

show abstract

“…A recent nomogram based on 800 patients with liposarcoma has confirmed the importance of histological subtype. 1 Few would challenge the authors questioning of whether, with such different outcomes, treatment should be different; however, how different is different? The real challenge, alluded to in the title, is what ''different'' treatment should be applied to these ''different'' diseases.…”

Section: To the Editormentioning

confidence: 99%