National Cancer Institute
U.S. National Institutes of Health | www.cancer.gov

NCI Home
Cancer Topics
Clinical Trials
Cancer Statistics
Research & Funding
News
About NCI
Osteosarcoma and Malignant Fibrous Histiocytoma of Bone Treatment (PDQ®)
Patient Version   Health Professional Version   En español   Last Modified: 11/26/2008



Purpose of This PDQ Summary






General Information






Prognostic Factors






Cellular Classification






Staging and Site Information






Treatment Option Overview






Localized Osteosarcoma/Malignant Fibrous Histiocytoma of Bone






Metastatic Disease at Diagnosis






Recurrent Osteosarcoma






Get More Information From NCI






Changes to This Summary (11/26/2008)






More Information



Page Options
Print This Page
Print Entire Document
View Entire Document
E-Mail This Document
Quick Links
Director's Corner

Dictionary of Cancer Terms

NCI Drug Dictionary

Funding Opportunities

NCI Publications

Advisory Boards and Groups

Science Serving People

Español
Quit Smoking Today
NCI Highlights
Report to Nation Finds Declines in Cancer Incidence, Death Rates

High Dose Chemotherapy Prolongs Survival for Leukemia

Prostate Cancer Study Shows No Benefit for Selenium, Vitamin E

The Nation's Investment in Cancer Research FY 2009

Past Highlights
Prognostic Factors

Primary Site
Tumor Size
Presence of Clinically Detectable Metastatic Disease
Adequacy of Tumor Resection
Necrosis Following Induction or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
Additional Prognostic Factors

Factors that influence prognosis for osteosarcoma include site and size of the primary tumor, presence or absence of clinically detectable metastatic disease, adequacy of resection, and degree of necrosis observed in tumors following initial chemotherapy. The latter two factors are not conventional prognostic factors since they can be assessed only after treatment, not at initial presentation.

Primary Site

The site of the primary tumor is a significant prognostic factor in localized disease. Among tumors of the extremity, distal sites have a more favorable prognosis than proximal sites. Axial skeleton primary tumors are associated with the greatest risk of progression and death.[1,2] Pelvic osteosarcomas make up 7% to 9% of all osteosarcomas; their current overall survival rate is 20% to 47%.[1] For patients with osteosarcoma of craniofacial bones, complete resection of the primary tumor with negative margins is essential for cure.[3-5] Despite a relatively high rate of inferior necrosis following neoadjuvant chemotherapy, fewer patients with craniofacial primaries develop systemic metastases than do patients with osteosarcoma originating in the extremities.[6-8] This low rate of metastasis may be related to the relatively smaller size and higher incidence of lower grade tumors in osteosarcoma of the head and neck. There is a better prognosis for patients who have osteosarcoma of the head and neck than for those who have appendicular lesions when treated with surgery alone. While small series have not shown a benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with osteosarcoma of the head and neck, one meta-analysis concluded that systemic chemotherapy improves the prognosis for these patients. Another large meta-analysis detected no benefit from chemotherapy for patients with osteosarcoma of the head and neck, but suggested that the incorporation of chemotherapy into treatment of patients with high-grade tumors may improve survival. A retrospective analysis identified a trend toward better survival in patients with high-grade osteosarcoma of the mandible and maxilla who received adjuvant chemotherapy.[9] However, radiation-associated craniofacial osteosarcomas are high-grade lesions, usually fibroblastic, which tend to recur locally and have a high rate of metastasis.[10]

Osteosarcoma in extraskeletal sites is rare in children and young adults. With current combined-modality therapy, the outcome for patients with extraskeletal osteosarcoma appears to be similar to that for patients with primary tumors of bone.[11]

Tumor Size

Larger tumors have a worse prognosis than smaller tumors. Tumor size has been assessed by the longest single dimension, by the cross-sectional area, or by an estimate of tumor volume; all have correlated with outcome. Serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), which also correlates with outcome, is a likely surrogate for tumor volume.

Presence of Clinically Detectable Metastatic Disease

Patients with localized disease have a much better prognosis than those with overt metastatic disease. As many as 20% of patients will have radiographically detectable metastases at diagnosis, with the lung being the most common site.[12] The prognosis for patients with metastatic disease appears to be determined largely by the site(s), the number of metastases, and the surgical resectability of the metastatic disease.[12-15] Patients who have complete surgical ablation of the primary and metastatic tumor (when confined to the lung) following chemotherapy may attain long-term survival, though overall event-free survival remains about 20% to 30% for patients with metastatic disease at diagnosis.[12,13,16-18] Prognosis appears more favorable for patients with fewer pulmonary nodules and for those with unilateral rather than bilateral pulmonary metastases; however, not every nodule detected indicates metastatic disease.[13,14] The degree of necrosis in the primary tumor after induction chemotherapy remains prognostic in metastatic osteosarcoma.[19] Patients with skip metastases (≥2 discontinuous lesions in the same bone) have been reported to have inferior prognoses.[20] Analysis of the German Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study (COSS) experience, however, suggests that skip lesions in the same bone do not confer an inferior prognosis if they are included in planned surgical resection. Skip lesions across a joint have a worse prognosis.[21] Patients with multifocal osteosarcoma (>1 bone lesion at diagnosis) have an extremely poor prognosis.[22]

Adequacy of Tumor Resection

Resectability of the tumor is a critical prognostic feature because this tumor is relatively resistant to radiation therapy. Complete resection of tumor-bearing bone with adequate margins is generally considered essential for cure. Skip lesions were previously considered an unfavorable risk factor. Analysis of the German COSS experience, however, suggests that skip lesions do not confer an inferior prognosis if they are included in planned surgical resction.[21] Two studies have examined the outcome for patients with osteosarcoma in the axial skeleton whose tumors were resected with positive margins. In these retrospective analyses of nonrandomized treatments, among patients who had no surgery or intralesional resection, patients who received radiation therapy had better survival than patients who did not receive radiation therapy.[1,23]

Necrosis Following Induction or Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

Most treatment protocols for osteosarcoma use an initial period of systemic chemotherapy prior to definitive resection of the primary tumor (or resection of sites of metastases for patients with metastatic disease). The pathologist assesses necrosis in the resected tumor. Patients with greater than or equal to 90% [24] necrosis in the primary tumor after induction chemotherapy have a better prognosis than those with less necrosis.[24] Patients with less necrosis (<90%) in the primary tumor following initial chemotherapy have a higher rate of recurrence within the first 2 years compared with patients with a more favorable amount of necrosis (≥90%).[25] Imaging modalities such as dynamic magnetic resonance imaging may offer a noninvasive method to assess necrosis.[26] Less necrosis should not be interpreted to mean that chemotherapy has been ineffective; cure rates for patients with little or no necrosis following induction chemotherapy are much higher than cure rates for patients who receive no chemotherapy.

Additional Prognostic Factors

Patients with osteosarcoma as a second malignant neoplasm share the same prognosis as patients with newly diagnosed disease if they are treated aggressively with surgery and multiagent chemotherapy.[27-31] There have been numerous other identified prognostic features for patients with conventional localized high-grade osteosarcoma. These factors include the age of the patient, LDH level, alkaline phosphatase level, and histologic subtype.[19,24,32-37] A number of potential prognostic factors have been identified but have not been tested in large numbers of patients. These include the expression of HER2/c-erbB-2 (there are conflicting data concerning the prognostic significance of this human epidermal growth factor);[38-40] tumor cell ploidy; specific chromosomal gains or losses;[41] loss of heterozygosity (LOH) of the RB gene;[42,43] LOH of the p53 locus;[44] and increased expression of p-glycoprotein.[45-48] A prospective analysis of p-glycoprotein expression determined by immunohistochemistry failed to identify prognostic significance for newly diagnosed patients with osteosarcoma, although earlier studies suggested that overexpression of p-glycoprotein predicted for poor outcome.[49] Patients with malignant fibrous histiocytoma (MFH) of bone are treated according to osteosarcoma treatment protocols, and the outcome for patients with resectable MFH is similar to the outcome for patients with osteosarcoma.[50] As with osteosarcoma, patients with a favorable necrosis had a longer survival than those with an inferior necrosis.[51] MFH of bone is seen more commonly in older adults.

References

  1. Ozaki T, Flege S, Kevric M, et al.: Osteosarcoma of the pelvis: experience of the Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group. J Clin Oncol 21 (2): 334-41, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  2. Donati D, Giacomini S, Gozzi E, et al.: Osteosarcoma of the pelvis. Eur J Surg Oncol 30 (3): 332-40, 2004.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  3. Patel SG, Meyers P, Huvos AG, et al.: Improved outcomes in patients with osteogenic sarcoma of the head and neck. Cancer 95 (7): 1495-503, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  4. Smith RB, Apostolakis LW, Karnell LH, et al.: National Cancer Data Base report on osteosarcoma of the head and neck. Cancer 98 (8): 1670-80, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  5. Fernandes R, Nikitakis NG, Pazoki A, et al.: Osteogenic sarcoma of the jaw: a 10-year experience. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 65 (7): 1286-91, 2007.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  6. Smeele LE, Kostense PJ, van der Waal I, et al.: Effect of chemotherapy on survival of craniofacial osteosarcoma: a systematic review of 201 patients. J Clin Oncol 15 (1): 363-7, 1997.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  7. Ha PK, Eisele DW, Frassica FJ, et al.: Osteosarcoma of the head and neck: a review of the Johns Hopkins experience. Laryngoscope 109 (6): 964-9, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  8. Duffaud F, Digue L, Baciuchka-Palmaro M, et al.: Osteosarcomas of flat bones in adolescents and adults. Cancer 88 (2): 324-32, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  9. Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Oncology Study Group.: Osteogenic sarcoma of the mandible and maxilla: a Canadian review (1980-2000). J Otolaryngol 33 (3): 139-44, 2004.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  10. McHugh JB, Thomas DG, Herman JM, et al.: Primary versus radiation-associated craniofacial osteosarcoma: Biologic and clinicopathologic comparisons. Cancer 107 (3): 554-62, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  11. Goldstein-Jackson SY, Gosheger G, Delling G, et al.: Extraskeletal osteosarcoma has a favourable prognosis when treated like conventional osteosarcoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 131 (8): 520-6, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  12. Kaste SC, Pratt CB, Cain AM, et al.: Metastases detected at the time of diagnosis of primary pediatric extremity osteosarcoma at diagnosis: imaging features. Cancer 86 (8): 1602-8, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  13. Harris MB, Gieser P, Goorin AM, et al.: Treatment of metastatic osteosarcoma at diagnosis: a Pediatric Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol 16 (11): 3641-8, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  14. Bacci G, Briccoli A, Ferrari S, et al.: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for osteosarcoma of the extremities with synchronous lung metastases: treatment with cisplatin, adriamycin and high dose of methotrexate and ifosfamide. Oncol Rep 7 (2): 339-46, 2000 Mar-Apr.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  15. Bacci G, Briccoli A, Ferrari S, et al.: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for osteosarcoma of the extremity: long-term results of the Rizzoli's 4th protocol. Eur J Cancer 37 (16): 2030-9, 2001.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  16. Goorin AM, Shuster JJ, Baker A, et al.: Changing pattern of pulmonary metastases with adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with osteosarcoma: results from the multiinstitutional osteosarcoma study. J Clin Oncol 9 (4): 600-5, 1991.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  17. Bacci G, Mercuri M, Longhi A, et al.: Grade of chemotherapy-induced necrosis as a predictor of local and systemic control in 881 patients with non-metastatic osteosarcoma of the extremities treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in a single institution. Eur J Cancer 41 (14): 2079-85, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  18. Bacci G, Briccoli A, Mercuri M, et al.: Osteosarcoma of the extremities with synchronous lung metastases: long-term results in 44 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Chemother 10 (1): 69-76, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  19. Meyers PA, Heller G, Healey JH, et al.: Osteogenic sarcoma with clinically detectable metastasis at initial presentation. J Clin Oncol 11 (3): 449-53, 1993.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  20. Sajadi KR, Heck RK, Neel MD, et al.: The incidence and prognosis of osteosarcoma skip metastases. Clin Orthop Relat Res (426): 92-6, 2004.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  21. Kager L, Zoubek A, Kastner U, et al.: Skip metastases in osteosarcoma: experience of the Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group. J Clin Oncol 24 (10): 1535-41, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  22. Bacci G, Fabbri N, Balladelli A, et al.: Treatment and prognosis for synchronous multifocal osteosarcoma in 42 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88 (8): 1071-5, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  23. DeLaney TF, Park L, Goldberg SI, et al.: Radiotherapy for local control of osteosarcoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 61 (2): 492-8, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  24. Bielack SS, Kempf-Bielack B, Delling G, et al.: Prognostic factors in high-grade osteosarcoma of the extremities or trunk: an analysis of 1,702 patients treated on neoadjuvant cooperative osteosarcoma study group protocols. J Clin Oncol 20 (3): 776-90, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  25. Kim MS, Cho WH, Song WS, et al.: time dependency of prognostic factors in patients with stage II osteosarcomas. Clin Orthop Relat Res 463: 157-65, 2007.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  26. Reddick WE, Wang S, Xiong X, et al.: Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of regional contrast access as an additional prognostic factor in pediatric osteosarcoma. Cancer 91 (12): 2230-7, 2001.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  27. Bielack SS, Kempf-Bielack B, Heise U, et al.: Combined modality treatment for osteosarcoma occurring as a second malignant disease. Cooperative German-Austrian-Swiss Osteosarcoma Study Group. J Clin Oncol 17 (4): 1164, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  28. Tabone MD, Terrier P, Pacquement H, et al.: Outcome of radiation-related osteosarcoma after treatment of childhood and adolescent cancer: a study of 23 cases. J Clin Oncol 17 (9): 2789-95, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  29. Gorlick R, Anderson P, Andrulis I, et al.: Biology of childhood osteogenic sarcoma and potential targets for therapeutic development: meeting summary. Clin Cancer Res 9 (15): 5442-53, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  30. Shaheen M, Deheshi BM, Riad S, et al.: Prognosis of radiation-induced bone sarcoma is similar to primary osteosarcoma. Clin Orthop Relat Res 450: 76-81, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  31. Bacci G, Longhi A, Forni C, et al.: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for radioinduced osteosarcoma of the extremity: The Rizzoli experience in 20 cases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 67 (2): 505-11, 2007.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  32. Meyers PA, Heller G, Healey J, et al.: Chemotherapy for nonmetastatic osteogenic sarcoma: the Memorial Sloan-Kettering experience. J Clin Oncol 10 (1): 5-15, 1992.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  33. Bacci G, Longhi A, Versari M, et al.: Prognostic factors for osteosarcoma of the extremity treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: 15-year experience in 789 patients treated at a single institution. Cancer 106 (5): 1154-61, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  34. Wuisman P, Enneking WF: Prognosis for patients who have osteosarcoma with skip metastasis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 72 (1): 60-8, 1990.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  35. Bieling P, Rehan N, Winkler P, et al.: Tumor size and prognosis in aggressively treated osteosarcoma. J Clin Oncol 14 (3): 848-58, 1996.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  36. Ferrari S, Bertoni F, Mercuri M, et al.: Predictive factors of disease-free survival for non-metastatic osteosarcoma of the extremity: an analysis of 300 patients treated at the Rizzoli Institute. Ann Oncol 12 (8): 1145-50, 2001.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  37. Bacci G, Longhi A, Fagioli F, et al.: Adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for osteosarcoma of the extremities: 27 year experience at Rizzoli Institute, Italy. Eur J Cancer 41 (18): 2836-45, 2005.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  38. Gorlick R, Huvos AG, Heller G, et al.: Expression of HER2/erbB-2 correlates with survival in osteosarcoma. J Clin Oncol 17 (9): 2781-8, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  39. Onda M, Matsuda S, Higaki S, et al.: ErbB-2 expression is correlated with poor prognosis for patients with osteosarcoma. Cancer 77 (1): 71-8, 1996.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  40. Kilpatrick SE, Geisinger KR, King TS, et al.: Clinicopathologic analysis of HER-2/neu immunoexpression among various histologic subtypes and grades of osteosarcoma. Mod Pathol 14 (12): 1277-83, 2001.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  41. Ozaki T, Schaefer KL, Wai D, et al.: Genetic imbalances revealed by comparative genomic hybridization in osteosarcomas. Int J Cancer 102 (4): 355-65, 2002.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  42. Feugeas O, Guriec N, Babin-Boilletot A, et al.: Loss of heterozygosity of the RB gene is a poor prognostic factor in patients with osteosarcoma. J Clin Oncol 14 (2): 467-72, 1996.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  43. Heinsohn S, Evermann U, Zur Stadt U, et al.: Determination of the prognostic value of loss of heterozygosity at the retinoblastoma gene in osteosarcoma. Int J Oncol 30 (5): 1205-14, 2007.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  44. Goto A, Kanda H, Ishikawa Y, et al.: Association of loss of heterozygosity at the p53 locus with chemoresistance in osteosarcomas. Jpn J Cancer Res 89 (5): 539-47, 1998.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  45. Serra M, Maurici D, Scotlandi K, et al.: Relationship between P-glycoprotein expression and p53 status in high-grade osteosarcoma. Int J Oncol 14 (2): 301-7, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  46. Hornicek FJ, Gebhardt MC, Wolfe MW, et al.: P-glycoprotein levels predict poor outcome in patients with osteosarcoma. Clin Orthop (373): 11-7, 2000.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  47. Serra M, Pasello M, Manara MC, et al.: May P-glycoprotein status be used to stratify high-grade osteosarcoma patients? Results from the Italian/Scandinavian Sarcoma Group 1 treatment protocol. Int J Oncol 29 (6): 1459-68, 2006.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  48. Pakos EE, Ioannidis JP: The association of P-glycoprotein with response to chemotherapy and clinical outcome in patients with osteosarcoma. A meta-analysis. Cancer 98 (3): 581-9, 2003.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  49. Schwartz CL, Gorlick R, Teot L, et al.: Multiple drug resistance in osteogenic sarcoma: INT0133 from the Children's Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 25 (15): 2057-62, 2007.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  50. Picci P, Bacci G, Ferrari S, et al.: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in malignant fibrous histiocytoma of bone and in osteosarcoma located in the extremities: analogies and differences between the two tumors. Ann Oncol 8 (11): 1107-15, 1997.  [PUBMED Abstract]

  51. Bramwell VH, Steward WP, Nooij M, et al.: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin and cisplatin in malignant fibrous histiocytoma of bone: A European Osteosarcoma Intergroup study. J Clin Oncol 17 (10): 3260-9, 1999.  [PUBMED Abstract]

Back to Top

< Previous Section  |  Next Section >


A Service of the National Cancer Institute
Department of Health and Human Services National Institutes of Health USA.gov