↓ Skip to main content

Race is an independent predictor of survival in patients with soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Race is an independent predictor of survival in patients with soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities
Published in
BMC Cancer, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12885-018-4397-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander L. Lazarides, Julia D. Visgauss, Daniel P. Nussbaum, Cindy L. Green, Dan G. Blazer, Brian E. Brigman, William C. Eward

Abstract

In the United States, race and socioeconomic status are well known predictors of adverse outcomes in several different cancers. Existing evidence suggests that race and socioeconomic status may impact survival in soft tissue sarcoma (STS). We investigated the National Cancer Database (NCDB), which contains several socioeconomic and medical variables and contains the largest sarcoma patient registry to date. Our goal was to determine the impact of race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status on patient survival in patients with soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities (STS-E). We retrospectively analyzed 14,067 STS-E patients in the NCDB from 1998 through 2012. Patients were stratified based on race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to correlate specific outcomes and survival measures with these factors. Then, long-term survival between groups was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier (KM) method with comparisons based on the log-rank test. Multiple variables were analyzed between two groups. Of the 14,067 patients analyzed, 84.9% were white, 11% were black and 4.1% were Asian. Black patients were significantly more likely (7.18% vs 5.65% vs 4.47%) than white or Asian patients to receive amputation (p = 0.027). Black patients were also less likely to have either an above-median education level or an above-median income level (p < 0.001). In addition, black patients were more likely to be uninsured (p < 0.001) and more likely to have a higher Charleson Comorbidity Score than white or Asian patients. Tumors were larger in size upon presentation in black patients than in white or Asian patients (p < 0.001). Black patients had significantly poorer overall survival than did white or Asian patients (p < 0.001) with a KM 5-year survival of 61.4% vs 66.9% and 69.9% respectively, and a 24% higher independent likelihood of dying in a multivariate analysis. This large database review reveals concerning trends in black patients with STS-E. These include larger tumors, poorer resources, a greater likelihood of amputation, and poorer survival than white and Asian patients. Future studies are warranted to help ensure adequate access to effective treatment for all patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 7 18%
Other 5 13%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Master 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 14 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Mathematics 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 17 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 May 2018.
All research outputs
#20,485,225
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#6,537
of 8,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,458
of 326,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#173
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,368 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.