Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 283

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Osteosarcoma of the spine: Experience of the Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group

Open access
Ozaki, Toshifumi, Flege, Silke, Liljenqvist, Ulf, Hillmann, Axel, Delling, Günter, Salzer‐Kuntschik, Mechthild, Jürgens, Heribert, Kotz, Rainer, Winkelmann, Winfried, Bielack, Stefan S.·2002·Cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Due to the low incidence rate, the optimal strategy for the treatment of patients with spinal osteosarcoma is unknown. METHODS: Twenty‐two patients with osteosarcoma of the spine (15 with tumors of the sacrum and 7 with tumors at other sites) who received chemotherapy according to the Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group protocol were analyzed. Six patients presented with metastasis, and 16 patients had no evidence of metastasis at the time of entry into the protocol. Of 12 patients who underwent excision of their tumors, 2 patients underwent wide excision, 3 patients underwent marginal excision, and 7 patients underwent intralesional excision. Eight patients received irradiation: Six patients received conventional radiotherapy only, one patient received neutron beam therapy, and one patient received samarium‐153‐ethylene diamine tetramethylene phosphonate therapy. Follow‐up ranged between 24 months and 105 months (median, 47 months). RESULTS: The median survival was 23 months, and three patients have survived without disease for > 6 years. Patients with primary metastases (P = 0.004), large tumors (P = 0.010), and sacral tumors (P = 0.048) had lower overall survival compared with patients who had no metastasis, small tumors, and nonsacral tumors, respectively. There was a significant difference in overall survival between 5 patients who underwent either wide or marginal surgery and 17 patients who underwent either intralesional surgery or no surgery (P = 0.033). Among 17 patients who underwent no surgery or intralesional surgery, overall survival tended to be better in 7 patients who received irradiation compared with the overall survival in 10 patients who did not receive irradiation (P = 0.059). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with metastases, a large tumors, and sacral tumors had a poor prognosis in the current study with small numbers of patients. Wide or marginal excision of the tumor improved survival. Patients with osteosarcoma of the spine should be treated with a combination of chemotherapy and at least marginal excision for those with surgically accessible tumors. Postoperative radiotherapy may be beneficial. Cancer 2002;94:1069–77. © 2002 American Cancer Society. DOI 10.1002/cncr.10258

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.10258

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 283

Metadata

Authors
Ozaki, T., Flege, S., Liljenqvist, U., Hillmann, A., Delling, G., Salzer‐Kuntschik, M., Jürgens, H., Kotz, R., Winkelmann, W., & Bielack, S. S.
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-02-15
Volume
94
Issue
4
Pages
1069-1077
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
OpenAlex
W2014055476
Cited by
283
References
0
FWCI
7.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Osteosarcoma of the spine: Experience of the Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.10258
The paper
Ozaki, T., Flege, S., Liljenqvist, U., Hillmann, A., Delling, G., Salzer‐Kuntschik, M., Jürgens, H., Kotz, R., Winkelmann, W., & Bielack, S. S. (2002). Osteosarcoma of the spine: Experience of the Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.10258

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.