Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 268

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Refinement of clinicopathologic staging for localized soft tissue sarcoma of the extremity: a study of 423 adults.

Gaynor, J J, Tan, C C, Casper, E S, Collin, C F, Friedrich, C, Shiu, M, Hajdu, S I, Brennan, M F·1992·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: The prognostic value of factors used in clinicopathologic staging of localized soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of the extremity were analyzed comprehensively. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four hundred twenty-three patients with STS that was confined to the extremity were admitted to Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center from 1968 to 1978. Cox models for the hazards rates of tumor mortality, development of a distant metastasis, strictly local recurrence, and postmetastasis survival were developed. Tests of changes in the prognostic value of the important variables over time were performed, as well as an analysis of the effect of a local recurrence on the hazard rate of distant metastasis. RESULTS: Three unfavorable characteristics contained independent prognostic value for the rates of distant metastasis and tumor mortality: high grade (P less than .00001), deep location (P less than .0002), and size greater than or equal to 5 cm (P less than .007). Their Cox model coefficients did not differ significantly (P greater than or equal to .65); thus, a staging scheme based on the risk of ever developing a distant metastasis would assign equal prognostic weights to grade, depth, and size. The tumor grade effect during the initial 18 months was much larger in magnitude than those for depth and size, and its effect disappeared beyond that time (P = .0003). Thus, a staging scheme based on the risk of early metastatic spread would assign a distinctly larger prognostic weight to grade and lesser but equal weights to depth and size. There was no local recurrence effect on the rate of distant metastasis in the high-risk group (high grade, deep, and greater than or equal to 5 cm; P = .75), but there was a significant association among the remaining groups combined (P = .0039). The magnitude of this association actually increased according to the number of favorable characteristics presented (P = .0024). CONCLUSIONS: The refinement of clinicopathologic staging may depend on the choice of outcome variable: ultimate prognosis versus early metastatic spread. Additionally, the observed local recurrence effect may be explained by a tendency for some patients to acquire one or more unfavorable risk factors at the time of local recurrence.

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 · 10.1200/jco.1992.10.8.1317

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 29 references

Cited by

See all 268

Metadata

Authors
Gaynor, J. J., Tan, C. C., Casper, E. S., Collin, C. F., Friedrich, C., Shiu, M., Hajdu, S. I., & Brennan, M. F.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
1992-08
Volume
10
Issue
8
Pages
1317-1329
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W1918248799
Cited by
268
References
29
FWCI
14.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Refinement of clinicopathologic staging for localized soft tissue sarcoma of the extremity: a study of 423 adults. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1992.10.8.1317
The paper
Gaynor, J. J., Tan, C. C., Casper, E. S., Collin, C. F., Friedrich, C., Shiu, M., Hajdu, S. I., & Brennan, M. F. (1992). Refinement of clinicopathologic staging for localized soft tissue sarcoma of the extremity: a study of 423 adults. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1992.10.8.1317

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.