Key result
Great vessel primary cardiac sarcoma is linked to ~50% lower mortality versus left heart location.
Why the study?
The impact of anatomical tumor location and tumor biology on perioperative and long-term outcomes after surgical resection of primary cardiac sarcoma was not well defined.
Does anatomical tumor location and biology impact survival in patients undergoing surgical resection of primary cardiac sarcoma?
Cohort (n=158)
Does anatomical tumor location and biology impact survival in patients undergoing surgical resection of primary cardiac sarcoma?
Hazard Ratio: 0.5 (95% CI 0.29–0.86)
p-value: p=0.037
In patients undergoing surgical resection of primary cardiac sarcoma, long-term survival remains poor and is driven predominantly by tumor histology, extracardiac disease, and gross residual disease rather than anatomical location among operative survivors.
Stratification by tumor location may guide PCS surgical planning; leaves open prospective validation of survival predictors.
OBJECTIVE(S): We evaluated perioperative and long-term outcomes after surgical resection of primary cardiac sarcoma (PCS) according to anatomical tumor location and identified predictors of survival. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 158 patients undergoing 172 PCS resections between 1998 and 2026. Patients were stratified according to tumor location as left heart (n=67), right heart (n=58), or great vessel sarcomas (n=33). Survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox analysis, including sensitivity analysis excluding operative mortality. RESULTS: Operative mortality was 13.4%. Median post-resection survival was 1.3 years; 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival was 59.1%, 27.7%, and 16.9%, respectively. Location was associated with survival (p=0.037), driven by lower mortality for great vessel versus left heart sarcomas (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.29-0.86). Metastatic disease/direct pulmonary invasion (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.15-2.50), age (HR 1.02/year; 95% CI 1.00-1.03) and R2 resection (HR 5.11; 95% CI 2.60-10.05) were independently associated with poorer survival; R1 resection was not. Excluding operative mortality, location was no longer significant (p=0.23), whereas histology was significant overall (p=0.012); UPS/intimal/spindle-cell sarcoma (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.26-0.90) and leiomyosarcoma (HR 0.26; 95% CI 0.12-0.60) were associated with improved survival versus angiosarcoma. Metastatic disease/direct pulmonary invasion and R2 resection remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor location influenced operative management and was associated with post-resection survival, but this was attenuated after excluding operative deaths. Among operative survivors, long-term outcomes were driven predominantly by histology, extracardiac disease, and gross residual disease. Although surgical resection remains a cornerstone of treatment, persistently poor survival highlights the need for effective biology-driven systemic therapies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Its licence doesn't allow us to show a copy here.
Székely et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Primary cardiac sarcoma (n=158). Great vessel tumor location vs. Left heart tumor location was evaluated on Survival (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29-0.86, p=0.037). Great vessel location of primary cardiac sarcoma was associated with lower mortality compared to left heart sarcomas (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.29-0.86), though attenuated after excluding operative deaths.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: