Rethinking the Prognostic Role of Necrosis in Soft-Tissue Sarcoma: Multidisciplinary Insights from the Sarcoma Academy

<b>Background:</b> Soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs) represent a heterogeneous group of malignancies with widely varying treatment responses and biological behaviors. While spontaneous necrosis (present at diagnosis) is recognized in established sarcoma grading systems, the prognostic significance of therapy-induced necrosis remains uncertain. Inconsistent definitions, methodological variability, and clinical confounders further complicate the interpretation of necrosis as an independent prognostic marker. <b>Methods:</b> This communication synthesizes findings from an international, multidisciplinary webinar hosted by the Sarcoma Academy, critically assessing the utility of therapy-induced necrosis in STS management. Discussions encompassed surgical, pathological, oncological, and radiological perspectives, emphasizing how necrosis is defined, measured, and contextualized in patient care. <b>Results:</b> Heterogeneity in STS subtypes, varied treatment protocols, and sampling inconsistencies challenge the prognostic value of post-treatment necrosis. While substantial necrosis may sometimes signal effective therapy, it can also reflect the tumor's aggressive nature. The panel underscored the utility of measuring the percentage of viable tumor cells, rather than necrosis alone, to obtain a more standardized and reproducible measure of therapy response. Emerging approaches-such as radiomics, molecular profiling, immune-based analyses, and real-world evidence (RWE) protocols-offer promising avenues for refining prognostication and guiding personalized therapy in STS. <b>Conclusions:</b> A focus solely on therapy-induced necrosis is insufficient to predict outcomes in STS. Instead, a multidisciplinary framework-combining standardized pathology protocols, quantification of viable tumor cells, advanced imaging, and innovative clinical trial designs-can better capture both treatment effects and underlying tumor biology. Future collaborative studies and hybrid trial methodologies are needed to determine which STS subgroups gain the most from intensified treatments aimed at maximizing necrosis, and how to balance such interventions with surgical considerations, toxicity, and overall patient well-being.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cancers
Published
2025-05-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17111779
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Sarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.04
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rethinking the Prognostic Role of Necrosis in Soft-Tissue Sarcoma: Multidisciplinary Insights from the Sarcoma Academy

Jay S. Wunder, Alexander L. Lazarides, Hans Roland Dürr, Bruno Fuchs et al.
2 citations
Cancers
Sarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
3.04
article

Rethinking the Prognostic Role of Necrosis in Soft-Tissue Sarcoma: Multidisciplinary Insights from the Sarcoma Academy

Jay S. Wunder, Alexander L. Lazarides, Hans Roland Dürr, Bruno Fuchs, Javier Martín‐Broto, Michelle Ghert, A.O. Naghavi, Roberto Scanferla, H. Thomas Temple, Julien Montreuil, Beata Bode‐Lesniewska, Tim Fischer, Gabriela Studer, Dian Wang, Lars H. Lindner, Malena Mazza
article en
2 citations

Abstract

<b>Background:</b> Soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs) represent a heterogeneous group of malignancies with widely varying treatment responses and biological behaviors. While spontaneous necrosis (present at diagnosis) is recognized in established sarcoma grading systems, the prognostic significance of therapy-induced necrosis remains uncertain. Inconsistent definitions, methodological variability, and clinical confounders further complicate the interpretation of necrosis as an independent prognostic marker. <b>Methods:</b> This communication synthesizes findings from an international, multidisciplinary webinar hosted by the Sarcoma Academy, critically assessing the utility of therapy-induced necrosis in STS management. Discussions encompassed surgical, pathological, oncological, and radiological perspectives, emphasizing how necrosis is defined, measured, and contextualized in patient care. <b>Results:</b> Heterogeneity in STS subtypes, varied treatment protocols, and sampling inconsistencies challenge the prognostic value of post-treatment necrosis. While substantial necrosis may sometimes signal effective therapy, it can also reflect the tumor's aggressive nature. The panel underscored the utility of measuring the percentage of viable tumor cells, rather than necrosis alone, to obtain a more standardized and reproducible measure of therapy response. Emerging approaches-such as radiomics, molecular profiling, immune-based analyses, and real-world evidence (RWE) protocols-offer promising avenues for refining prognostication and guiding personalized therapy in STS. <b>Conclusions:</b> A focus solely on therapy-induced necrosis is insufficient to predict outcomes in STS. Instead, a multidisciplinary framework-combining standardized pathology protocols, quantification of viable tumor cells, advanced imaging, and innovative clinical trial designs-can better capture both treatment effects and underlying tumor biology. Future collaborative studies and hybrid trial methodologies are needed to determine which STS subgroups gain the most from intensified treatments aimed at maximizing necrosis, and how to balance such interventions with surgical considerations, toxicity, and overall patient well-being.

CancersVol. 17(11)
Mount Sinai Hospital (CA), University of Miami (US), University of Toronto (CA), Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires (AR), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (CA), LMU Klinikum (DE), Moffitt Cancer Center (US), Kantonsspital Winterthur (CH), Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi (IT), Luzerner Kantonsspital (CH), Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz (ES), Klinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie, Physikalische Medizin und Rehabilitation (DE), Rush University (US), University of Maryland, College Park (US), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE), McMaster University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Sarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
3.04
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.