Skip to main content
Download PDF
  • Research article
  • Open access
  • Published:

Denosumab combined with en bloc resection and arthrodesis for recurrent grade 3 giant cell tumor of bone in distal radius

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research volume 19, Article number: 607 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to analyse the clinical outcomes of preoperative adjuvant denosumab therapy (PADT) combined with resection and arthrodesis for recurrent grade 3 giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) in the distal radius.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted on twenty-three patients (8 males, 15 females) who were treated with the adjuvant denosumab combined with en bloc resection (EBR) and arthrodesis for biopsy confirmed recurrent Campanacci III giant cell tumor of bone in the distal radius between January 2015 and December 2022. All 23 patients were treated with wrist arthrodesis reconstruction using autogenous free iliac crest bone graft (ICBG), bridging plate and screws. The local control, metastasis and overall survival were evaluated during the follow-up period. Functional outcomes were evaluated using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score (MSTS-87 and MSTS-93), and grip strength in the follow-up period. Additionally, all surgical or denosumab-related complications that occurred were recorded in this study.

Results

Twenty-three patients were included in this retrospective study and no patients were lost in the follow-up period. The average patient age was 32.5 ± 10.2 years (range, 19–53 years) and the mean follow-up time was 35.5 ± 18.4 months (range, 13–72 months). The average tumor length was 71.7 ± 8.7 mm (range, 50 to 85 mm) and bone reconstruction length was 78.5 ± 8.5 mm (range, 60 to 90 mm). Four patients (17.4%) had secondary local recurrence after reoperation and two patients had (8.7%) multiple recurrences. One patient (4.3%) was deceased in the last follow-up due to multiple metastases. The estimated 5-year recurrence-free survival rate was 81.3% and 5-year metastasis-free survival rate was 95.7%. The mean union time was 8.5 ± 1.9 (6–12) months and the overall survivorship of the allograft was 82.7% (21/23) at an average 35 month follow-up. The average MSTS-87 and MSTS-93 scores were 27.8 ± 1.6 (range, from 23 to 30) and 91.5 ± 5.0 (range, from 76 to 100), and the average DASH score was 8.9 ± 3.2 (range, from 3 to 15), respectively. The average grip strength was 64.6 ± 15.7% (range, from 30 to 95%) of the uninvolved side. Eight patients (34.7%) had at least one complication in the follow-up time. Two autografts (8.7%) were removed due to local recurrence and bone nonunion, and the average autograft survival time was 32.8 ± 18.5 months (range, 12 to 72 months).

Conclusions

Preoperative adjuvant denosumab therapy (PADT) combined with en bloc resection and arthrodesis is a promising method for the treatment of recurrent Campanacci III GCTB in distal radius with acceptable short-term local control and functional satisfaction.

Level of evidence: level IV Therapeutic.

Introduction

Giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) is a histologically benign but clinically aggressive bone tumor, and a high local recurrence rate has been the main cause of unsatisfactory clinical outcomes [1,2,3]. The former studies have reported a local recurrence (LR) rate ranging from 3 to 65% in GCTB [4,5,6,7]. Despite curettage combined with adjuvant local therapy has been the most widely used surgical technique in the treatment of Campanacci I or II GCTB, the high local recurrence rate in Campanacci III tumors remains a challenging clinical problem. Among all surgical techniques in the treatment of GCTB, en bloc resection has the lowest recurrence rate from 3 to 25% [8, 9]. The most common lesion locations of GCTB are the distal femur, proximal tibia, and distal radius. The distal radius is associated with a higher risk of local recurrence especially in Campanacci III tumors [10,11,12]. Therefore, en bloc resection followed by reconstructions as a primary treatment has been supported by many studies [13,14,15,16].

Denosumab is a human monoclonal antibody that inhibits the RANK-RANKL (receptor activation of nuclear factor-kappa β ligand) pathway and osteoclast-mediated bone destruction, and was approved for the treatment of operable, unresectable and metastatic GCTB [17,18,19]. However, there are still some controversies in the preoperative use of denosumab. In recent reports, denosumab has been reported as a risk factor for increased local recurrence rate. A study involving 25 patients with GCTB who underwent curettage following denosumab had a local recurrence rate of 60% [20]. What’s more, some authors have reported that the short course of preoperative denosumab administration (≤ 6 doses) has similar oncological, functional outcomes, histological, and radiological responses as longer courses of therapy (> 6 doses).

To our knowledge, few studies reported the clinical outcomes of preoperative adjuvant denosumab therapy (PADT) combined with en bloc resection and wrist arthrodesis using ICBG for the treatment of distal radius recurrent Campanacci III GCTB in former English literature. Therefore, we attempted to answer the following questions: (1) What’s the local recurrence rate of combination therapy of preoperative adjuvant denosumab therapy and en bloc resection in recurrent Campanacci grade III giant cell tumor of bone? (2) What are the functional outcomes of wrist arthrodesis using an iliac crest bone graft (ICBG) to reconstruct the bone defect in the distal radius? (3) What are the complications of preoperative short-course denosumab (≤ 6 doses) administration in the distal radius giant cell tumor of bone? (4) What’s the radiological and histological response to adjuvant denosumab therapy of recurrent giant cell tumor of bone?

Patients and methods

This was a retrospective cohort study including patients who accepted preoperative adjuvant denosumab combined with en bloc resection and arthrodesis for recurrent Campanacci III giant cell tumor of bone in the distal radius and the human protocol for this study was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) in our hospital. Among 111 cases that underwent resection for distal radius GCTB in our institution from 2015 to 2022, we included 23 cases treated with PADT combined with en bloc resection and arthrodesis (Fig. 1). The minimal follow-up time was ≥ 12 months. All patients were diagnosed as recurrent Campanacci III GCTB by percutaneous core needle biopsy and reconstructed by en bloc resection and wrist arthrodesis using autogenous free iliac crest bone graft (ICBG) in the reoperation.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow chart of distal radius recurrent Campanacci III GCTB treated with PADT and en bloc resection in our institution from 2015 to 2022

Full size image

All patients accepted preoperative evaluations including plain films of the wrist, hand, forearm, and pelvis (bone graft donor site); CT scan of the wrist and chest; MRI of the wrist, whole body scan (WBS), and PET-CT if necessary. Denosumab was approved for surgically salvageable GCTB with planned surgery expected to result in severe morbidity and all patients used denosumab to control the local progression of GCTB before reoperation [21, 22]. Considering the higher occurrence rate of systemic complications in patients with long-course therapy (14–20%) than short-course therapy (0–5%), we recommend short-course denosumab therapy for preoperative treatment [23]. Patients received 120 mg subcutaneous denosumab once every 4 weeks for 3 months with loading doses (120 mg subcutaneously) administered on days 8 and 15 in the first month. Calcium and vitamin D supplements were used for all patients to prevent denosumab-related complications. We assessed the complete blood count technique, calcium and phosphorus before each dose of preoperative denosumab treatment. Oral examination is mandatory at each visit. Adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE; version 4.0).

All patients included in this study underwent distal radius recurrent tumor reoperation, autogenous non-vascularized structural ICBG reconstruction and arthrodesis. A dorsal approach was used to expose the tumor lesions and en bloc resection for at least marginal margin was performed. Autografts were harvested from the iliac crest donor site and a reconstruction plate was used for internal fixation. The remaining radius, structural ICBG, the carpals, and the middle finger metacarpal were fixed from proximal to distal and the wrist joint was fixed at 15°-20°dorsal extension (functional position) (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

A 48-year-old male with left distal radius recurrent Campanacci III GCTB treated with inadequate curettage as initial treatment. This figure shows procedures for tumor resection and reconstruction. A The distal radial X-ray before and after the denosumab therapy. B–C A dorsal approach was used to expose the tumor location. D–E The structural ICBG was harvested and reconstructed by autografts and a reconstruction plate. F The X-ray showed that the wrist was fixed at 15°-20°dorsal extension

Full size image

The radiological evaluation was based on the enhanced CT scan and analyzed the enhanced CT value before and after PADT, which was introduced in our former studies [24]. The average tumor enhancement rates were defined as the ratio of the enhanced CT value to the plain CT value and used to evaluate the tumor blood supply at diagnosis, one month after PADT and three months after PADT. All specimens were evaluated by two senior pathologists at our institution. The histological evaluation included the preoperative biopsy and postoperative resected specimens after denosumab administrations of all 23 patients.

All patients accepted at least 1-year follow-up and postoperative follow-up included radiological and functional evaluation including AP and lateral plain radiographs of the wrist, CT scan of wrist and chest, MRI scan and whole-body scan (WBS) if necessary. The host-autograft bone union evaluation was based on the conventional radiographs and the bone nonunion was defined as the lack of continuity in three cortices at the junction one year after surgery. Autograft failures were defined as the removal or replacement of an iliac crest bone graft. Recurrence, metastasis, progression-free survival, and overall survival rate were used to evaluate the oncological outcomes. The functional outcomes were evaluated by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score (MSTS-87 and 93), the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, and grip strength [11, 25]. The functional results were reported at the latest follow-up only.

Statistical analysis

The Student t-test was used for bivariate analysis. The recurrence-free survival and overall survival were measured from the time of reoperation for recurrent tumors. Survival was analyzed with Kaplan–Meier curves and the log-rank test. All tests were two-sided and a p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. Statistical analysis was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 26.0 (USA) and GraphPad Prism software version 10 (USA).

Results

Twenty-three patients were included in this retrospective study, in which eight patients were male and fifteen were female with an average age of 32.5 ± 10.2 years (range, 19–53). The mean follow-up time was 35.5 ± 18.4 months (range, 13–72). No patient was lost in the follow-up. The average interval between the initial surgery and first recurrence was 16.7 ± 9.7 months (range, 4 to 36 months) and 78.2% of all these patients had local recurrence two years after the initial surgery. The demographics of all patients are shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Demographics of patients
Full size table

Oncological outcomes

Local re-recurrence occurred in four patients (17.4%) after the preoperative adjuvant denosumab combined with en-bloc resection and arthrodesis. Of all 4 patients who had a second recurrence, two patients (8.7%) had soft tissue recurrences and two patients (8.7%) had bone recurrences. Two patients accepted soft tissue extended resections and two patients accepted recurrent tumor resections and reconstruction. In 4 patients who underwent reoperations, two cases had the third recurrence. The average duration from the reoperation to the third recurrence was 14.5 months (range, 5 to 24 months). In these 2 patients, one patient (case 11) had multiple pulmonary metastases 8 months after reoperation and accepted long-term denosumab administration (120 mg/month) and died in the 57 months after reoperation. Another patient accepted extended resection and did not have further recurrences after the third surgery. The estimated 5-year recurrence-free survival rate was 81.3% and 5-year metastasis-free survival rate was 95.7%, respectively (Fig. 2).

Functional outcomes

We achieved good functional outcomes using this technique in our patients. The average MSTS-87 and MSTS-93 scores were 27.8 ± 1.6 (range, from 23 to 30) and 91.5 ± 5.0% (range, from 76 to 100%), respectively. What’s more, the average DASH score was 8.9 ± 3.2 (range, from 3 to 15) (value range, from 0 to 100%, with higher scores representing better function). Regarding the postoperative grip strength, the involved hand had an average of 64.6 ± 15.7% (range, from 30 to 95%) on the contralateral side (Table 2; Fig. 3).

Table 2 Outcomes of patients
Full size table
Fig. 3
figure 3

The Kaplan–Meier survival curve showed recurrence-free survival and metastasis-free survival for the treatment of distal radius recurrent Campanacci III GCTB. (A) The 5-year recurrence-free survival of patients who underwent PADT combined with EBR for distal radius GCTB. (The dotted line showed a 95% confidence interval.) (B) The 5-year metastasis-free survival of patients who underwent PADT combined with EBR for distal radius GCTB. (The dotted line showed a 95% confidence interval)

Full size image

Radiological and histopathological evaluation

The average post-treatment enhancement rates at diagnosis, 1 month and 3 months were 2.10 ± 0.25, 1.45 ± 0.15 and 1.26 ± 0.11, respectively (Fig. 4). With the prolonged administration of denosumab, the enhancement rates declined but the reduction of the absolute CT enhancement value and the degree of reduction reduced. The average reduction was 0.61 (29.3%) at one month of denosumab treatment and 0.83 (39.5%) at three months of denosumab treatment, which had a significant difference in CT enhancement rates among the diagnosis, one month, and three months of treatment (p < 0.001). However, the average reduction was 0.22 (10.2%) from one month to three months of treatment.

Fig. 4
figure 4

The CT enhancement rate in different PADT treatment periods (diagnosis, 1 month, and 3 months after PADT). There is a significant difference between the CT enhancement rate at diagnosis and 3 months after PADT (p < 0.001, F = 131.2), and between 1 and 3 months after PADT (p = 0.0004, F = 18.2)

Full size image

Twenty-three cases accepted preoperative diagnostic biopsy. Histopathological examinations and typical GCTB morphology were seen in all cases (Fig. 5A-B. After denosumab treatment, all samples showed significant pathological changes: osteoclast-like giant cells had almost disappeared. Other areas were characterized by fibrillary extracellular matrices organized in trabecular structures or with increased honeycomb-pattern bone (Fig. 5C-D).

Fig. 5
figure 5

Hematoxylin and eosin staining of GCTB before and after denosumab treatment. A–B Biopsy specimens revealed an admixture of neoplastic mononuclear cells and osteoclast-type giant cells. (Magnification, × 20). C–D The post-treatment specimens revealed storiform-pattern bland-appearing spindle cells, associated with collagen matrix production. (Magnification, × 20)

Full size image

Complications

A total of eight patients (34.7%) had complications in the follow-up period. Four patients with oncological complications had been described in oncological outcomes. Two patients (8.7%) had mechanical complications related to wrist arthrodesis and ICBG. One patient accepted revision with free vascularized fibular grafting (FVFG) and had bone union 6 months after the secondary surgery. Another patient had long-term donor site pain (> 1 year) and accepted oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Moreover, two patients (8.7%) had denosumab-related complications in this cohort. Limb pain occurred in one patient during the denosumab treatment period which was relieved soon after stopping the denosumab. Asymptomatic hypocalcemia occurred in one patient but improved without medical intervention (Table 2).

Discussion

The diagnosis and treatment of recurrent Campanacci III GCTB of the distal radius are challenging due to the special anatomical structure and histological characteristics [4,6–9,26,]. Recent studies have reported a range of 69–96% H3F3A mutations in GCTB [27, 28], and Luo et al. demonstrated that H3F3A mutations may contribute to the differential diagnosis of GCTB in non-long bones [29]. H3F3A hotspot mutations were not highly expressed in other giant cell tumor-rich lesions including chondroblastoma, osteosarcoma, aneurysmal bone cysts and cartilaginous mucinous fibroma, which helped us to identify giant cell tumors of bone and other giant cell-rich lesions (Figs. 6, 7).

Fig. 6
figure 6

A 22-year-old female with left distal radius GCTB. A–B The AP and lateral plain films of the wrist and MRI revealed a Campanacci III GCT at first diagnosis. C–D Postoperative AP and lateral plain films and CT scan of the wrist showed local recurrence 2 months after initial curettage. E–F After 3 months of PADT, perilesional new bone formation eggshell-like mineralization layer occurred at recurrent site as shown on AP and lateral radiographs and CT scan of the wrist. G This patient underwent en bloc resection combined with arthrodesis for the treatment of recurrent GCTB and got bony union six months after autograft reconstruction

Full size image
Fig. 7
figure 7

A 24-year-old male with right distal radius GCTB. A–B The AP and lateral plain films of the wrist and MRI revealed a Campanacci III GCT at first diagnosis. C–D Postoperative AP and lateral plain films and MRI of the wrist showed local recurrence involving distal ulna 21 months after initial curettage and cement reconstruction. E After 3 months of PADT, perilesional new bone formation eggshell-like mineralization layer occurred at recurrent site as shown on AP and lateral radiographs of the wrist. F–G This patient underwent en bloc resection combined with arthrodesis for the treatment of recurrent GCTB and got bony union six months after autograft reconstruction

Full size image

Intralesional curettage combined with local adjuvant therapy had been recommended as an optimal treatment method for primary or recurrent Campanacci I or II giant cell tumor of bone in the distal radius because the patients got more clinical benefits despite the slightly higher local recurrence rates compared to en bloc resection [30]. However, the high recurrence rate was the most significant risk in the treatment of distal radius Campanacci III GCTB and there was uncertainty regarding the best treatment strategy [31]. Aoude et al. reported curettage and distal radius location were independent risk factors for local recurrence (LR) of GCTB [32]. Furthermore, all patients were recurrent cases in this cohort and the special anatomical structures in the distal radius may contribute to further recurrences. Therefore, en bloc resection was deemed as a primary choice to receive satisfactory local control. The standard reconstructive approach after the resection of a tumor of the distal radius remained uncertain because of the extremely high functional demands of the wrist.

The commonly used reconstructive modalities included: arthrodesis, allograft reconstruction, ulnar transposition, non-vascularized or vascularized autologous fibula implantation, and endoprosthetic replacement [33]. Despite acceptable postoperative function, allograft reconstruction was associated with a high rate of complications, including fractures, bone nonunion, and infection [34, 35]. The ulnar transposition technique reduced the incidence of allograft bone complications (infection and bone nonunion), but its most common complication remained proximal radio-ulnar junction nonunion. this might require autologous cancellous bone grafting and internal fixation revision [36, 37].

Autogenous non-vascularized structural ICBG had been a favourable reconstruction technique that provided simple autograft harvest, ample cancellous bone, robust wrist stability, consistent graft union, and wrist fusion. 95.6% (22/23) patients had bone union in both osteosynthesis sites 12 months after surgery and the proximal osteosynthesis site had a prolonged union time (8.5 ± 1.9 months) than the distal osteosynthesis site (4.5 ± 1.4 months). However, this result may be caused by the use of reconstruction plates and was still acceptable compared with former studies using arthrodesis reconstruction [38,39,40,41]. Clarkson et al. compared the functional results between vascularized (80, median MSTS-93 score) versus non-vascularized (90, median MSTS-93 score) autografts for wrist arthrodesis in distal radius GCTB, and non-vascularized autografts were deemed as a more convenient reconstruction technique which had comparable functional scores [42]. In our study, the MSTS-93 scores (91.5% ± 5.0%) were slightly better than the former study without statistical difference (p > 0.05) and we hypothesized that may be a result of the ceiling effect in distal radius bone defect reconstruction. One patient in our study had a revision with free vascularized fibular grafting (FVFG) because of bone nonunion, and the FVFG technique still had non-negligible advantages in prompting bony union and larger bone defects.

The denosumab use brought revolutionary changes and has been proven to improve tumor response and reduce surgical morbidity in the treatment of giant cell tumor of bone, especially in recurrent or unresectable GCTB [43, 44, 46]. However, Errani et al. reported a high local recurrence rate (60%, 15/25) in extremities GCTB treated with preoperative denosumab and intralesional curettage with long-term denosumab administration courses (> 6 months). All 25 patients with preoperative denosumab therapy were diagnosed with remaining GCTB after pathological specimen examinations [16]. Moreover, the perioperative administration doses and duration of denosumab have been controversial in different indications. In former studies, Hindiskere et al. reported that short-term PADT (≤ 3 doses) was associated with no differences in clinical outcomes compared to long-term PADT and Liang et al. Reported that short-term PADT could elicit tumor responses and reduce the perilesional fibrosis and ossification to facilitate nerve-sparing surgeries in sacral GCTB [45]. Moreover, Zhang et al. used short-term PADT (≤ 6 doses) to treat unresectable or recurrent GCTB in axial and appendicular bones and had a total recurrence rate of 27% (3/11) after reoperation [47]. Our studies indicated that the denosumab administration could decrease the CT enhancement rate of GTCB, which proved that the blood supply of tumor lesions was reduced by the denosumab therapy. Moreover, the effect of three-month courses of denosumab administration decreased gradually compared with one-month courses, which indicated that the short-term denosumab courses had the most evident effects on reducing tumor blood supply. Yang et al. reported longer denosumab administration (6 months) had no significant difference with 3 months of denosumab administration in axial and appendicular bones and PET-CT results indicated the average SUV max values of the tumors decreased significantly, which showed the biological activity of tumor declined [24]. In our cases, patients who accepted 3 months of denosumab treatment had significant CT enhancement rate and blood supply decrease and we recommended 3 months of denosumab treatment.

To our knowledge, there have been few studies concerning PADT therapy combined with en bloc resection and arthrodesis in the treatment of distal radius recurrent Campanacci III GCTB. Because long-term denosumab had been proven to increase the local recurrence rate in curettage surgery and the distal radius adjoined the neurovascular structures, tendons, and distal radial ulnar joint (DRUJ), we believed that achieving a safe surgical margin was extremely important. Soft tissue extension was also common in distal radius recurrent GCTB, therefore a clear demarcation between tumor and healthy tissues was necessary. PADT could result in extensive perilesional new bone formation and sclerosis which was conducive to lesion resection and reduced the risk of tumor cell extravasation, and this layer became thicker when the denosumab administration period was prolonged. En bloc resection (EBR) could resect the eggshell-like mineralization layer with remaining tumor cells and help to achieve a clear surgical margin. Tsukamoto et al. reported a local recurrence rate in distal radial GCTB of 30.6% with preoperative denosumab therapy and no LR difference was found between the curettage group and the EBR group [48]. However, this study did not consider the denosumab usage in different Campanacci grade GCTB and the denosumab administration in Campanacci I or II GCTB may increase the local recurrence rate treated with preoperative denosumab and curettage therapy. Tsukamoto et al. also reported clinical outcomes of reoperation for recurrent GCTB in extremities following en bloc resection with a second recurrence rate of 41.4% (12/29) and a third recurrence rate of 17.2% (5/29) [49]. A meta-analysis showed that recurrent GCTB patients had a 20.5% secondary recurrence rate and a 23.4% third recurrence rate after reoperation [4]. In our study, the second recurrence rate was 17.4% (4/23) after reoperation and the third recurrence rate was 8.7% (2/23) after the third operation, which was fairly low in the treatment of distal radius recurrent Campanacci III GCTB.

Recent studies have also reported some complications associated with denosumab administration including jaw osteonecrosis, atypical femoral fracture, hypercalcemia, arthralgia, headache, nausea, fatigue, and anaemia [14, 43, 44]. The long-term denosumab safety profile had not been determined in recent studies, however, former studies reported fewer complications, especially Grade 2 or higher complications, in the short-term compared with long-term denosumab administration. Palmerini et al. reported 54 cases that accepted long-term denosumab therapy (median duration of 54 months) had 37% complications in total and 13% Grade 2 or higher complications and 43 cases accepted short-term denosumab therapy (median duration of 12 months) had 2% complications (one case of osteonecrosis of the jaw) [44]. Moreover, Hindiskere et al. also reported no Grade 2 or higher complications in the short-term denosumab courses (≤ 3 doses) [45]. In our study, 8.7% (2/23) patients had denosumab-related Grade 1 complications (1 case of asymptomatic hypocalcemia and 1 case of limb pain) and no Grade 2 or higher complications were found in this cohort.

There were also some limitations in our study. Firstly, the retrospective cohort had selection bias and confounding bias due to the lack of randomization. Secondly, the sample size was still limited in this study, because the recurrent Campanacci III giant cell tumor of bone was a quite rare disease in a single institution, even in a referral cancer center. And to our knowledge, this is the largest case series regarding the adjuvant preoperative denosumab and en bloc resection therapy for recurrent Campanacci III GCTB in the distal radius. Because of the limited sample size and non-randomization nature of our study, we cannot conclude that adjuvant denosumab combined with en bloc resection will significantly improve the local control in distal radius recurrent Campanacci III GCTB. Therefore, a prospective, randomized study is necessary to determine the efficacy and safety of denosumab in the treatment of recurrent Campanacci III GCTB in the distal radius.

Nevertheless, this study introduced a possible method for the treatment of distal radius recurrent Campanacci III GCTB with preoperative short-course denosumab therapy, en bloc resection and arthrodesis, which has few mentions in the former literature. Although there are many options for reconstruction after resection of giant cell tumours of the distal radius, this technique avoids the need for microsurgical techniques and bone banking, and the complication rate is comparable to other described techniques [50, 51]. Because the technique was not compared with other reconstruction techniques, we cannot claim that this reconstruction is superior to other methods. However, in our preliminary report, we obtained satisfactory oncological and functional results and we believe that this technique is a reasonable alternative to resection and reconstruction of recurrent Campanacci III GCT tumours of the distal radius. Further future studies comparing the advantages and disadvantages of arthrodesis with other reconstructive methods, such as vascularised fibula grafts and carpal prostheses, are necessary to assess the potential advantages of one technique over the other.

Availability of data and materials

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

References

  1. Enneking WF, Spanier SS, Goodman MA. A system for the surgical staging of musculoskeletal sarcoma. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;153:106–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Campanacci M, Baldini N, Boriani S, Sudanese A. Giant-cell tumor of bone. J Bone Joint Surg. 1987;69(1):106–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bini SA, Gill K, Johnston JO. Giant cell tumor of bone: curettage and cement reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995;321:245–50.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Pitsilos C, Givissis P, Papadopoulos P, Chalidis B. Treatment of recurrent giant cell tumor of bones: a systematic review. Cancers (Basel). 2023;15(13):3287.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Blackley HR, Wunder JS, Davis AM, White LM, Kandel R, Bell RS. Treatment of giant-cell tumors of long bones with curettage and bone-grafting. J Bone Joint Surg. 1999;81(6):811–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cheng CY, Shih HN, Hsu KY, Hsu RW. Treatment of giant cell tumor of the distal radius. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;383:221–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Murray JA, Schlafly B. Giant-cell tumors in the distal end of the radius: treatment by resection and fibular autograft interpositional arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1986;68(5):687–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kocker MS, Gebhardt MC, Mankin HJ. Reconstruction of the distal aspect of the radius with use of an osteoarticular allograft after excision of a skeletal tumor. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80(3):407–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Niu X, Zhang Q, Hao L, Ding Y, Li Y, Xu H, Liu W. Giant cell tumor of the extremity: retrospective analysis of 621 Chinese patients from one institution. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94:461–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Vail TP, Urbaniak JR. Donor-site morbidity with use of vascularized autogenous fibular grafts. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78(2):204–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Enneking WF, Dunham W, Gebhardt MC, Malawar M, Pritchard DJ. A system for the functional evaluation of reconstructive procedures after surgical treatment of tumors of the musculoskeletal system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993;286:241–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. McDonald DJ, Sim FH, McLeod RA, Dahlin DC. Giant-cell tumor of bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1986;68(2):235–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Niu X, Zhang Q, Hao L, et al. Giant cell tumor of the extremity: retrospective analysis of 621 Chinese patients from one institution. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(5):461–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chawla S, Blay JY, Rutkowski P, et al. Denosumab in patients with giant-cell tumour of bone: a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(12):1719–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Agarwal MG, Gundavda MK, Gupta R, Reddy R. Does denosumab change the giant cell tumor treatment strategy? lessons learned from early experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476(9):1773–82.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Errani C, Tsukamoto S, Leone G, et al. Denosumab may increase the risk of local recurrence in patients with giant-cell tumor of bone treated with curettage. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100(6):496–504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Aponte-Tinao LA, Piuzzi NS, Roitman P, Farfalli GL. A high-grade sarcoma arising in a patient with recurrent benign giant cell tumor of the proximal tibia while receiving treatment with denosumab. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(9):3050–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Gitelis S, Mallin BA, Piasecki P, Turner F. Intralesional excision compared with en bloc resection for giant-cell tumors of bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75(11):1648–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vander GRA, Funderburk CH. The treatment of giant-cell tumors of the distal part of the radius. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75(6):899–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Wang T, Chan CM, Yu F, Li Y, Niu X. Does wrist arthrodesis with structural iliac crest bone graft after wide resection of distal radius giant cell tumor result in satisfactory function and local control? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(3):767–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Puloski SK, Griffin A, Ferguson PC, Bell RS, Wunder JS. Functional outcomes after treatment of aggressive tumors in the distal radius. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;459:154–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lans J, Oflazoglu K, Lee H, et al. Giant cell tumors of the upper extremity: predictors of recurrence. J Hand Surg Am. 2020;45(8):738–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Heijden L, Dijkstra PDS, Blay JY, Gelderblom H. Giant cell tumour of bone in the denosumab era. Eur J Cancer. 2017;77:75–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yang Y, Xu H, Liu W, Niu X. Study of imaging changes following preoperative denosumab for giant cell tumor of bone. J Bone Oncol. 2021;31(32):100410.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Hudak P.L., Amadio P.C., Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG) Am. J. Ind. Med. 1996;29:602–608.

  26. Qu H, Guo W, Li D, Yang Y, Wei R, Xu J. Functional results of wrist arthrodesis versus arthroplasty with proximal fibula following giant cell tumour excision of the distal radius. J Hand Surg Eur. 2019;44(4):394–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Behjati S, Tarpey PS, Presneau N, et al. Distinct H3F3A and H3F3B driver mutations define chondroblastoma and giant cell tumor of bone. Nat Genet. 2013;45:1479–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cleven AH, Höcker S, Briaire-de Bruijn I, Szuhai K, Cleton-Jansen AM, Bovée JV. Mutation analysis of H3F3A and H3F3B as a diagnostic tool for giant cell tumor of bone and chondroblastoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2015;39(11):1576–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Luo Y, Tang J, Huang J, et al. Diagnostic value of H3F3A mutation and clinicopathological features of giant cell tumours in non-long bones. J Bone Oncol. 2022;38:100467.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Becker WT, Dohle J, et al. Local recurrence of giant cell tumor of bone after intralesional treatment with and without adjuvant therapy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(5):1060–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Saini R, Bali K, Bachhal V, Mootha AK, Dhillon MS, Gill SS. En bloc excision and autogenous fibular reconstruction for aggressive giant cell tumor of distal radius: a report of 12 cases and review of literature. J Orthop Surg Res. 2011;6:14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Aoude A, Nikomarov D, Perera JR, Ibe IK, Griffin AM, Tsoi KM, Ferguson PC, Wunder JS. Giant cell tumour of bone. Bone Joint J. 2023;105(5):559–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Liu W, Wang B, Zhang S, Li Y, Hu B, Shao Z. Wrist reconstruction after En Bloc resection of bone tumors of the distal radius. Orthop Surg. 2021;13(2):376–83.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Albergo JI, Farfalli GL, Cabas-Geat A, Roitman P, Ayerza MA, Aponte-Tinao LA. Does osteoarticular allograft reconstruction achieve long-term survivorship after En Bloc resection of grade 3 giant cell tumor of bone? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(11):2562–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Bus MP, van de Sande MA, Taminiau AH, Dijkstra PD. Is there still a role for osteoarticular allograft reconstruction in musculoskeletal tumour surgery? a long-term follow-up study of 38 patients and systematic review of the literature. Bone Joint J. 2017;99(4):522–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Gundavda MK, Agarwal MG, Reddy R, Katariya A, Bhadiyadra R. Does a modified technique to achieve arthrodesis of the wrist after resection of the distal radius and translocating the ipsilateral ulna as a vascularized graft to reconstruct the defect improve grip strength and outcomes scores? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2021;479(6):1285–93.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Puri A, Gulia A, Agarwal MG, Reddy K. Ulnar translocation after excision of a Campanacci grade-3 giant-cell tumour of the distal radius: an effective method of reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92:875–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Albergo JI, Farfalli GL, Cabas-Geat A, Roitman P, Ayerza MA, Aponte-Tinao LA. Does osteoarticular allograft reconstruction achieve long-term survivorship after en bloc resection of grade 3 giant cell tumor of bone? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(11):2562–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Koucheki R, Gazendam A, Perera J, Griffin A, Ferguson P, Wunder J, Tsoi K. Management of giant cell tumors of the distal radius: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2023;33(4):759–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Tsukamoto S, Mavrogenis AF, Tanzi P, Leone G, Ciani G, Righi A, Akahane M, Honoki K, Tanaka Y, Donati DM, Errani C. Denosumab for bone giant cell tumor of the distal radius. Orthopedics. 2020;43(5):284–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Medellin MR, Fujiwara T, Tillman RM, Jeys LM, Gregory J, Stevenson JD, Parry M, Abudu A. Prognostic factors for local recurrence in extremity-located giant cell tumours of bone with pathological fracture. Bone Joint J. 2018;100(12):1626–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Clarkson PW, Sandford K, Phillips AE, Pazionis TJ, Griffin A, Wunder JS, Ferguson PC, Masri BA, Goetz T. Functional results following vascularized versus nonvascularized bone grafts for wrist arthrodesis following excision of giant cell tumors. J Hand Surg. 2013;38(5):935–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ueda T, Morioka H, Nishida Y, Kakunaga S, Tsuchiya H, Matsumoto Y, et al. Objective tumor response to Denosumab in patients with giant cell tumor of bone: a multicenter phase II trial. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(10):2149–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Palmerini E, Chawla NS, Ferrari S, Sudan M, Picci P, Marchesi E, Leopardi MP, Syed I, Sankhala KK, Parthasarathy P, Mendanha WE, Pierini M, Paioli A, Chawla SP. Denosumab in advanced/unresectable giant-cell tumor of bone (GCTB): for how long? Eur J Cancer. 2017;76:118–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Hindiskere S, Errani C, Doddarangappa S, Ramaswamy V, Rai M, Chinder PS. Is a short-course of preoperative denosumab as effective as prolonged therapy for giant cell tumor of bone? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(11):2522–33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Liang H, Liu X, Yang Y, Guo W, Yang R, Tang X, Yan T, Li Y, Tang S, Li D, Qu H, Dong S, Ji T, Du Z, Zang J. Ultra-short course of neo-adjuvant denosumab for nerve-sparing surgery for giant cell tumor of bone in sacrum. Spine. 2022;47(9):691–701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Zhang RZ, Ma TX, Qi DW, Zhao M, Hu T, Zhang GC. Short-term preoperative denosumab with surgery in unresectable or recurrent giant cell tumor of bone. Orthop Surg. 2019;11(6):1101–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Tsukamoto S, Tanaka Y, Mavrogenis AF, Kido A, Kawaguchi M, Errani C. Is Treatment with denosumab associated with local recurrence in patients with giant cell tumor of bone treated with curettage? a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(5):1076–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Tsukamoto S, Mavrogenis AF, Hindiskere S, Honoki K, Kido A, Fujii H, Masunaga T, Tanaka Y, Chinder PS, Donati DM, Errani C. Outcome of reoperation for local recurrence following En Bloc resection for bone giant cell tumor of the extremity. Curr Oncol. 2022;29(9):6383–99.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Kuruoglu D, Rizzo M, Rose PS, Moran SL, Houdek MT. Treatment of giant cell tumors of the distal radius: a long-term patient-reported outcomes study. J Surg Oncol. 2022;126(4):798–803.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. van der Heijden L, Bindt S, Scorianz M, Ng C, Gibbons MCLH, van de Sande MAJ, Campanacci DA. Surgical challenges, novel techniques, and systemic treatment of giant cell tumour of bone of the distal radius: clinical outcomes and systematic review of the literature. Bone Jt Open. 2022;3(7):515–28.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China Grant No (2023YFB4706300), National Natural Science Foundation of China (62171017), Beijing Natural Science Foundation (L212042), and Beijing Municipal Health Commission (BJRITO-RDP-2024).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Oncology Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China

    Zhuoyu Li, Zhiping Deng, Yongkun Yang, Qing Zhang & Xiaohui Niu

  2. Department of Pathology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China

    Dalin Gao

  3. National Center for Orthopedics, Beijing, China

    Zhuoyu Li, Zhiping Deng, Yongkun Yang, Qing Zhang, Xiaohui Niu & Weifeng Liu

  4. Beijing Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedics, Beijing, China

    Zhuoyu Li & Weifeng Liu

Authors
  1. Zhuoyu Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhiping Deng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yongkun Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dalin Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Qing Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Xiaohui Niu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Weifeng Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Concept and design: Weifeng Liu; data collection: ZD, YY; drafting of the article: ZL; critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: QZ and XN. ZL and ZD contributed equally to this paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Weifeng Liu.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Review Board of Beijing Jishuitan Hospital. All methods were performed in accordance with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments, and the ethical standards of the institutional research committee.

Consent for publication

Written informed consent for publication was obtained from all participants.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, Z., Deng, Z., Yang, Y. et al. Denosumab combined with en bloc resection and arthrodesis for recurrent grade 3 giant cell tumor of bone in distal radius. J Orthop Surg Res 19, 607 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05092-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05092-1

Keywords

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

ISSN: 1749-799X