Background: Many papers have reported the results achieved with combined therapy for Ewing’s tumors, but little is known about the treatment and outcome of those 30–40% of patients who relapse. Patients and methods: In a retrospective study, we evaluated 195 patients with Ewing’s tumors treated at our institution from 1979 to 1997 with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery or combined therapies after recurrence. Results: A second complete remission was achieved in only 26 patients (13.3%); 12 relapsed again and died of the tumor. The 5-year post-relapse event-free survival and overall survival were 9.7% and 13.8%, respectively; both of which were significantly better for patients who had relapsed ≥2 years after the beginning of the first treatment (14.3% versus 2.5%; P <0.001) and for patients who relapsed with only lung metastases (14.5% versus 0.9%; P <0.0005). In terms of treatment, patients treated with surgery or radiotherapy, alone or in combination with chemotherapy, had better survival rates than patients treated with chemotherapy alone (15.4% versus 0.9%; P <0.0001). Conclusions: The outcome of Ewing’s tumor patients who relapse after combined treatment is very poor. However, these patients may be divided into two groups: those that can be cured with traditional treatments (late relapse and/or only lung metastases), and a second group of patients (early relapses with metastases in lungs and/or other sites) who gain no benefit from traditional therapies. For the latter group, multicenter studies are needed to evaluate new strategies of treatment.

Adequacy of margins must take into consideration both the resection margin width (quantity) and anatomic barrier (quality). There are several classification schemes for reporting surgical resection margin status for soft tissue sarcomas (STS). Most of the studies regarding treatment outcomes in STS included all histologic grades and histological subtypes, which include infiltrative and non-infiltrative subtypes and are very heterogeneous in terms of both histologic characteristics and treatment modalities (adjuvant treatments or not). This lack of consistency makes it difficult to compare results from study to study. Therefore, there is a great need for evidence-based standardization concerning the width of resection margins. The aim of this narrative review is to provide a comprehensive assessment of the literature on margins, and to highlight the need for a uniform description of the margin status for patients with STS. Patient cases should be discussed at multidisciplinary tumor boards and treatments should be individualized to clinical and demographic characteristics, which must include also a deep knowledge of specific histotypes behaviors, particularly infiltrative ones.