Retrospective evaluation of prognostic factors in metastatic spine disease: serum albumin and primary tumour type are key

ANZ Journal of Surgery - Tập 90 Số 6 - Trang 1070-1074 - 2020
William H. Cook1, Joseph F. Baker2,1
1Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
2Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Waikato Hospital, Hamilton, New Zealand

Tóm tắt

AbstractBackgroundTreatment decisions for metastatic spine disease are complex and depend on prognosis. Four prognostic systems in use are the Oswestry Risk Index, modified Bauer score (MBS), van der Linden score and New England Spinal Metastasis Score (NESMS). We aimed to determine the performance of these scoring systems in a New Zealand cohort of patients and develop a prognostic score specific to this demographic.MethodsA retrospective review of a patient cohort from 2009 to 2016 was undertaken. Scores and individual scoring items were evaluated with univariate and multivariate analyses. Significant items were used to design a simple, population‐specific objective scoring system, which was then tested.ResultsA total of 106 patients receiving either surgery and radiotherapy (65) or radiotherapy alone (41) were included. Mean post‐treatment survival time was 13.7 months. All scoring systems were significantly correlated with survival and had similar concordances. The MBS had the largest coefficient of determination (Cox and Snell's R2 = 0.18), followed by the NESMS (R2 = 0.14). On multivariate analysis, the lung cancer (MBS) and serum albumin (NESMS) items were significant. A modified Oswestry Risk Index primary tumour item and NESMS serum albumin outperformed the MBS (R2 = 0.20), providing the basis for a prognostic scoring tool specific to our demographic.ConclusionBased on serum albumin and primary tumour type, we propose the ‘Metastatic Spine Risk Index’ as a simple and objective tool, specific to our population for predicting survival, which can be used in conjunction with other clinical information when considering treatment options.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.3109/17453679508995508

10.1017/S031716710001177X

10.1177/2192568217750125

10.1586/erp.12.14

10.1302/0301-620X.95B2.29323

10.1016/j.spinee.2015.06.061

10.1007/s00586-008-0763-1

10.1002/cncr.20756

10.1007/978-0-387-77244-8

Cox DR, 1989, Analysis of Binary Data

10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181c30fb2

10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182011f84

10.1097/BRS.0000000000001192

10.1007/s00586-014-3730-z

10.1016/j.spinee.2015.09.043

10.1007/s00586-014-3665-4

10.1097/00007632-200102010-00016

10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181e574f5

10.1001/archsurg.134.1.36

10.1016/j.spinee.2016.04.008

10.1097/01.brs.0000222146.91398.c9

10.1016/j.spinee.2019.01.014

10.1590/0004-282X20150003

10.1016/j.clon.2015.01.002

10.1002/cncr.24565

10.1002/1097-0142(19840501)53:9<2002::AID-CNCR2820530933>3.0.CO;2-W

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

ANZ Journal of Surgery

Tập 90 Số 6

1070-1074

Thông tin tác giả