Validation of Traditional Prognosis Scoring Systems and Skeletal Oncology Research Group Nomogram for Predicting Survival of Spinal Metastasis Patients Undergoing Surgery

Which Prognostic Model Best Predicts Poor Prognosis in Patients with Spinal Metastases? A Comparative Analysis of 8 Scoring Systems

BACKGROUND

Existing scoring system's comparative effectiveness in identifying patients with poor prognosis (i.e., <6 months survival) has not been thoroughly explored.

METHODS

We compared the predictive performance of 8 prognostic scoring systems (Tomita, modified Tokuhashi, modified Bauer, Rades, Oncological Spinal Prognostic Index, Lei, New England Spinal Metastasis Score, and the skeletal oncology research group [SORG] nomogram) with the area under the curve (AUC) from receiver operating characteristic curves and evaluated the predictive accuracy for 6-month survival across different primary tumor origins, and 1-month survival. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with 6-month survival.

RESULTS

Six hundred forty one patients with spinal metastasis treated between 1994 and 2022 were included. The SORG nomogram showed best performance with low discriminative power in predicting 6-month survival (AUC [95% confidence interval {CI}]: 0.664 [0.584-0.744]). Logistic regression analysis identified significant factors influencing 6-month survival, including primary cancer type in Lei's classification, preoperative Frankel grades C and D, or grades A and B compared with grade E, preoperative white blood cell, preoperative albumin, and preoperative chemotherapy. For 1-month survival predictions, both the SORG nomogram (AUC [95% CI]: 0.750 [0.648-0.851]) and modified Tokuhashi score (AUC [95% CI]: 0.667 [0.552-0.781]) showed significance, albeit with moderate to low discriminative power.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that most scoring systems have low discriminative power, with only the SORG nomogram having moderate power for predicting poor prognosis. Recent and future advances in treatment, laboratory markers, and our understanding of tumor biology should be incorporated into prognostic models to improve their accuracy.

Hematologic Malignancies Influence the Accuracy of Prediction of Survival in Patients With Solid Tumor Spinal Metastases Undergoing Surgery

PURPOSE

There is no consensus on how to identify patients with multiple-level spinal metastases who would benefit from surgery. Previous studies have revealed that patients with hematologic malignancies have a significantly longer median survival time than those with solid tumor spinal metastases. We aimed to compare predictors and survival data between patients with spinal metastases, including hematologic malignancies (all-malignancies group), with only those with nonhematologic malignancies (nonhematologic malignancies group).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included all patients age >18 years who underwent surgery to treat spinal metastases in our department from 2008 to 2018. The patients' baseline characteristics, treatment modalities, and laboratory results were analyzed. Survival was calculated from the date of surgery to the date of confirmed death. Cox regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of survival.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 186 patients with a mean age of 57.1 ± 13.4 years, 101 of whom were male and 18 of whom had hematologic malignancies. The median survival time was 201 days in the all-malignancies group and 168 days in the nonhematologic malignancies group. Independent predictors of survival differed between the two groups. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status and response to preoperative chemotherapy were identified as independent factors in both groups. However, radiosensitivity and CNS metastases were identified only in the all-malignancies group, and tumor growth potential, albumin status, and number of vertebrae were identified only in the nonhematologic malignancies group. The receiver operating characteristics were comparable in the two groups: 0.75 in the all-malignancies group and 0.77 in the nonhematologic malignancies group.

CONCLUSION

Longer survival in patients with hematologic malignancies influences the overall prediction of survival. Tumor-specific prognostic factors may improve the prediction of survival in patients with spinal metastases.

When Should Spinal Surgery Be Considered for Spinal Metastasis from Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer?-Propensity Score Matched Study between Surgery with Radiotherapy and Radiotherapy Alone

(1) Background: Although metastatic spine disease is increasing, the debate on therapeutic modality remains due to the heterogeneity of tumors and patients. This study aims to evaluate the efficacies of surgery and risk factors for patients' survival from potentially unstable spinal metastasis of non-small cell lung cancer; (2) Methods: Twenty-two patients undergoing surgery and radiotherapy (group I) were compared with 22 patients undergoing radiotherapy alone (group II) using propensity score matching in a 1-to-1 format. Clinical outcomes included the performance status and ambulatory status. In addition, independent risk factors for patients' survival were evaluated, including the molecular targeted therapy for mutations; (3) Results: deterioration in neurologic status was only observed in group II compared to group I (22.7% vs. 0%, p-value = 0.018). In addition, five patients in the surgery group showed improved Frankel grades. Regarding the patients' survival, a smoking history of more than ten pack-years (hazard ratio (HR) = 12.18), worse performance status (HR = 6.86), and absence of mutations (HR = 3.39) were the independent risk factors; (4) Conclusions: Spinal surgery with radiotherapy could have advantages for improving the neurologic status including ambulation for potentially unstable spine due to metastasis. Thus, surgery should be considered for patients with a longer life expectancy resulting from better performance status and use of the targeted therapy.