Which Scoring System Best Predicts Long-term Survival in Patients with Spinal Metastasis in the Era of Targeted Systemic Treatment? A Comparative Study of Eight Prognostic Models.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Spine Pub Date : 2024-11-05 DOI:10.1097/BRS.0000000000005205
Dong-Ho Kang, Jin-Sung Park, Minwook Kang, Kyunghun Jung, Chong-Suh Lee, Se-Jun Park
{"title":"Which Scoring System Best Predicts Long-term Survival in Patients with Spinal Metastasis in the Era of Targeted Systemic Treatment? A Comparative Study of Eight Prognostic Models.","authors":"Dong-Ho Kang, Jin-Sung Park, Minwook Kang, Kyunghun Jung, Chong-Suh Lee, Se-Jun Park","doi":"10.1097/BRS.0000000000005205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective observational study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the accuracy of eight scoring systems, including the Tomita, modified Tokuhashi, modified Bauer, Rades, Oswestry Spinal Risk index (OSRI), Lei, New England Spinal Metastasis Score, and Skeletal Oncology Research Group (SORG) nomogram, for predicting long-term survival of patients with spinal metastasis.</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Predicting the prognosis of spinal metastasis is vital for surgical decisions, yet the effectiveness of existing scoring systems in identifying long-term survival remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>456 cases were finally included. Prognostic scores were compared with survival outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were analyzed for the entire cohort and across three distinct time periods to evaluate the area under the curve (AUC) for 1-year and 2-year survival, alongside Harrell's C-statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean patient age was 58.9 years, and the median survival time was 8.6 months. For the entire cohort, the SORG nomogram, OSRI, and modified Tokuhashi scores yielded Harrell's C-index values of 0.64, 0.63, and 0.62, respectively. For 1-year survival prediction, the SORG nomogram, OSRI, and modified Tokuhashi score demonstrated moderate discriminative power, with AUC values of 0.72, 0.71, and 0.70, respectively. Similarly, for 2-year survival prediction, the modified Tokuhashi score, SORG nomogram, and OSRI also revealed moderate discriminative power, with AUC values of 0.73, 0.72, and 0.70, respectively. For patients who underwent surgery in the most recent period, OSRI demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy for 1-year survival, with a Harrell's C-index of 0.63 and an AUC of 0.68, and 2-year survival, with a Harrell's C-index of 0.63 and an AUC of 0.64.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most scoring systems exhibited low discriminative power, with only the SORG nomogram, OSRI, and modified Tokuhashi scores demonstrating moderate power for predicting long-term survival. In the most recent period, the OSRI demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy for both 1-year and 2-year survival.</p>","PeriodicalId":22193,"journal":{"name":"Spine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000005205","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: Retrospective observational study.

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of eight scoring systems, including the Tomita, modified Tokuhashi, modified Bauer, Rades, Oswestry Spinal Risk index (OSRI), Lei, New England Spinal Metastasis Score, and Skeletal Oncology Research Group (SORG) nomogram, for predicting long-term survival of patients with spinal metastasis.

Summary of background data: Predicting the prognosis of spinal metastasis is vital for surgical decisions, yet the effectiveness of existing scoring systems in identifying long-term survival remains unclear.

Methods: 456 cases were finally included. Prognostic scores were compared with survival outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were analyzed for the entire cohort and across three distinct time periods to evaluate the area under the curve (AUC) for 1-year and 2-year survival, alongside Harrell's C-statistic.

Results: The mean patient age was 58.9 years, and the median survival time was 8.6 months. For the entire cohort, the SORG nomogram, OSRI, and modified Tokuhashi scores yielded Harrell's C-index values of 0.64, 0.63, and 0.62, respectively. For 1-year survival prediction, the SORG nomogram, OSRI, and modified Tokuhashi score demonstrated moderate discriminative power, with AUC values of 0.72, 0.71, and 0.70, respectively. Similarly, for 2-year survival prediction, the modified Tokuhashi score, SORG nomogram, and OSRI also revealed moderate discriminative power, with AUC values of 0.73, 0.72, and 0.70, respectively. For patients who underwent surgery in the most recent period, OSRI demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy for 1-year survival, with a Harrell's C-index of 0.63 and an AUC of 0.68, and 2-year survival, with a Harrell's C-index of 0.63 and an AUC of 0.64.

Conclusion: Most scoring systems exhibited low discriminative power, with only the SORG nomogram, OSRI, and modified Tokuhashi scores demonstrating moderate power for predicting long-term survival. In the most recent period, the OSRI demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy for both 1-year and 2-year survival.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在靶向系统治疗时代,哪种评分系统最能预测脊柱转移患者的长期生存?八种预后模型的比较研究。
研究设计回顾性观察研究:评估富田、改良德桥、改良鲍尔、拉德斯、奥斯韦斯特里脊柱风险指数(OSRI)、雷、新英格兰脊柱转移评分和骨骼肿瘤研究组(SORG)提名图等八种评分系统预测脊柱转移患者长期生存的准确性:预测脊柱转移瘤的预后对手术决策至关重要,但现有评分系统在确定长期生存率方面的有效性仍不明确。将预后评分与生存结果进行比较。对整个队列和三个不同时间段的受体操作特征曲线(ROC)进行了分析,以评估 1 年和 2 年生存率的曲线下面积(AUC)以及 Harrell 的 C 统计量:患者平均年龄为 58.9 岁,中位生存时间为 8.6 个月。在整个队列中,索尔格提名图、OSRI 和改良德桥评分得出的哈雷尔 C 指数值分别为 0.64、0.63 和 0.62。在预测 1 年生存率方面,SORG 直方图、OSRI 和改良德桥评分显示出中等程度的鉴别力,AUC 值分别为 0.72、0.71 和 0.70。同样,在预测 2 年生存率方面,改良德桥评分、SORG 直方图和 OSRI 也显示出中等程度的鉴别力,AUC 值分别为 0.73、0.72 和 0.70。对于近期接受手术的患者,OSRI 对 1 年生存率的预测准确率最高,哈雷尔 C 指数为 0.63,AUC 为 0.68,对 2 年生存率的预测准确率也最高,哈雷尔 C 指数为 0.63,AUC 为 0.64:大多数评分系统的判别能力较低,只有SORG提名图、OSRI和改良德桥评分在预测长期生存方面表现出中等水平的能力。在最近一段时期,OSRI 对 1 年和 2 年生存率的预测准确率最高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Spine
Spine 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
361
审稿时长
6.0 months
期刊介绍: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins is a leading international publisher of professional health information for physicians, nurses, specialized clinicians and students. For a complete listing of titles currently published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and detailed information about print, online, and other offerings, please visit the LWW Online Store. Recognized internationally as the leading journal in its field, Spine is an international, peer-reviewed, bi-weekly periodical that considers for publication original articles in the field of Spine. It is the leading subspecialty journal for the treatment of spinal disorders. Only original papers are considered for publication with the understanding that they are contributed solely to Spine. The Journal does not publish articles reporting material that has been reported at length elsewhere.
期刊最新文献
Temporal Trends of Improvement After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Intraoperative Hypotension Is an Important Modifiable Risk Factor for Major Complications in Spinal Fusion Surgery. Clinical Outcome of Lumbar Hybrid Surgery in a Consecutive Series of Patients With Long-term Follow-up. Does Paraspinal Muscle Mass Predict Lumbar Lordosis Before and After Decompression for Degenerative Spinal Stenosis? The Utility of the Surgical Apgar Score in Assessing the Risk of Perioperative Complications Following Spinal Fusion Surgery for Pediatric Patients With Scoliosis and Cerebral Palsy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1