Neurological Outcomes and the Need for Retreatments Among Multiple Myeloma Patients With High-Grade Spinal Cord Compression: Radiotherapy vs Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: Up to 30% of Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients are expected to experience Epidural Spinal Cord Compression (ESCC) during the course of their disease. To prevent irreversible neurological damage, timely diagnosis and treatment are important. However, debate remains regarding the optimal treatment regimen. The aim of this study was to investigate the neurological outcomes and frequency of retreatments for MM patients undergoing isolated radiotherapy and surgical interventions for high-grade (grade 2-3) ESCC. METHODS: This study included patients with MM and high-grade ESCC treated with isolated radiotherapy or surgery. Pre- and post-treatment American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) impairment scale and retreatment rate were compared between the 2 groups. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression was utilized to examine differences in neurologic compromise, pain, and retreatments. RESULTS: A total of 247 patients were included (Radiotherapy: n = 154; Surgery: n = 93). After radiotherapy, 82 patients (53%) achieved full neurologic function (ASIA E) at the end of follow-up. Of the surgically treated patients, 67 (64%) achieved full neurologic function. In adjusted analyses, patients treated with surgery were less likely to experience neurologic deterioration within 2 years (OR = .15; 95%CI .05-.44; P = .001) and had less pain (OR = .29; 95%CI .11-.74; P = .010). Surgical treatment was not associated with an increased risk of retreatments (OR = .64; 95%CI .28-1.47; P = .29) or death (HR = .62, 95%CI .28-1.38; P = .24). CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for baseline differences, surgically treated patients with high-grade ESCC showed better neurologic outcomes compared to patients treated with radiotherapy. There were no differences in risk of retreatment or death.

Comparison of eight modern preoperative scoring systems for survival prediction in patients with extremity metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Survival is an important factor to consider when clinicians make treatment decisions for patients with skeletal metastasis. Several preoperative scoring systems (PSSs) have been developed to aid in survival prediction. Although we previously validated the Skeletal Oncology Research Group Machine-learning Algorithm (SORG-MLA) in Taiwanese patients of Han Chinese descent, the performance of other existing PSSs remains largely unknown outside their respective development cohorts. We aim to determine which PSS performs best in this unique population and provide a direct comparison between these models. METHODS: We retrospectively included 356 patients undergoing surgical treatment for extremity metastasis at a tertiary center in Taiwan to validate and compare eight PSSs. Discrimination (c-index), decision curve (DCA), calibration (ratio of observed:expected survivors), and overall performance (Brier score) analyses were conducted to evaluate these models' performance in our cohort. RESULTS: The discriminatory ability of all PSSs declined in our Taiwanese cohort compared with their Western validations. SORG-MLA is the only PSS that still demonstrated excellent discrimination (c-indexes>0.8) in our patients. SORG-MLA also brought the most net benefit across a wide range of risk probabilities on DCA with its 3-month and 12-month survival predictions. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should consider potential ethnogeographic variations of a PSS's performance when applying it onto their specific patient populations. Further international validation studies are needed to ensure that existing PSSs are generalizable and can be integrated into the shared treatment decision-making process. As cancer treatment keeps advancing, researchers developing a new prediction model or refining an existing one could potentially improve their algorithm's performance by using data gathered from more recent patients that are reflective of the current state of cancer care.

Preoperative embolization in surgical treatment of spinal metastases originating from non-hypervascular primary tumors: a propensity score matched study using 495 patients.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Preoperative embolization (PE) reduces intraoperative blood loss during surgery for spinal metastases of hypervascular primary tumors such as thyroid and renal cell tumors. However, most spinal metastases originate from primary breast, prostate, and lung tumors and it remains unclear whether these and other spinal metastases benefit from PE. PURPOSE: To assess the (1) efficacy of PE on the amount of intraoperative blood loss and safety in patients with spinal metastases originating from non-hypervascular primary tumors, and (2) secondary outcomes including perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion, anesthesia time, hospitalization, postoperative complication within 30 days, reoperation, 90-day mortality, and 1-year mortality. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective propensity-score matched, case-control study at 2 academic tertiary medical centers. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients 18 years of age or older undergoing surgery for spinal metastases originating from primary non-thyroid, non-renal cell, and non-hepatocellular tumors between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2016 were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were estimated amount of intraoperative blood loss and complications attributable to PE, such as neurologic injury, wound infection, thrombosis, or dissection. The secondary outcomes included perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion, anesthesia time, hospitalization, postoperative complication within 30 days, reoperation, 90-day mortality, and 1-year mortality. METHODS: In total, 495 patients were identified, of which 54 (11%) underwent PE. After propensity score matching on 21 variables, including primary tumor, number of spinal levels, and surgical treatment, 53 non-PE patients were matched to 53 PE patients. Matching was adequate measured by comparing the matched variables, testing the standardized mean differences (<0.25), and inspecting Kernel density plots. The degree of embolization was noted to be complete, until stasis, or successful in 43 (80%) patients. RESULTS: Intraoperative blood loss did not differ between both groups with a median blood loss in liters of 0.6 (IQR, 0.4-1.2) for non-PE patients and 0.9 (IQR, 0.6-1.2) for PE patients (p=.32). No complications occurred during embolization or the time between embolization and surgery. No differences were found in terms of the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that, although no complications occurred and the embolization procedure can be considered safe, patients with non-hypervascular spinal metastases might not benefit from PE. A larger, prospective study could confirm or refute these study findings and aid in elucidating a subset of spinal metastases that might benefit from PE.