A new era in the management of spinal metastasis.

Despite the recent advances in cancer treatment, the incidence of patients with spinal metastases continues to grow along with the total number of cancer patients. Spinal metastases can significantly impair activities of daily living (ADL) and quality of life (QOL), compared with other types of bone metastases, as they are characterized with severe pain and paralysis caused by skeletal-related events. Reduced ADL can also lead to treatment limitations as certain anticancer agents and radiation therapy are not compatible treatments; thus, leading to a shorter life expectancy. Consequently, maintaining ADLs in patients with spinal metastases is paramount, and spine surgeons have an integral role to play in this regard. However, neurosurgeon, orthopedic and spinal surgeons in Japan do not have a proactive treatment approach to spinal metastases, which may prevent them from providing appropriate treatment when needed (clinical inertia). To overcome such endemic inertia, it is essential for 1) spine surgeons to understand and be more actively involved with patients with musculoskeletal disorders (cancer locomo) and cancer patients; 2) the adoption of a multidisciplinary approach (coordination and meetings not only with the attending oncologist but also with spine surgeons, radiologists, rehabilitation specialists, and other professionals) to preemptive treatment such as medication, radiotherapy, and surgical treatment; and 3) the integration of the latest findings associated with minimally invasive spinal treatments that have expanded the indications for treatment of spinal metastases and improved treatment outcomes. This heralds a new era in the management of spinal metastases.

Association between the Prognostic Nutritional Index and the Occurrence of Immune-Related Adverse Events.

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) affect all organs and are associated with various symptoms. The identification of biomarkers that can predict irAEs may be particularly clinically useful. This study aimed to investigate whether the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) before the initiation of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment can predict the occurrence of irAEs. We conducted a survey of 111 patients with cancer who were receiving ICI fixed-dose monotherapy at Saga University Hospital from the time each ICI became available until January 2020. We compared the PNI between the patients with and without irAE expression, established a cutoff value for PNI associated with the development of irAEs, and investigated the incidence of irAEs and progression-free survival (PFS) in groups divided by the cutoff value. Patients with irAEs had significantly higher PNI than did those without, and there was a significant association between PNI and irAEs after adjusting for potential factors (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.21). In addition, PNI ≥44.2 was associated with a significantly higher incidence of irAEs (75.0% vs. 35.2%, p = 0.0001) and significantly longer PFS than PNI <44.2 (p = 0.025). In conclusion, pretreatment PNI may be associated with the risk of developing irAEs in patients with advanced recurrent solid tumors. When the PNI is ≥44.2, patient management is important for avoiding serious AEs because while the treatment may be effective, the occurrence of irAEs is a concern.