Incidence, characteristics, management and outcome of patients with follicular lymphoma with tumor epidural compression, a study on 22 cases.

PURPOSE: Follicular lymphoma (FL) is one of the most common lymphoma. Occasionally, FL is associated with tumoral epidural compression and management of these patients remain poorly codified. This study aims to report incidence, clinical characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with FL and tumoral epidural compression. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational, retrospective cohort study of adult patients with FL and epidural tumor compression, treated in a French Institute over the last 20 years (2000-2021). RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2021, 1382 patients with FL were followed by the haematological department. Of them, 22 (1.6%) patients (16 men and 6 women) had follicular lymphoma with epidural tumor compression. At epidural tumor compression occurrence, 8/22 (36%) patients had a neurological clinical deficit (motor, sensory or sphincter function) and 14/22 (64%) had tumor pain. All patients were treated with immuno-chemotherapy; the main regimen being used was R-CHOP plus high dose IV methotrexate in 16/22 (73%) patients. Radiotherapy for tumor epidural compression was performed in 19/22 (86%) patients. With a median follow-up of 60 months (range=[1-216]), 5 year local tumor relapse free survival was achieved in 65% (95% CI 47-90%) of patients. The median PFS was of 36 months (95% CI 24-NA) and 5 years OS estimate was 79% (95% CI 62-100%). Two patients developed a relapse at a second epidural site. CONCLUSION: FL with tumoral epidural compression reached 1.6% of all FL patients. Management based on immuno-chemotherapy with radiotherapy appeared to produce comparable outcomes with the general FL population.

Cost-effectiveness of surgery in the management of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression: a systematic review.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To perform an evidence-based synthesis of the literature to examine the cost-effectiveness of surgery in the management of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Between 2.5% and 10% of patients with cancer develop symptomatic MESCC, which leads to significant morbidity, and a reduction in quality and length of life. Although surgery is being increasingly used in the management of MESCC, it is unclear whether this modality is cost-effective, given the relatively limited lifespan of these patients. METHODS: Numerous databases were searched to identify full economic studies based on key questions established a priori. Only economic studies that evaluated and synthesized the costs and consequences (i.e., cost-minimization, cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, or cost-utility) were considered for inclusion. Two independent reviewers examined the full text of the articles meeting inclusion criteria to obtain the final cohort of included studies. The Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument was scored by 2 independent reviewers. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 38 potentially relevant citations, 2 of which met the inclusion criteria. One was a cost-utility study and the other was a cost-effectiveness study, and both used clinical data from the same randomized controlled trial. Both studies found surgery plus radiotherapy to be not only more expensive but also more effective than radiotherapy alone in the management of patients with MESCC. CONCLUSION: There is evidence from 2 high-quality studies that surgery plus radiotherapy is costlier but clinically more effective than radiotherapy alone for the management of MESCC. Of note, cost-effectiveness data for the role of spinal stabilization in the management of oncological spinal instability are lacking. This is a key knowledge gap that represents an opportunity for future research.

[Paradigm shift in the management of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression: the importance of preserving ambulation].

In 2005, a Landmark study showed that direct decompressive surgery, followed by postoperative external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) is superior to EBRT alone in patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). Patients undergoing both surgery and EBRT had similar median survival but experienced longer ambulation than with EBRT alone. Additional studies have shown improvements in quality-of-life, higher cost-effectiveness, improved pain control, and higher functional status with surgery plus EBRT. Improved neurological outcome also improved the patients' ability to undergo postoperative adjuvant therapy. According to our experience, even patients over 65 or patients with aggressive primary tumors and additional metastases have benefited from surgical intervention, living longer than expected with preservation of ambulation and sphincter control until death or shortly before. Preserving ambulation is critical. With current surgical devices and techniques, patients with MESCC who present with a single area of cord compression, back pain, neurological deficit, or progressive deformity, may benefit from surgery prior to adjuvant radiation-based treatment or chemotherapy.

The combined use of surgery and radiotherapy to treat patients with epidural cord compression due to metastatic disease: a cost-utility analysis.

Neoplastic metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is a common complication of cancer that causes pain and progressive neurologic impairment. The previous standard treatment for this condition involved corticosteroids and radiotherapy (RT). Direct decompressive surgery with postoperative radiotherapy (S + RT) is now increasingly being chosen by clinicians to significantly improve patients' ability to walk and reduce their need for opioid analgesics and corticosteroids. A cost-utility analysis was conducted to compare S + RT with RT alone based on the landmark randomized clinical trial by Patchell et al. (2005). It was performed from the perspective of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Ontario-based costs were adjusted to 2010 US dollars. S + RT is more costly but also more effective than corticosteroids and RT alone, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$250 307 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. First order probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that the probability of S + RT being cost-effective is 18.11%. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed that there is a 91.11% probability of S + RT being cost-effective over RT alone at a willingness-to-pay of US$1 683 000 per QALY. In practice, the results of our study indicate that, by adopting the S + RT strategy, there would still be a chance of 18.11% of not paying extra at a willingness-to-pay of US$50 000 per QALY. Those results are sensitive to the costs of hospice palliative care. Our results suggest that adopting a standard S + RT approach for patients with MSCC is likely to increase health care costs but would result in improved outcomes.

Assessment of prognostic factors in patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) from solid tumor after surgery plus radiotherapy: a single institution experience.

PURPOSE: To identify potential prognostic factors predicting functional outcome and survival after surgery followed by radiotherapy for metastatic spinal cord compression due to solid tumors. METHODS: 531 consecutive patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) were treated at our institution. Surgery followed by radiation therapy was performed in 151 patients (30%) with various histological diagnoses. Three different surgical procedures were performed: minimal resection with or without instrumented fixation, curettage, and total tumorectomy. Within 1 month after surgery, RT was performed, delivering a total dose of 30-36 Gy (3 Gy per fraction). Ten potential prognostic factors were investigated for relationship with functional outcome and survival. RESULTS: Clinical remission of pain was obtained in 91% of patients and 94 (62.5%) had recovery of neurological deficit. Recurrence in the same site of treatment occurred in nine (6%) patients. Median survival was 14 months (range 0-52 months); OS at 1, 2, and 3 years was 43.6, 37, and 21.5%, respectively. Survival was significantly associated with the histology of primary tumor (P < 0.001) and visceral metastases (P < 0.001) in the whole group; for histology, the prognostic factors statistically significant were other bone metastases in breast cancer, control of primary tumor, and the absence of visceral metastases in NSCLC and kind of surgery in the other. CONCLUSIONS: The key element for successful treatment of MESCC is multidisciplinary care of the patient, which includes all of those prognostic factors that have been, until now, analyzed and compared. In our set of patients treated for vertebral metastases, PS, time to development of symptoms, and the presence of visceral metastases affected functional outcome and survival.

Commentary: Surgery for nonambulatory patients with epidural spinal metastasis: is it evidence based and cost effective?

Commentary on: Kim CH, Chung CK, Jahng T-A, Kim HJ. Resumption of ambulatory status after surgery for nonambulatory patients with epidural spinal metastasis. Spine J 2011; 11:1015-23 (in this issue).

Cost-effectiveness of surgery plus radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression.

PURPOSE: A recent randomized clinical trial has demonstrated that direct decompressive surgery plus radiotherapy was superior to radiotherapy alone for the treatment of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. The current study compared the cost-effectiveness of the two approaches. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In the original clinical trial, clinical effectiveness was measured by ambulation and survival time until death. In this study, an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a societal perspective. Costs related to treatment and posttreatment care were estimated and extended to the lifetime of the cohort. Weibull regression was applied to extrapolate outcomes in the presence of censored clinical effectiveness data. RESULTS: From a societal perspective, the baseline incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was found to be $60 per additional day of ambulation (all costs in 2003 Canadian dollars). Using probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 50% of all generated ICERs were lower than $57, and 95% were lower than $242 per additional day of ambulation. This analysis had a 95% CI of -$72.74 to 309.44, meaning that this intervention ranged from a financial savings of $72.74 to a cost of $309.44 per additional day of ambulation. Using survival as the measure of effectiveness resulted in an ICER of $30,940 per life-year gained. CONCLUSIONS: We found strong evidence that treatment of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression with surgery in addition to radiotherapy is cost-effective both in terms of cost per additional day of ambulation, and cost per life-year gained.