RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to elucidate postoperative outcomes in patients with spinal metastases of prostate cancer, with a focus on patient-oriented assessments. METHODS: This was a prospective multicenter registry study involving 35 centers. A total of 413 patients enrolled in the Japanese Association for Spine Surgery and Oncology Multicenter Prospective Study of Surgery for Metastatic Spinal Tumors were evaluated for inclusion. The eligible patients were followed for at least 1 year after surgery. The Frankel Classification, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, visual analog scale for pain, face scale, Barthel Index, vitality index, indications for oral pain medication, and the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire were used for evaluating functional status, activities of daily living, and patient motivation. RESULTS: Of the 413 eligible patients, 41 with primary prostate cancer were included in the study. The patient-oriented assessments indicated that the patients experienced postoperative improvements in quality of life and motivation in most items, with the improvements extending for up to 6 months. More than half of the patients with Frankel classifications B or C showed improved neurological function at 1 month after surgery, and most patients presented maintained or improved their classification at 6 months. CONCLUSION: Surgical intervention for spinal metastases of prostate cancer significantly improved neurological function, quality of life, and motivation of the patients. Consequently, our results support the validity of surgical intervention for improving the neurological function and overall well-being of patients with spinal metastases of prostate cancer.
RESUMEN
STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective registry study. OBJECTIVE: To clarify minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for surgical interventions for spinal metastases, thereby enhancing patient care by integrating quality of life (QoL) assessments with clinical outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite its proven usefulness in degenerative spinal diseases and deformities, the MCID remains unexplored regarding surgery for spinal metastases. METHODS: This study included 171 (out of 413) patients from the multicenter "Prospective Registration Study on Surgery for Metastatic Spinal Tumors" by the Japan Association of Spine Surgeons. These were evaluated preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively using the Face scale, EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L), including the visual analog scale (VAS), and performance status. The MCIDs were calculated using an anchor-based method, classifying participants into the improved, unchanged, and deteriorated groups based on the Face scale scores. Focusing on the improved and unchanged groups, the change in the EQ-5D-5L values from before to after treatment was analyzed, and the cutoff value with the highest sensitivity and specificity was determined as the MCID through receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The validity of the MCIDs was evaluated using a distribution-based calculation method for patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: The improved, unchanged, and deteriorated groups comprised 121, 28, and 22 participants, respectively. The anchor-based MCIDs for the EQ-5D-5L index, EQ-VAS, and domains of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression were 0.21, 15.50, 1.50, 0.50, 0.50, 0.50, and 0.50, respectively; the corresponding distribution-based MCIDs were 0.17, 15,99, 0.77, 0.80, 0.78, 0.60, and 0.70, respectively. CONCLUSION: We identified MCIDs for surgical treatment of spinal metastases, providing benchmarks for future clinical research. By retrospectively examining whether the MCIDs are achieved, factors favoring their achievement and risks affecting them can be explored. This could aid in decisions on surgical candidacy and patient counseling.