Impact of surgical treatment on patient reported outcome in patients with spinal metastases from prostate cancer.

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.

Development of a clinical prediction score for perioperative complications following metastatic spinal surgery (PERCOM) score.

Background: Spinal metastases can impair mobility, worsening the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS). Surgery for spinal metastases has the potential to improve KPS and extend prognosis, but it is crucial to recognize the elevated risk of perioperative complications. Therefore, the development of a new scoring system to accurately predict perioperative complications in spinal metastatic surgery is essential. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study with 86 patients who underwent surgical intervention for spinal metastases. Patients were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of perioperative complications within 14 days after surgery. Various factors related to perioperative complications were assessed through univariate and multivariate analyses. We established a clinical prognostic scoring system called the Perioperative Complications following Metastatic Spinal Surgery (PERCOM) score and evaluated its precision using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results: Five variables (age, KPS, primary prostate cancer, Albumin, and Hemoglobin) identified in the univariate analysis were assigned binary values of 0 or 1. The PERCOM score was then calculated for each patient by summing the individual points, ranging from 0 to 5. The optimal threshold determined by ROC curve analysis for the PERCOM score was 2 points, with a sensitivity of 86 % and a specificity of 56 %. Conclusions: The composite PERCOM score effectively predicted perioperative complications in spinal metastasis surgery. To further validate its precision, a prospective multicenter study is needed.

Verification of the Accuracy of Cervical Spinal Cord Injury Prognosis Prediction Using Clinical Data-Based Artificial Neural Networks.

BACKGROUND: In patients with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI), we need to make accurate prognostic predictions in the acute phase for more effective rehabilitation. We hypothesized that a multivariate prognosis would be useful for patients with cervical SCI. METHODS: We made two predictive models using Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) and Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs). We adopted MLR as a conventional predictive model. Both models were created using the same 20 clinical parameters of the acute phase data at the time of admission. The prediction results were classified by the ASIA Impairment Scale. The training data consisted of 60 cases, and prognosis prediction was performed for 20 future cases (test cohort). All patients were treated in the Spinal Injuries Center (SIC) in Fukuoka, Japan. RESULTS: A total of 16 out of 20 cases were predictable. The correct answer rate of MLR was 31.3%, while the rate of ANNs was 75.0% (number of correct answers: 12). CONCLUSION: We were able to predict the prognosis of patients with cervical SCI from acute clinical data using ANNs. Performing effective rehabilitation based on this prediction will improve the patient's quality of life after discharge. Although there is room for improvement, ANNs are useful as a prognostic tool for patients with cervical SCI.

Prospective Registration Study for Establishing Minimal Clinically Important Differences in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Spinal Metastases.

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.