Literature DB >> 25724521

Treatment Planning and Fracture Prediction in Patients with Skeletal Metastasis with CT-Based Rigidity Analysis.

Ara Nazarian1, Vahid Entezari2, David Zurakowski3, Nathan Calderon4, John A Hipp4, Juan C Villa-Camacho2, Patrick P Lin5, Felix H Cheung6, Albert J Aboulafia7, Robert Turcotte8, Megan E Anderson9, Mark C Gebhardt9, Edward Y Cheng10, Richard M Terek11, Michael Yaszemski12, Timothy A Damron13, Brian D Snyder14.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Pathologic fractures could be prevented if reliable methods of fracture risk assessment were available. A multicenter prospective study was conducted to identify significant predictors of physicians' treatment plan for skeletal metastasis based on clinical fracture risk assessments and the proposed CT-based Rigidity Analysis (CTRA). EXPERIMENTAL
DESIGN: Orthopedic oncologists selected a treatment plan for 124 patients with 149 metastatic lesions based on the Mirels method. Then, CTRA was performed, and the results were provided to the physicians, who were asked to reassess their treatment plan. The pre- and post-CTRA treatment plans were compared to identify cases in which the treatment plan was changed based on the CTRA report. Patients were followed for a 4-month period to establish the incidence of pathologic fractures.
RESULTS: Pain, lesion type, and lesion size were significant predictors of the pre-CTRA plan. After providing the CTRA results, physicians changed their plan for 36 patients. CTRA results, pain, and primary source of metastasis were significant predictors of the post-CTRA plan. Follow-up of patients who did not undergo fixation resulted in 7 fractures; CTRA predicted these fractures with 100% sensitivity and 90% specificity, whereas the Mirels method was 71% sensitive and 50% specific.
CONCLUSIONS: Lesion type and size and pain level influenced the physicians' plans for the management of metastatic lesions. Physicians' treatment plans and fracture risk predictions were significantly influenced by the availability of CTRA results. Due to its high sensitivity and specificity, CTRA could potentially be used as a screening method for pathologic fractures. ©2015 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25724521      PMCID: PMC4452435          DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-2668

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Cancer Res        ISSN: 1078-0432            Impact factor:   12.531


  31 in total

1.  Predicting fracture through benign skeletal lesions with quantitative computed tomography.

Authors:  Brian D Snyder; Diana A Hauser-Kara; John A Hipp; David Zurakowski; Andrew C Hecht; Mark C Gebhardt
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers.

Authors:  J R Landis; G G Koch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1977-06       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Surgical treatment for secondary neoplastic fractures. A retrospective study of ninety-six patients.

Authors:  F F Parrish; J A Murray
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1970-06       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Density predicts the activity-dependent failure load of proximal femora with defects.

Authors:  D A Michaeli; K Inoue; W C Hayes; J A Hipp
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Long-term prevention of skeletal complications of metastatic breast cancer with pamidronate. Protocol 19 Aredia Breast Cancer Study Group.

Authors:  G N Hortobagyi; R L Theriault; A Lipton; L Porter; D Blayney; C Sinoff; H Wheeler; J F Simeone; J J Seaman; R D Knight; M Heffernan; K Mellars; D J Reitsma
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Inter- and intra-observer variation in classification systems for impending fractures of bone metastases.

Authors:  Moataz El-Husseiny; Nigel Coleman
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Incidence of fracture through metastases in long bones.

Authors:  M Fidler
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1981-12

9.  Pathologic fracture risk in rehabilitation of patients with bony metastases.

Authors:  R Bunting; W Lamont-Havers; D Schweon; A Kliman
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1985 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 10.  Impending fracture associated with bone destruction.

Authors:  R C Thompson
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 1.390

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  Computed tomography-based rigidity analysis: a review of the approach in preclinical and clinical studies.

Authors:  Juan C Villa-Camacho; Otatade Iyoha-Bello; Shohreh Behrouzi; Brian D Snyder; Ara Nazarian
Journal:  Bonekey Rep       Date:  2014-11-05

Review 2.  Fracture risk assessment and clinical decision making for patients with metastatic bone disease.

Authors:  Timothy A Damron; Kenneth A Mann
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2020-03-23       Impact factor: 3.494

3.  CORR Insights®: What Is the Adverse Event Profile After Prophylactic Treatment of Femoral Shaft or Distal Femur Metastases?

Authors:  Timothy A Damron
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Has the Level of Evidence of Podium Presentations at the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Annual Meeting Changed Over Time?

Authors:  Daniel M Lerman; Matthew G Cable; Patrick Thornley; Nathan Evaniew; Gerard P Slobogean; Mohit Bhandari; John H Healey; R Lor Randall; Michelle Ghert
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Does CT-based Rigidity Analysis Influence Clinical Decision-making in Simulations of Metastatic Bone Disease?

Authors:  Ara Nazarian; Vahid Entezari; Juan C Villa-Camacho; David Zurakowski; Jeffrey N Katz; Mary Hochman; Elizabeth H Baldini; Vartan Vartanians; Max P Rosen; Mark C Gebhardt; Richard M Terek; Timothy A Damron; Michael J Yaszemski; Brian D Snyder
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 6.  The effects of metastatic lesion on the structural determinants of bone: Current clinical and experimental approaches.

Authors:  Stacyann Bailey; David Hackney; Deepak Vashishth; Ron N Alkalay
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 4.398

Review 7.  [Differentiated treatment strategies for bone metastases of the extremities].

Authors:  B Rath; M Tingart; F Migliorini; J Eschweiler; R Zureik; J Hardes
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  CORR Insights®: Is There an Association Between Prophylactic Femur Stabilization and Survival in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease?

Authors:  Timothy A Damron
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 4.755

9.  Predicting Fracture Risk in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease of the Femur: A Pictorial Review Using Three Different Techniques.

Authors:  Shannon M Kaupp; Kenneth A Mann; Mark A Miller; Timothy A Damron
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2021-06-16

10.  CORR Insights®: Can a Novel Scoring System Improve on the Mirels Score in Predicting the Fracture Risk in Patients with Multiple Myeloma?

Authors:  Timothy A Damron
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 4.755

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.