Carmine Zoccali1, Jesse Skoch2,3, Christina M Walter2, Mohammad Torabi4, Mark Borgstrom4, Ali A Baaj2,5. 1. Oncological Orthopaedics Department, Muscular-skeletal Tissue Bank, IFO-Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Via Elio Chianesi 53, 00144, Rome, Italy. carminezoccali@libero.it. 2. Division of Neurosurgery, University of Arizona College of Medicine, 1501 N. Campbell Avenue, Tucson, AZ, 85724, USA. 3. Division of Pediatric Neurosurgery, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Avenue, Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA. 4. Research Computing Group of University Information Technology Services, University of Arizona, 1077 N. Highland, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA. 5. Weill Cornell Brain and Spine Center, Weill Cornell Medical Center, 525 East 68th Street, Box 99, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Accurate survival estimation is prerequisite to determine the most appropriate treatment for patients with metastatic spine disease. Several authors have proposed classification systems analyzing clinical and radiological parameters, such as, performance status, metastasis localization, and primary tumor histotype, but the modified Tokuhashi score (mTS) is the most widely used. Although it is regarded as one of the most complete and accurate systems, it does not take the effectiveness of new therapeutic strategies into consideration, contributing to a progressive loss of accuracy. The purpose of this review is to verify the ability of the mTS to accurately estimate metastatic spine patient survival, nearly 10 years after it was introduced. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to evaluate mTS accuracy to predict metastatic spine patient survival. RESULTS: Ten studies were selected, representing 1686 patients. The total predictive accuracy of the mTS was 63.00%; for patients expected to survive less than 6 months (group I), it was 64.10%; 6-12 months (group II), 55.32%; and more than 12 months (group III), 77.21%. A progressive decrease in accuracy over time was statistically significant in groups I and II. CONCLUSIONS: The mTS is suggestive of actual survival for patients with a good prognosis. It is less accurate for patients with an estimated survival of less than 12 months. The decreasing trend in mTS accuracy over time will likely further reduce mTS utility. An important opportunity exists to develop new instruments to assist spine surgeons and oncologists to choose appropriate surgical or non-surgical treatment modalities for patients with metastatic spine disease.
PURPOSE: Accurate survival estimation is prerequisite to determine the most appropriate treatment for patients with metastatic spine disease. Several authors have proposed classification systems analyzing clinical and radiological parameters, such as, performance status, metastasis localization, and primary tumor histotype, but the modified Tokuhashi score (mTS) is the most widely used. Although it is regarded as one of the most complete and accurate systems, it does not take the effectiveness of new therapeutic strategies into consideration, contributing to a progressive loss of accuracy. The purpose of this review is to verify the ability of the mTS to accurately estimate metastatic spine patient survival, nearly 10 years after it was introduced. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to evaluate mTS accuracy to predict metastatic spine patient survival. RESULTS: Ten studies were selected, representing 1686 patients. The total predictive accuracy of the mTS was 63.00%; for patients expected to survive less than 6 months (group I), it was 64.10%; 6-12 months (group II), 55.32%; and more than 12 months (group III), 77.21%. A progressive decrease in accuracy over time was statistically significant in groups I and II. CONCLUSIONS: The mTS is suggestive of actual survival for patients with a good prognosis. It is less accurate for patients with an estimated survival of less than 12 months. The decreasing trend in mTS accuracy over time will likely further reduce mTS utility. An important opportunity exists to develop new instruments to assist spine surgeons and oncologists to choose appropriate surgical or non-surgical treatment modalities for patients with metastatic spine disease.
Authors: E A Enkaoua; L Doursounian; G Chatellier; F Mabesoone; T Aimard; G Saillant Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 1997-10-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Miao Wang; Cody Eric Bünger; Haisheng Li; Chunsen Wu; Kristian Høy; Bent Niedermann; Peter Helmig; Yu Wang; Anders Bonde Jensen; Katrin Schättiger; Ebbe Stender Hansen Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2012-04-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Vincent Pointillart; Jean-Marc Vital; Rachid Salmi; Abou Diallo; Gerald M Quan Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2010-09-04 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Ori Barzilai; Anne L Versteeg; Arjun Sahgal; Laurence D Rhines; Mark H Bilsky; Daniel M Sciubba; James M Schuster; Michael H Weber; Peter Pal Varga; Stefano Boriani; Chetan Bettegowda; Michael G Fehlings; Yoshiya Yamada; Michelle J Clarke; Paul M Arnold; Ziya L Gokaslan; Charles G Fisher; Ilya Laufer Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 6.860