Literature DB >> 30985913

Ambulatory status after surgical and nonsurgical treatment for spinal metastasis.

Andrew J Schoenfeld1, Elena Losina1, Marco L Ferrone1, Joseph H Schwab2, John H Chi3, Justin A Blucher1, Genevieve S Silva1, Angela T Chen1, Mitchel B Harris2, James D Kang1, Jeffrey N Katz1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Decisions for operative or nonoperative management remain challenging for patients with spinal metastases, especially when life expectancy and quality of life are not easily predicted. This study evaluated the effects of operative and nonoperative management on maintenance of ambulatory function and survival for patients treated for spinal metastases.
METHODS: Propensity matching was used to yield an analytic sample in which operatively and nonoperatively treated patients were similar with respect to key baseline covariates. The study included patients treated for spinal metastases between 2005 and 2017 who were 40 to 80 years old, were independent ambulators at presentation, and had fewer than 5 medical comorbidities. It evaluated the influence of operative care and nonoperative care on ambulatory function 6 months after presentation as the primary outcome. Survival at 6 months and survival at 1 year were secondary outcomes.
RESULTS: Nine hundred twenty-nine individuals eligible for inclusion were identified, with 402 (201 operative patients and 201 nonoperative patients) retained after propensity score matching. Patients treated operatively had a lower likelihood than those treated nonoperatively of being nonambulatory 6 months after presentation (3% vs 16%; relative risk [RR], 0.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06-0.46) as well as a reduced risk of 6-month mortality (20% vs 29%; RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49-0.98).
CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that in a group of patients with similar demographic and clinical characteristics, those treated operatively were less likely to lose ambulatory function 6 months after presentation than those managed nonoperatively. For patients with spinal metastases, our data can be incorporated into discussions about the treatments that align best with patients' preferences regarding surgical risk, mortality, and ambulatory status.
© 2019 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ambulatory function; propensity score matching; spinal metastases; surgical management; survival

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30985913      PMCID: PMC6625859          DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32140

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  25 in total

1.  Matched pair analysis comparing surgery followed by radiotherapy and radiotherapy alone for metastatic spinal cord compression.

Authors:  Dirk Rades; Stefan Huttenlocher; Juergen Dunst; Amira Bajrovic; Johann H Karstens; Volker Rudat; Steven E Schild
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-07-06       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Direct decompressive surgical resection in the treatment of spinal cord compression caused by metastatic cancer: a randomised trial.

Authors:  Roy A Patchell; Phillip A Tibbs; William F Regine; Richard Payne; Stephen Saris; Richard J Kryscio; Mohammed Mohiuddin; Byron Young
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Aug 20-26       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases.

Authors:  R A Deyo; D C Cherkin; M A Ciol
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 4.  Clinical outcome of metastatic spinal cord compression treated with surgical excision ± radiation versus radiation therapy alone: a systematic review of literature.

Authors:  Jaehon M Kim; Elena Losina; Christopher M Bono; Andrew J Schoenfeld; Jamie E Collins; Jeffrey N Katz; Mitchel B Harris
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2012-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Chemotherapy Use, Performance Status, and Quality of Life at the End of Life.

Authors:  Holly G Prigerson; Yuhua Bao; Manish A Shah; M Elizabeth Paulk; Thomas W LeBlanc; Bryan J Schneider; Melissa M Garrido; M Carrington Reid; David A Berlin; Kerin B Adelson; Alfred I Neugut; Paul K Maciejewski
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 31.777

6.  Prediction of Quality of Life and Survival After Surgery for Symptomatic Spinal Metastases: A Multicenter Cohort Study to Determine Suitability for Surgical Treatment.

Authors:  David Choi; Zoe Fox; Todd Albert; Mark Arts; Laurent Balabaud; Cody Bunger; Jacob M Buchowski; Maarten H Coppes; Bart Depreitere; Michael G Fehlings; James Harrop; Norio Kawahara; Juan A Martin-Benlloch; Eric M Massicotte; Christian Mazel; Fetullah C Oner; Wilco Peul; Nasir Quraishi; Yasuaki Tokuhashi; Katsuro Tomita; Jorit Jan Verlaan; Michael Wang; H Alan Crockard
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.654

7.  Prognostic factors associated with survival in patients with symptomatic spinal bone metastases: a retrospective cohort study of 1,043 patients.

Authors:  Laurens Bollen; Yvette M van der Linden; Willem Pondaag; Marta Fiocco; Bas P M Pattynama; Corrie A M Marijnen; Rob G H H Nelissen; Wilco C Peul; P D Sander Dijkstra
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 12.300

8.  Optimal caliper widths for propensity-score matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Pharm Stat       Date:  2011 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.894

9.  Comparing paired vs non-paired statistical methods of analyses when making inferences about absolute risk reductions in propensity-score matched samples.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-02-21       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 2.373

View more
  11 in total

1.  Non-operative management of spinal metastases: A prognostic model for failure.

Authors:  Andrew J Schoenfeld; Joseph H Schwab; Marco L Ferrone; Justin A Blucher; Tracy A Balboni; Lauren B Barton; John H Chi; James D Kang; Elena Losina; Jeffrey N Katz
Journal:  Clin Neurol Neurosurg       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 1.876

2.  Randomized controlled trials and high-intensity spine surgery.

Authors:  Andrew J Schoenfeld
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2020-04-18       Impact factor: 4.166

3.  Outcomes of surgical treatments of spinal metastases: a prospective study.

Authors:  C Bouthors; S Prost; C Court; B Blondel; Y P Charles; S Fuentes; H P Mousselard; C Mazel; C H Flouzat-Lachaniette; P Bonnevialle; F Saihlan
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2019-08-09       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  Cost-Utility Analysis Compared Between Radiotherapy Alone and Combined Surgery and Radiotherapy for Symptomatic Spinal Metastases in Thailand.

Authors:  Pasawat Taechalertpaisarn; Sirichai Wilartratsami; Pochamana Phisalprapa; Chayanis Kositamongkol; Achiraya Teyateeti; Panya Luksanapruksa
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2022-05-12

5.  Patient experiences of decision-making in the treatment of spinal metastases: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Emma C Lape; Jeffrey N Katz; Justin A Blucher; Angela T Chen; Genevieve S Silva; Joseph H Schwab; Tracy A Balboni; Elena Losina; Andrew J Schoenfeld
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 4.166

6.  A Natural History of Patients Treated Operatively and Nonoperatively for Spinal Metastases Over 2 Years Following Treatment: Survival and Functional Outcomes.

Authors:  Grace X Xiong; Miles W A Fisher; Joseph H Schwab; Andrew K Simpson; Lananh Nguyen; Daniel G Tobert; Tracy A Balboni; John H Shin; Marco L Ferrone; Andrew J Schoenfeld
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 7.  Evaluating ambulatory function as an outcome following treatment for spinal metastases: a systematic review.

Authors:  Lananh Nguyen; Nicole Agaronnik; Marco L Ferrone; Jeffrey N Katz; Andrew J Schoenfeld
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 4.297

8.  Clinician Experiences in Treatment Decision-Making for Patients with Spinal Metastases: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Lauren B Barton; Kaetlyn R Arant; Justin A Blucher; Danielle L Sarno; Kristin J Redmond; Tracy A Balboni; Matthew Colman; C Rory Goodwin; Ilya Laufer; Rick Placide; John H Shin; Daniel M Sciubba; Elena Losina; Jeffrey N Katz; Andrew J Schoenfeld
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 6.558

9.  The Cost-Effectiveness of Surgical Intervention for Spinal Metastases: A Model-Based Evaluation.

Authors:  Andrew J Schoenfeld; Gordon P Bensen; Justin A Blucher; Marco L Ferrone; Tracy A Balboni; Joseph H Schwab; Mitchel B Harris; Jeffrey N Katz; Elena Losina
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Characterizing Health-Related Quality of Life by Ambulatory Status in Patients with Spinal Metastases.

Authors:  Andrew J Schoenfeld; Caleb M Yeung; Daniel G Tobert; Lananh Nguyen; Peter G Passias; John H Shin; James D Kang; Marco L Ferrone
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 3.241

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.