Harvard Combined Orthopaedic Residency Program, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, San Antonio Military Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, TX.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2022 Apr 1;47(7):515-522. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004322.
Prospective observational study.
We present the natural history, including survival and function, among participants in the prospective observational study of spinal metastases treatment investigation.
Surgical treatment has been touted as a means to preserve functional independence, quality of life, and survival. Nearly all prior investigations have been limited by retrospective design and relatively short-periods of post-treatment surveillance.
This natural history study was conducted using the records of patients who were enrolled in the prospective observational study of spinal metastases treatment study (2017-2019). Eligible participants were 18 or older and presenting for treatment of spinal metastatic disease. Patients were followed at predetermined intervals (1, 3, 6, 12, and 24-mo) following treatment. We conducted cox proportional hazard regression analysis adjusting for confounders including age, biologic sex, number of comorbidities, type of metastatic lesion, neurologic symptoms at presentation, number of metastases involving the vertebral body, vertebral body collapse, New England Spinal Metastasis Score (NESMS) at presentation, and treatment strategy.
We included 202 patients. Twenty-three percent of the population had died by 3 months following treatment initiation, 51% by 1 year, and 70% at 2 years. There was no significant difference in survival between patients treated operatively and nonoperatively (P = 0.16). No significant difference in HRQL between groups was appreciated beyond 3 months following treatment initiation. NESMS at presentation (scores of 0 [HR 5.61; 95% CI 2.83, 11.13] and 1 [HR 3.00; 95% CI 1.60, 5.63]) was significantly associated with mortality.
We found that patients treated operatively and nonoperatively for spinal metastases benefitted from treatment in terms of HRQL. Two-year mortality for the cohort as a whole was 70%. When prognosticating survival, the NESMS appears to be an effective utility, particularly among patients with scores of 0 or 1.Level of Evidence: 2.
前瞻性观察研究。
我们报告了前瞻性观察性脊柱转移瘤治疗研究中参与者的自然史,包括生存率和功能。
手术治疗被吹捧为保持功能独立性、生活质量和生存的一种手段。几乎所有先前的研究都受到回顾性设计和相对较短的治疗后监测期的限制。
本自然史研究使用了 2017 年至 2019 年期间参加脊柱转移瘤治疗研究前瞻性观察性研究的患者的记录。符合条件的参与者年龄在 18 岁或以上,并有脊柱转移疾病的治疗需求。患者在治疗后按照预定的时间间隔(1、3、6、12 和 24 个月)进行随访。我们进行了 Cox 比例风险回归分析,调整了混杂因素,包括年龄、生物性别、合并症数量、转移灶类型、就诊时的神经症状、涉及椎体的转移灶数量、椎体塌陷、新英格兰脊柱转移评分(NESMS)就诊时和治疗策略。
我们纳入了 202 名患者。治疗开始后 3 个月内,23%的人群死亡,1 年内 51%死亡,2 年内 70%死亡。手术治疗和非手术治疗的患者生存率无显著差异(P=0.16)。治疗开始后 3 个月后,两组之间的 HRQL 无显著差异。就诊时 NESMS(评分 0 [HR 5.61;95%CI 2.83,11.13]和 1 [HR 3.00;95%CI 1.60,5.63])与死亡率显著相关。
我们发现,接受手术和非手术治疗的脊柱转移患者在 HRQL 方面均受益于治疗。该队列的两年总死亡率为 70%。在预测生存率时,NESMS 似乎是一种有效的工具,特别是在评分 0 或 1 的患者中。
2 级。