Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Department of Education, National Taiwan University Hospital, Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsin-Chu, Taiwan.
Clin Nutr. 2022 Mar;41(3):620-629. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2022.01.011. Epub 2022 Jan 14.
Survival estimation for patients with spinal metastasis is crucial to treatment decisions. Psoas muscle area (PMA), a surrogate for total muscle mass, has been proposed as a useful survival prognosticator. However, few studies have validated the predictive value of decreased PMA in an Asian cohort or its predictive value after controlling for existing preoperative scoring systems (PSSs). In this study, we aim to answer: (1) Is PMA associated with survival in Han Chinese patients with spinal metastasis? (2) Is PMA a good prognosticator according to concordance index (c-index) and decision curve analysis (DCA) after controlling for six existing and commonly used PSSs?
This study included 180 adult (≥18 years old) Taiwanese patients with a mean age of 58.3 years (range: 22-85) undergoing surgical treatment for spinal metastasis. A patient's PMA was classified into decreased, medium, and large if it fell into the lower (0-33%), middle (33-67%), and upper (67-100%) 1/3 in the study cohort, respectively. We used logistic and cox proportional-hazard regressions to assess whether PMA was associated with 90-day, 1-year, and overall survival. The model performance before and after addition of PMA to six commonly used PSSs, including Tomita score, original Tokuhashi score, revised Tokuhashi score, modified Bauer score, New England Spinal Metastasis Score, and Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine learning algorithms (SORG-MLAs), was compared by c-index and DCA to determine if PMA was a useful survival prognosticator.
Patients with a larger PMA is associated with better 90-day, but not 1-year, survival. The model performance of 90-day survival prediction improved after PMA was incorporated into all PSSs except SORG-MLAs. PMA barely improved the discriminatory ability (c-index, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.82 vs. c-index, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.66-0.81) and provided little gain of clinical net benefit on DCA for SORG-MLAs' 90-day survival prediction.
PMA is a prognosticator for 90-day survival and improves the discriminatory ability of earlier-proposed PSSs in our Asian cohort. However, incorporating PMA into more modern PSSs such as SORG-MLAs did not significantly improve its prediction performance.
对脊柱转移瘤患者进行生存估计对治疗决策至关重要。腰大肌面积(PMA)是肌肉总量的替代指标,已被提出作为一种有用的生存预后指标。然而,很少有研究在亚洲人群中验证 PMA 降低的预测价值,也很少有研究在控制现有的术前评分系统(PSSs)后验证其预测价值。本研究旨在回答:(1)PMA 是否与汉族脊柱转移瘤患者的生存相关?(2)在控制六个常用的 PSS 后,根据一致性指数(c-index)和决策曲线分析(DCA),PMA 是一个好的预后指标吗?
本研究纳入了 180 名接受手术治疗的成年(≥18 岁)台湾脊柱转移瘤患者,平均年龄为 58.3 岁(范围:22-85 岁)。如果患者的 PMA 属于研究队列中下(0-33%)、中(33-67%)和上(67-100%)1/3 的 1/3,则将其分为 PMA 降低、中等和较大。我们使用逻辑回归和 Cox 比例风险回归来评估 PMA 是否与 90 天、1 年和总生存率相关。在向六个常用的 PSS(包括 Tomita 评分、原始 Tokuhashi 评分、改良 Tokuhashi 评分、改良 Bauer 评分、新英格兰脊柱转移评分和骨骼肿瘤研究组机器学习算法(SORG-MLAs))中添加 PMA 之前和之后,通过 c-index 和 DCA 比较模型性能,以确定 PMA 是否是一种有用的生存预后指标。
PMA 较大的患者 90 天生存率较好,但 1 年生存率无差异。在除 SORG-MLAs 以外的所有 PSS 中加入 PMA 后,90 天生存预测的模型性能均得到改善。PMA 几乎没有提高区分能力(c-index,0.74;95%置信区间[CI],0.67-0.82 vs. c-index,0.74;95%CI,0.66-0.81),在 DCA 上对 SORG-MLAs 90 天生存预测也几乎没有提供临床净获益。
PMA 是 90 天生存的预后指标,可提高我们亚洲人群中早期提出的 PSS 的区分能力。然而,将 PMA 纳入更现代的 PSS,如 SORG-MLAs,并不能显著提高其预测性能。