Are spine metastasis survival scoring systems outdated and do they underestimate life expectancy? Caution in surgical recommendation guidance

Hematologic Malignancies Influence the Accuracy of Prediction of Survival in Patients With Solid Tumor Spinal Metastases Undergoing Surgery

PURPOSE

There is no consensus on how to identify patients with multiple-level spinal metastases who would benefit from surgery. Previous studies have revealed that patients with hematologic malignancies have a significantly longer median survival time than those with solid tumor spinal metastases. We aimed to compare predictors and survival data between patients with spinal metastases, including hematologic malignancies (all-malignancies group), with only those with nonhematologic malignancies (nonhematologic malignancies group).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included all patients age >18 years who underwent surgery to treat spinal metastases in our department from 2008 to 2018. The patients' baseline characteristics, treatment modalities, and laboratory results were analyzed. Survival was calculated from the date of surgery to the date of confirmed death. Cox regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of survival.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 186 patients with a mean age of 57.1 ± 13.4 years, 101 of whom were male and 18 of whom had hematologic malignancies. The median survival time was 201 days in the all-malignancies group and 168 days in the nonhematologic malignancies group. Independent predictors of survival differed between the two groups. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status and response to preoperative chemotherapy were identified as independent factors in both groups. However, radiosensitivity and CNS metastases were identified only in the all-malignancies group, and tumor growth potential, albumin status, and number of vertebrae were identified only in the nonhematologic malignancies group. The receiver operating characteristics were comparable in the two groups: 0.75 in the all-malignancies group and 0.77 in the nonhematologic malignancies group.

CONCLUSION

Longer survival in patients with hematologic malignancies influences the overall prediction of survival. Tumor-specific prognostic factors may improve the prediction of survival in patients with spinal metastases.

Development and internal validation of machine-learning models for predicting survival in patients who underwent surgery for spinal metastases

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to develop machine-learning algorithms for predicting survival in patients who underwent surgery for spinal metastasis.

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

This study develops machine-learning models to predict postoperative survival in spinal metastasis patients, filling the gaps of traditional prognostic systems. Utilizing data from 389 patients, the study highlights XGBoost and CatBoost algorithms̓ effectiveness for 90, 180, and 365-day survival predictions, with preoperative serum albumin as a key predictor. These models offer a promising approach for enhancing clinical decision-making and personalized patient care.

METHODS

A registry of patients who underwent surgery (instrumentation, decompression, or fusion) for spinal metastases between 2004 and 2018 was used. The outcome measure was survival at postoperative days 90, 180, and 365. Preoperative variables were used to develop machine-learning algorithms to predict survival chance in each period. The performance of the algorithms was measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULTS

A total of 389 patients were identified, with 90-, 180-, and 365-day mortality rates of 18%, 41%, and 45% postoperatively, respectively. The XGBoost algorithm showed the best performance for predicting 180-day and 365-day survival (AUCs of 0.744 and 0.693, respectively). The CatBoost algorithm demonstrated the best performance for predicting 90-day survival (AUC of 0.758). Serum albumin had the highest positive correlation with survival after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

These machine-learning algorithms showed promising results in predicting survival in patients who underwent spinal palliative surgery for spinal metastasis, which may assist surgeons in choosing appropriate treatment and increasing awareness of mortality-related factors before surgery.

A critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines on surgical treatments for spinal metastasis

PURPOSE

As an important treatment for spinal metastasis, surgery has strict applicable conditions. Although various organizations have formulated different guidelines on surgical treatment for spinal metastasis (SM), there are certain differences in the content, standardization and quality of the guidelines and it is necessary to make a critical appraisal of them. We aim to systematically review and appraise the current guidelines on surgical treatments of SM and summarize the related recommendations with the quality evaluation of supporting evidence, as to provide a reference for the standardization of surgical treatment plans, and help clinical front-line medical workers can make safe and effective clinical decisions faster.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, and Embase for three major databases and online guideline databases. According to certain inclusion and exclusion criteria, the latest guidelines on the surgical treatment of SM were sorted out. AGREE II was used to evaluated the guideline's quality, and we extracted and compared the recommended treatment content of each guideline with evaluating by the evidence-grading scale.

RESULTS

Eight guidelines from 2013 to 2019 were included. Seven guidelines are comprehensive guidelines and one related to the reconstructive surgery of SM. Five guidelines were evaluated as "recommended," and three guidelines were evaluated as "recommended with modifications." Regarding the indications of surgery with SM, four guidelines, seven guidelines, seven guidelines, three guidelines and three guidelines recommended surgical treatment for patients with SM with intractable pain, mechanical instability, metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC), recurrent spinal metastasis (RSM), and survival predication, respectively. Regarding the surgical strategies, three guidelines recommended minimally invasive therapy but had strict indications. Six guidelines and five guidelines recommend palliative surgery and with receiving radiation therapy, respectively. For the aggressive surgery, only one guideline recommended to apply to patients in good general conditions who has isolated symptomatic SM. Regarding the surgical reconstructions, one guideline didn't recommend iliac bone graft and three guidelines recommended PMMA bone cement.

CONCLUSION

Most of the guidelines do not provide clear criteria for surgical application and provide more of a basic framework. The level of evidence for these surgical recommendations ranges from LOE B to D, and almost all guidelines recommend vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty, but for palliative and more aggressive surgery, which recommended to personalize specific surgical strategies with multidisciplinary collaboration.

Implant and construct decision-making in metastatic spine tumour surgery: a review of current concepts with a decision-making algorithm

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVE

Metastatic spine tumour surgery (MSTS) is an important treatment modality of metastatic spinal disease (MSD). Increase in MSTS has been due to improvements in our oncological treatment, as patients have increased longevity and even those with poorer comorbidities are now being considered for surgery. However, there is currently no guideline on how MSTS surgeons should select the appropriate levels to instrument, and which type of implants should be utilised.

METHODS

The current literature on MSTS was reviewed to study implant and construct decision making factors, with a view to write this narrative review. All studies that were related to instrumentation in MSTS were included.

RESULTS

A total of 58 studies were included in this review. We discuss novel decision-making models that should be taken into account when planning for surgery in patients undergoing MSTS. These factors include the quality of bone for instrumentation, the extent of the construct required for MSTS patients, the use of cement augmentation and the choice of implant. Various studies have advocated for the use of these modalities and demonstrated better outcomes in MSTS patients when used appropriately.

CONCLUSION

We have established a new instrumentation algorithm that should be taken into consideration for patients undergoing MSTS. It serves as an important guide for surgeons treating MSTS, with the continuous evolvement of our treatment capacity in MSD.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

Surgical management of spinal metastases from primary thyroid carcinoma: Demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment outcomes - A retrospective analysis

Objective

Metastatic spinal tumors represent a rare but concerning complication of primary thyroid carcinoma. We identified demographics, metastatic features, outcomes, and treatment strategies for these tumors in our institutional cohort.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients surgically treated for spinal metastases of primary thyroid carcinoma. Demographics, tumor characteristics, and treatment modalities were collected. The functional outcomes were quantified using Nurik, Modified Rankin, and Karnofsky Scores.

Results

Twelve patients were identified who underwent 17 surgeries for resection of spinal metastases. The primary thyroid tumor pathologies included papillary (4/12), follicular (6/12), and Hurthle cell (2/12) subtypes. The average number of spinal metastases was 2.5. Of the primary tumor subtypes, follicular tumors averaged 2.8 metastases at the highest and Hurthle cell tumors averaged 2.0 spinal metastases at the lowest. Five patients (41.7%) underwent preoperative embolization for their spinal metastases. Seven patients (58.3%) received postoperative radiation. There was no significant difference in progression-free survival between patients receiving surgery with adjuvant radiation and surgery alone (P = 0.0773). Five patients (41.7%) experienced postoperative complications. Two patients (16.7%) succumbed to disease progression and two patients (16.7%) experienced tumor recurrence following resection. Postsurgical mean Nurik scores decreased 0.54 points, mean Modified Rankin scores decreased 0.48 points, and mean Karnofsky scores increased 4.8 points.

Conclusion

Surgery presents as an important treatment modality in the management of spinal metastases from thyroid cancer. Further work is needed to understand the predictive factors for survival and outcomes following treatment.

Predictors of Survival After Emergent Surgical Decompression for Acutely Presenting Spinal Metastasis

BACKGROUND

Metastatic spinal tumors represent 90% of spinal masses and present variably with slow progression and/or rapid symptomatic worsening. Several prognostic scoring systems have been proposed. However, patients presenting acutely and requiring emergent surgery represent a unique subset of patients with different prognostic indicators.

METHODS

All cases of symptomatic spinal metastases requiring emergent surgery between 2010 and 2021 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. Survival time from date of surgery to death or last follow-up was calculated. Patients were stratified on the basis of survival for more or less than 6 months after surgery. Multivariate logistic regression was used to develop a model predicting probability of mortality at 6 months.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients satisfied inclusion criteria. Mean age at presentation was 60.4 ± 11.8 years with a median survival time of 6.5 [1.9-19.5 interquartile range] months. On univariate analysis, higher Tokuhashi score, Karnofksy performance scale (KPS), and lower modified McCormick scale were significantly associated with 6-month survival (P = 0.018, P < 0.001, P = 0.002, respectively). Preoperative American Spinal Injury Association grade and Spine Instability Neoplastic Score scores were not associated with survival. Multivariate analysis found KPS significantly correlated with survival (0.91 odds ratio, 0.85-0.98, 95% confidence interval, P = 0.011) at 6 months and that a stepwise regression model derived from KPS and Tokuhashi score demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy for 6-month survival (area under the curve = 0.843, Akaike information criterion = 37.1, P = 0.0039).

CONCLUSIONS

KPS and Tokuhashi scores most strongly correlated with 6-month survival in patients presenting with acutely symptomatic spinal metastases. These findings underscore the importance of baseline functional status and overall tumor burden on survival and may be useful in preoperative evaluation and surgical decision making for acutely presenting spinal metastases.

A novel scoring system incorporating sarcopenia to predict postoperative survival in spinal metastasis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

As the prevalence of spinal metastasis rises, methods to predict survival will become increasingly important for clinical decision-making. Sarcopenia may be used to predict survival in these patients.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study to develop a prediction model incorporating sarcopenia for postoperative survival in patients with spinal metastasis.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

This study included 200 patients who underwent operative intervention for spinal metastasis in our institution, a tertiary, academic spine center.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was 1-year postoperative survival. The secondary outcome measures were 3-month and 6-month postoperative survival.

METHODS

Clinicopathological and survivorship data was collated. Sarcopenia was defined using the L3 Psoas/Vertebral Body Ratio on cross-sectional CT. Independent predictors of postoperative survival were assessed by multiple logistic regression.

RESULTS

Overall 1-year postoperative survival was 50%. L3/Psoas ratio ≥1.5 (OR 6.2), albumin ≥35g/l (OR 3.0) and primary tumor type were found to be independent predictors of 3 month, 6 month and 1 year postoperative survival on multivariable analysis. Age at surgery, ambulatory status and mode of presentation were not independent predictors of survival. Variables were used to generate a new scoring system, ProgMets, to predict postoperative survival. The ProgMets system had greater correlation and higher area under the curve (AUC, 0.80) for 1-year survival than other scoring systems.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first model to incorporate sarcopenia to predict survival in spinal metastasis patients and has good prediction of survival compared to previous models. This tool may be increasingly useful for informed decision making for patients and surgeons.

Surgical Outcome and Prognosis of Patients with Spinal Metastasis from Esophageal Cancer: The Experience from a Single Center

BACKGROUND

The spine is one of the common sites of esophageal cancer metastasis, with a worse prognosis than that of metastasis occurring in other sites. However, the exact mechanism underlying metastatic spinal esophageal cancer (MSEC) is poorly understood possibly due to the short survival time of patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate surgical outcomes and factors affecting the prognosis of patients with MSEC.

METHODS

Enrolled in this retrospective study were 20 consecutive patients who received surgical treatment for MSEC in our hospital from 2013 to 2020. The impact of surgery on patient's quality of life was assessed by visual analog scale score and American Spinal Injury Association grade. Prognostic variables relative to traditional clinical parameters and inflammation and nutrition indicators were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

The median survival time of patients with MSEC was 6 months, with a one-year survival rate of 20%. Pain relief was achieved in most patients, and nerve function was recovered in part of the patients after surgery. Analysis of clinical factors showed that total tumor resection was beneficial to overall survival of patients with MSEC. Laboratory indicators of erythrocyte sedimentation rate, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, and platelet/lymphocyte ratio were identified as independent prognostic factors for patients with MSEC.

CONCLUSIONS

Timely surgical intervention can improve the quality of life of patients with MSEC. The preoperative erythrocyte sedimentation rate, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, and platelet/lymphocyte ratio could help predict the overall survival of patients with MSEC. These findings may help in decision-making for the treatment of patients with MSEC.

Multiple Myeloma Spinal Lesion Care: Management of a Primary Bone Malignancy Rather Than a Spinal Metastasis

OBJECTIVE

Multiple myeloma (MM) is too often wrongly categorized as a spinal metastasis (SpM), although it is distinguishable from SpM in many aspects, such as its earlier natural history at the time of diagnosis, its increased overall survival (OS), and its response to therapeutic modalities. The characterization of these 2 different spine lesions remains a main challenge.

METHODS

This study compares 2 consecutive prospective oncologic populations of patients with spine lesions: 361 patients treated for MM spine lesions and 660 patients treated for SpM between January 2014 and 2017.

RESULTS

The mean time between the tumor/MM diagnosis and spine lesions was respectively 0.3 (standard deviation [SD] 4.1) and 35.1 months (SD 21.2) for the MM and SpM groups. The median OS for the MM group was 59.6 months (SD 6.0) versus 13.5 months (SD 1.3) for the SpM group (P < 0.0001). Regardless of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, patients with MM always have a significantly better median OS than do patients with SpM: ECOG 0, 75.3 versus 38.7 months; ECOG 1, 74.3 versus 24.7 months; ECOG 2, 34.6 versus 8.1 months; ECOG 3, 13.5 versus 3.2 months and ECOG 4, 7.3 versus 1.3 months (P < 0.0001). The patients with MM had more diffuse spinal involvement (mean, 7.8 lesions; SD 4.7) than did patients with SpM (mean, 3.9; SD 3.5) (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

MM must be considered as a primary bone tumor, not as SpM. The strategic position of the spine in the natural course of cancer (i.e., nurturing cradle of birth for MM vs. systemic metastases spreading for SpM) explains the differences in OS and outcome.

Risk Factors for Poor Outcome after Palliative Surgery for Metastatic Spinal Tumors

Palliative surgery is performed to improve the quality of life of patients with spinal metastases. However, it is sometimes difficult to achieve the expected results because the patient's condition, and risk factors related to poor outcomes have not been well elucidated. This study aimed to evaluate the functional outcomes and investigate the risk factors for poor outcomes after palliative surgery for spinal metastasis. We retrospectively reviewed the records of 117 consecutive patients who underwent palliative surgery for spinal metastases. Neurological and ambulatory statuses were evaluated pre- and post-operatively. Poor outcomes were defined as no improvement or deterioration in functional status or early mortality, and the related risk factors were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression analysis. The results showed neurological improvement in 48% and ambulatory improvement in 70% of the patients with preoperative impairment, whereas 18% of the patients showed poor outcomes. In the multivariate analysis, low hemoglobin levels and low revised Tokuhashi scores were identified as risk factors for poor outcomes. The present results suggest that anemia and low revised Tokuhashi scores are related not only to life expectancy but also to functional recovery after surgery. Treatment options should be carefully selected for the patients with these factors.

Evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a Chinese cohort

INTRODUCTIONS

The spine is one of the most common sites of metastasis for malignancies. This study aimed to compare the predictive performance of seven commonly used prognostic scoring systems for surgically treated spine metastases. It is expected to assist surgeons in selecting appropriate scoring systems to support clinical decision-making and better inform patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study involving 268 surgically treated patients with spine metastases between 2017 and 2020 at a single regional oncology center in China. The revised Tokuhashi, Tomita, modified Bauer, revised Katagiri, van der Linden, Skeletal Oncology Research Group (SORG) nomogram, and SORG machine-learning (ML) scoring systems were externally validated. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve was used to evaluate sensitivity and specificity at different postoperative time points. The actual survival time was compared with the reference survival time provided in the original publication.

RESULTS

In the present study, the median survival was 16.6 months. The SORG ML scoring system demonstrated the highest accuracy in predicting 90-day (AUC: 0.743) and 1-year survival (AUC: 0.787). The revised Katagiri demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC: 0.761) in predicting 180-day survival. The revised Katagiri demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC: 0.779) in predicting 2-year survival. Based on this series, the actual life expectancy was underestimated compared with the original reference survival time.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the scoring systems can perform optimally at all time points and for all pathology types, and the reference survival times provided in the original study need to be updated. A cautious awareness of the underestimation by these models is of paramount importance in relation to current patients.

Survival and Functional Outcomes after Surgical Treatment for Spinal Metastasis in Patients with a Short Life Expectancy

This study aimed to analyze the survival and functional outcome after surgery in spinal metastasis patients with a short life expectancy and to compare the baseline characteristics based on 3-month survival. A total of 492 surgical treatment cases with a preoperative revised Tokuhashi score ≤ 8were reviewed. Median survival was calculated and Kaplan−Meier analysis was used to analyze the survival rates at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. The surgical period was divided into three time frames to examine the time trends. For the functional outcome, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) was analyzed. This study categorized subjects based on 3-month survival and compared the baseline characteristics. The median overall survival was 10.6 months. The 2013−2020 period showed a significantly better median survival than the other two periods (p < 0.001). Lung and kidney cancers showed a significant survival improvement in 2013−2020 (p < 0.001). Patients with ECOG-PS ≤ 2 increased from 37.4% preoperatively to 63.7% postoperatively (p < 0.001). There were significantly more cases of preoperative favorable performance status, slow and moderate growth cancers, and chemotherapy after surgery in the survival ≥3 months group. Depending on the type of primary cancer, surgery can be considered even in spinal metastasis patients with a short life expectancy, particularly those with a good performance status.

Development and external validation of predictive algorithms for six-week mortality in spinal metastasis using 4,304 patients from five institutions

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Historically, spine surgeons used expected postoperative survival of 3-months to help select candidates for operative intervention in spinal metastasis. However, this cutoff has been challenged by the development of minimally invasive techniques, novel biologics, and advanced radiotherapy. Recent studies have suggested that a life expectancy of 6 weeks may be enough to achieve significant improvements in postoperative health-related quality of life.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to develop a model capable of predicting 6-week mortality in patients with spinal metastases treated with radiation or surgery.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A retrospective review was conducted at five large tertiary centers in the United States and Taiwan.

PATIENT SAMPLE

The development cohort consisted of 3,001 patients undergoing radiotherapy and/or surgery for spinal metastases from one institution. The validation institutional cohort consisted of 1,303 patients from four independent, external institutions.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was 6-week mortality.

METHODS

Five models were considered to predict 6-week mortality, and the model with the best performance across discrimination, calibration, decision-curve analysis, and overall performance was integrated into an open access web-based application.

RESULTS

The most important variables for prediction of 6-week mortality were albumin, primary tumor histology, absolute lymphocyte, three or more spine metastasis, and ECOG score. The elastic-net penalized logistic model was chosen as the best performing model with AUC 0.84 on evaluation in the independent testing set. On external validation in the 1,303 patients from the four independent institutions, the model retained good discriminative ability with an area under the curve of 0.81. The model is available here: https://sorg-apps.shinyapps.io/spinemetssurvival/.

CONCLUSIONS

While this study does not advocate for the use of a 6-week life expectancy as criteria for considering operative management, the algorithm developed and externally validated in this study may be helpful for preoperative planning, multidisciplinary management, and shared decision-making in spinal metastasis patients with shorter life expectancy.

Epidemiology of spinal metastases, metastatic epidural spinal cord compression and pathologic vertebral compression fractures in patients with solid tumors: A systematic review

Introduction

Spinal metastases (SM) are a frequent complication of cancer and may lead to pathologic vertebral compression fractures (pVCF) and/or metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). Based on autopsy studies, it is estimated that about one third of all cancer patients will develop SM. These data may not provide a correct estimation of the incidence in clinical practice.

Objective

This systematic review (SR) aims to provide a more accurate estimation of the incidence of SM, MESCC and pVCF in a clinical setting.

Methods

We performed a SR of papers regarding epidemiology of SM, pVCF, and MESCC in patients with solid tumors conform PRISMA guidelines. A search was conducted in the PubMed and Web of Science database using the terms epidemiology, prevalence, incidence, global burden of disease, cost of disease, spinal metastas*, metastatic epidural spinal cord compression, pathologic fracture, vertebral compression fracture, vertebral metastas* and spinal neoplasms. Papers published between 1975 and august 2021 were included. Quality was evaluated by the STROBE criteria.

Results

While 56 studies were included, none of them reports the actual definition used for MESCC and pVCF, inevitably introducing heterogenity. The overall cumulative incidence of SM and MESCC is 15.67% and 2.84% respectively in patients with a solid tumor. We calculated a mean cumulative incidence in patients with SM of 9.56% (95% CI 5.70%-13.42%) for MESCC and 12.63% (95% CI 7.00%-18.25%) for pVCF. Studies show an important delay between onset of symptoms and diagnosis.

Conclusions

While the overall cumulative incidence for clinically diagnosed SM in patients with a solid tumor is 15.67%, autopsy studies reveal that SM are present in 30% by the time they die, suggesting underdiagnosing of SM. Approximately 1 out of 10 patients with SM will develop MESCC and another 12.6% will develop a pVCF. Understanding these epidemiologic data, should increase awareness for first symptoms, allowing early diagnosis and subsequent treatment, thus improving overall outcome.

Impact of Spinal Instrumentation on Neurological Outcome in Patients with Intermediate Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS)

Background: Adequate assessment of spinal instability using the spinal instability neoplastic score (SINS) frequently guides surgical therapy in spinal epidural osseous metastases and subsequently influences neurological outcome. However, how to surgically manage ‘impending instability’ at SINS 7−12 most appropriately remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the necessity of spinal instrumentation in patients with SINS 7−12 with regards to neurological outcome. Methods: We screened 683 patients with spinal epidural metastases treated at our interdisciplinary spine center. The preoperative SINS was assessed to determine spinal instability and neurological status was defined using the Frankel score. Patients were dichotomized according to being treated by instrumentation surgery and neurological outcomes were compared. Additionally, a subgroup analysis of groups with SINS of 7−9 and 10−12 was performed. Results: Of 331 patients with a SINS of 7−12, 76.1% underwent spinal instrumentation. Neurological outcome did not differ significantly between instrumented and non-instrumented patients (p = 0.612). Spinal instrumentation was performed more frequently in SINS 10−12 than in SINS 7−9 (p < 0.001). The subgroup analysis showed no significant differences in neurological outcome between instrumented and non-instrumented patients in either SINS 7−9 (p = 0.278) or SINS 10−12 (p = 0.577). Complications occurred more frequently in instrumented than in non-instrumented patients (p = 0.016). Conclusions: Our data suggest that a SINS of 7−12 alone might not warrant the increased surgical risks of additional spinal instrumentation.

Spinal metastasis: narrative reviews of the current evidence and treatment modalities

The treatment for spinal metastasis has evolved significantly during the past decade. An advancement in systemic therapy has led to a prolonged overall survival in cancer patients, thus increasing the incidence of spinal metastasis. In addition, with the improved treatment armamentarium, the prediction of patient survival using traditional prognostic models may have limitations and these require the incorporation of some novel parameters to improve their prognostic accuracy. The development of minimally-invasive spinal procedures and minimal access surgical techniques have facilitated a quicker patient recovery and return to systemic treatment. These modern interventions help to alleviate pain and improve quality of life, even in candidates with a relatively short life expectancy. Radiotherapy may be considered in non-surgical candidates or as adjuvant therapy for improving local tumour control. Stereotactic radiosurgery has facilitated this even in radioresistant tumours and may even replace surgery in radiosensitive malignancies. This narrative review summarizes the current evidence leading to the paradigm shifts in the modern treatment of spinal metastasis.