Clarke, Michelle J.

Study Design: Systematic review. Objectives: We conducted a systematic review of the literature to answer the following questions regarding the use of steroid therapy in metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC): 1. In cases of MSCC, what is the effect of steroid administration before definitive radiotherapy or surgery on ambulatory status, bowel and bladder function and survival? 2. What steroid dosing regimens are associated with the best outcomes concerning neurological symptoms and complication prevention in cases of MSCC? Summary of Background Data: Currently, there is significant variation in the initial bolus dose, daily maintenance dose and duration of treatment when steroids are used as a bridge to definitive therapy for MSCC. Methods: A literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted in June 2016, using Medline via Ovid SP, Medline via PubMed, Embase, Biosis Previews and the Cochrane Library. Search terms used in each database varied slightly to optimize results. All generic steroid formulations were included along with spinal cord compression or myelopathy combined with metastatic or malignant tumors. Papers discussing acute traumatic causes of spinal cord compression were excluded, as were papers discussing cord compression from nonmetastatic tumors or epidural lipomatosis. Subjects were limited to adult humans undergoing definitive treatment with radiotherapy or surgery. Results: Of the 309 papers retrieved, 66 full text studies were reviewed and 6 papers were found to address the stated questions. Conclusions: There is a paucity of high quality literature evaluating the use of steroids in MSCC. On the basis of the evidence available an initial 10 mg intravenous bolus of dexamethasone followed by 16 mg PO QD has been associated with fewer complications compared with 100 mg bolus and 96 mg QD. Weaning of steroids should occur rapidly after definitive treatment. Risk of gastric bleeding or perforation can be managed with the routine use of proton-pump inhibitors. Level of Evidence: Level IIIa.

BACKGROUNDThe Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ) was developed as the first spine oncology‐specific health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) measure. This study evaluated the psychometric properties and clinical validity of the SOSGOQ in a diverse cohort of patients with spinal metastases.METHODSAn international, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study including patients with spinal metastases who underwent surgery and/or radiotherapy was conducted by the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor. Demographic, tumor, and treatment data were collected. HRQOL was evaluated using the SOSGOQ and Medical Outcomes Study Questionnaire Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF‐36) at baseline and fixed follow‐up times. Construct validity was assessed using multitrait scaling analyses, confirmatory factor analyses, and correlation with the SF‐36 and NRS pain score. Test‐retest reliability was assessed in a subgroup of patients between 12 weeks after treatment and the retest 4 to 9 days later.RESULTSA total of 238 patients were enrolled at 9 centers across North America; 153 of these patients had HRQOL data available at 12 weeks after treatment. Multitrait scaling analyses and confirmatory factor analyses resulted in a refined version of the SOSGOQ with 4 domains and 4 single items. The revised SOSGOQ (SOSGOQ2.0) demonstrated strong correlations with SF‐36 and the ability to discriminate between clinically distinct patient groups. Reliability of the SOSGOQ2.0 was demonstrated to be good, with an intraclass correlation coefficient ranging from 0.58 to 0.92 for the different domains.CONCLUSIONSThe SOSGOQ2.0 is a reliable and valid measure with which to evaluate HRQOL in patients with spinal metastases. It is recommended to use the SOSGOQ2.0 together with a generic HRQOL outcome measure to comprehensively assess HRQOL and increase sensitivity and specificity. Cancer 2018;124:1828‐38. © 2018 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

Study Design: Systematic review. Objectives: The objective of this systematic review was to answer 2 key questions: (1) What is the clinical presentation and probability of symptomatic improvement following treatment for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of the spine? (2) What is the overall survival of patients diagnosed with spinal metastases from RCC? Methods: A literature review was performed to identify articles that reported on survival, clinical outcomes, and/or prognostic factors in the RCC population with spinal metastases from 1986 to 2016. Results: Forty-eight articles (807 patients) were included. The Fuhrman Nuclear Grade has been significantly associated with survival in previous studies but was underpowered in the current study. The Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Score (MSKCC/Motzer) was also underpowered in the current study. From the time of spinal metastasis, the mean and median survival for patients with previously diagnosed primary RCC was 8.75 and 11.7 months, respectively, whereas synchronously diagnosed patients (primary RCC and spinal metastasis) had a mean and median survival of 6.75 and 11 months, respectively. Patients with a “low” (0-8), “intermediate” (9-11), or “high” (12-15) revised Tokuhashi score at initial presentation had a median survival of 5.4, 11.7, and 32.9 months, respectively. Conclusion: Patients with either a synchronous or latent diagnosis of RCC survived greater than 6 months from the time of presentation. Initial Furhman grade, Tokuhashi score, and MSKCC/Motzer can be useful tools in informing patient-specific prognosis for those with metastatic RCC of the spine.

Background Complication avoidance is paramount to the success of any surgical procedure. In the case of spine tumor surgery, the risk of complications is increased because of the primary disease process and the radiotherapy and chemotherapeutics used to treat the disease. If complications do occur, then life-saving adjuvant treatment must be delayed or withheld until the issue is resolved, potentially impacting overall disease control. Methods We reviewed the literature and our own best practices to provide recommendations on complication avoidance as well as the management of complications that may occur. Appropriate workup of suspected complications and treatment algorithms are also discussed. Results Appropriate patient selection and a multidisciplinary workup are imperative in the setting of spinal tumors. Intraoperative complications may be avoided by employing proper surgical technique and an understanding of the pathological changes in anatomy. Major postoperative issues include wound complications and spinal reconstruction failure. Preoperative surgical planning must include postoperative reconstruction. Patients undergoing spinal tumor resection should be closely monitored for local tumor recurrence, recurrence along the biopsy tract, and for distant metastatic disease. Any suspected recurrence should be closely watched, biopsied if necessary, and promptly treated. Conclusions Because patients with spinal tumors are normally treated with a multidisciplinary approach, emphasis should be placed on the recognition of surgical complications beyond the surgical setting.

Background Primary tumors are rare and those localized to a single location offer the potential for cure. To achieve this, early recognition of the primary tumor and proper workup and treatment are essential. Methods The authors reviewed the literature and best practices to provide recommendations on primary spine tumor treatment. Appropriate workup of primary spine tumors and treatment algorithms are also discussed. Results Patients suspected of a primary spine tumor should undergo fine-needle aspirate biopsy following consultation with the surgical team to ensure the biopsy tract is surgically resectable should the need arise. Once pathology is confirmed, metastatic workup should be performed to guide the level of treatment. If a localized lesion with poor radiation and chemotherapeutic response is diagnosed, then en bloc resection may be required for cure. If en bloc resection is not feasible or metastatic lesions are present, then radiation and medical oncology specialists must work in conjunction with the surgical team to determine the best treatment options. Conclusions Patients with suspected primary tumors of the spine should be treated in a multidisciplinary fashion from the outset. With thoughtful management, these lesions offer the opportunity for surgical cure.

Study Design: Systematic review. Objective: Surgical decompression and reconstruction of symptomatic spinal metastases has improved the quality of life in cancer patients. However, most data has been collected on cohorts of patients with mixed tumor histopathology. We systematically reviewed the literature for prognostic factors specific to the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine. Methods: A systemic review of the literature was conducted to answer the following questions: Question 1. Describe the survival and functional outcomes of surgery or vertebral augmentation for prostate metastases to the spine. Question 2. Determine whether overall tumor burden, Gleason score, preoperative functional markers, and hormonal naivety favor operative intervention. Question 3. Establish whether clinical outcomes vary with the evolution of operative techniques. Results: A total of 16 studies met the preset inclusion criteria. All included studies were retrospective series with a level of evidence of IV. Included studies consistently showed a large effect of hormone-naivety on overall survival. Additionally, studies consistently demonstrated an improvement in motor function and the ability to maintain/regain ambulation following surgery resulting in moderate strength of recommendation. All other parameters were of insufficient or low strength. Conclusions: There is a dearth of literature regarding the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine, which represents an opportunity for future research. Based on existing evidence, it appears that the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine has consistently favorable results. While no consistent preoperative indicators favor nonoperative treatment, hormone-naivety and high Karnofsky performance scores have positive effects on survival and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVEPrimary osteosarcoma of the spine is a rare osseous neoplasm. While previously reported retrospective studies have demonstrated that overall patient survival is impacted mostly by en bloc resection and chemotherapy, the continued management of residual disease remains to be elucidated. This systematic review was designed to address the role of revision surgery and multimodal adjuvant therapy in cases in which en bloc excision is not initially achieved.METHODSA systematic literature search spanning the years 1966 to 2015 was performed on PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science to identify reports describing outcomes of patients who underwent biopsy alone, neurological decompression, or intralesional resection for osteosarcoma of the spine. Studies were reviewed qualitatively, and the clinical course of individual patients was aggregated for quantitative meta-analysis.RESULTSA total of 16 studies were identified for inclusion in the systematic review, of which 8 case reports were summarized qualitatively. These studies strongly support the role of chemotherapy for overall survival and moderately support adjuvant radiation therapy for local control. The meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant benefit in overall survival for performing revision tumor debulking (p = 0.01) and also for chemotherapy at relapse (p < 0.01). Adjuvant radiation therapy was associated with longer survival, although this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.06).CONCLUSIONSWhile the initial therapeutic goal in the management of osteosarcoma of the spine is neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by en bloc marginal resection, this objective is not always achievable given anatomical constraints and other limitations at the time of initial clinical presentation. This systematic review supports the continued aggressive use of revision surgery and multimodal adjuvant therapy when possible to improve outcomes in patients who initially undergo subtotal debulking of osteosarcoma. A limitation of this systematic review is that lesions amenable to subsequent resection or tumors inherently more sensitive to adjuvants would exaggerate a therapeutic effect of these interventions when studied in a retrospective fashion.

Study Design: A multicenter, retrospective review of C5 palsy after cervical spine surgery. Objective: Postoperative C5 palsy is a known complication of cervical decompressive spinal surgery. The goal of this study was to review the incidence, patient characteristics, and outcome of C5 palsy in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective review of 13 946 patients across 21 centers who received cervical spine surgery (levels C2 to C7) between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2011, inclusive. P values were calculated using 2-sample t test for continuous variables and χ 2 tests or Fisher exact tests for categorical variables. Results: Of the 13 946 cases reviewed, 59 patients experienced a postoperative C5 palsy. The incidence rate across the 21 sites ranged from 0% to 2.5%. At most recent follow-up, 32 patients reported complete resolution of symptoms (54.2%), 15 had symptoms resolve with residual effects (25.4%), 10 patients did not recover (17.0%), and 2 were lost to follow-up (3.4%). Conclusion: C5 palsy occurred in all surgical approaches and across a variety of diagnoses. The majority of patients had full recovery or recovery with residual effects. This study represents the largest series of North American patients reviewed to date.