Boriani, Stefano

Study Design: Ambispective cohort study design. Objectives: Cervical spine metastases have distinct clinical considerations. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of surgical intervention (± radiotherapy) or radiotherapy alone on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes in patients treated for cervical metastatic spine tumours. Methods: Patients treated with surgery and/or radiotherapy for cervical spine metastases were identified from the Epidemiology, Process, and Outcomes of Spine Oncology (EPOSO) international multicentre prospective observational study. Demographic, diagnostic, treatment, and HRQOL (numerical rating scale [NRS] pain, EQ-5D (3L), SF-36v2, and SOSGOQ) measures were prospectively collected at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months postintervention. Results: Fifty-five patients treated for cervical metastases were identified: 38 underwent surgery ± radiation and 17 received radiation alone. Surgically treated patients had higher mean spinal instability neoplastic scores compared with the radiation-alone group (13.0 vs 8.0, P < .001) and higher NRS pain scores and lower HRQOL scores compared to the radiation alone group ( P < .05). From baseline to 6 months posttreatment, surgically treated patients demonstrated statistically significant improvements in NRS pain, EQ-5D (5L), and SOSGOQ2.0 scores compared with nonsignificant improvements in the radiotherapy alone group. Conclusions: Surgically treated cervical metastases patients presented with higher levels of instability, worse baseline pain and HRQOL scores compared with patients who underwent radiotherapy alone. Significant improvements in pain and HRQOL were noted for those patients who received surgical intervention. Limited or no improvements were found in those treated with radiotherapy alone.

Abstract Background The treatment of oligometastatic (≤5 metastases) spinal disease has trended toward ablative therapies, yet to the authors’ knowledge little is known regarding the prognosis of patients presenting with oligometastatic spinal disease and the value of this approach. The objective of the current study was to compare the survival and clinical outcomes of patients with cancer with oligometastatic spinal disease with those of patients with polymetastatic (>5 metastases) disease. Methods The current study was an international, multicenter, prospective study. Patients who were admitted to a participating spine center with a diagnosis of spinal metastases and who underwent surgical intervention and/or radiotherapy between August 2013 and May 2017 were included. Data collected included demographics, overall survival, local control, and treatment information including surgical, radiotherapy, and systemic therapy details. Health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) measures included the EuroQOL 5 dimensions 3‐level questionnaire (EQ‐5D‐3L), the 36‐Item Short Form Health Survey (SF‐36v2), and the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ). Results Of the 393 patients included in the current study, 215 presented with oligometastatic disease and 178 presented with polymetastatic disease. A significant survival advantage of 90.1% versus 77.3% at 3 months and 77.0% versus 65.1% at 6 months from the time of treatment was found for patients presenting with oligometastatic disease compared with those with polymetastatic disease. It is important to note that both groups experienced significant improvements in multiple HRQOL measures at 6 months after treatment, with no differences in these outcome measures noted between the 2 groups. Conclusions The treatment of oligometastatic disease appears to offer a significant survival advantage compared with polymetastatic disease, regardless of treatment choice. HRQOL measures were found to improve in both groups, demonstrating a palliative benefit for all treated patients.

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.

OBJECTIVE Primary spinal osteosarcomas are rare and aggressive neoplasms. Poor outcomes can occur, as obtaining marginal margins is technically demanding; further Enneking-appropriate en bloc resection can have significant morbidity. The goal of this study is to identify prognostic variables for local recurrence and mortality in surgically treated patients diagnosed with a primary osteosarcoma of the spine. METHODS A multicenter ambispective database of surgically treated patients with primary spine osteosarcomas was developed by AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor. Patient demographic, diagnosis, treatment, perioperative morbidity, local recurrence, and cross-sectional survival data were collected. Tumors were classified in 2 cohorts: Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI), as defined by pathology margin matching Enneking-recommended surgical margins. Prognostic variables were analyzed in reference to local recurrence and survival. RESULTS Between 1987 and 2012, 58 patients (32 female patients) underwent surgical treatment for primary spinal osteosarcoma. Patients were followed for a mean period of 3.5 ± 3.5 years (range 0.5 days to 14.3 years). The median survival for the entire cohort was 6.7 years postoperative. Twenty-four (41%) patients died, and 17 (30%) patients suffered a local recurrence, 10 (59%) of whom died. Twenty-nine (53%) patients underwent EA resection while 26 (47%) patients underwent EI resection with a postoperative median survival of 6.8 and 3.7 years, respectively (p = 0.048). EI patients had a higher rate of local recurrence than EA patients (p = 0.001). Patient age, previous surgery, biopsy type, tumor size, spine level, and chemotherapy timing did not significantly influence recurrence and survival. CONCLUSIONS Osteosarcoma of the spine presents a significant challenge, and most patients die in spite of aggressive surgery. There is a significant decrease in recurrence and an increase in survival with en bloc resection (EA) when compared with intralesional resection (EI). The effect of adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapeutics, as well as method of biopsy, requires further exploration.

OBJECT A chordoma is an indolent primary spinal tumor that has devastating effects on the patient's life. These lesions are chemoresistant, resistant to conventional radiotherapy, and moderately sensitive to proton therapy; however, en bloc resection remains the preferred treatment for optimizing patient outcomes. While multiple small and largely retrospective studies have investigated the outcomes following en bloc resection of chordomas in the sacrum, there have been few large-scale studies on patients with chordomas of the mobile spine. The goal of this study was to review the outcomes of surgically treated patients with mobile spine chordomas at multiple international centers with respect to local recurrence and survival. This multiinstitutional retrospective study collected data between 1988 and 2012 about prognosis-predicting factors, including various clinical characteristics and surgical techniques for mobile spine chordoma. Tumors were classified according to the Enneking principles and analyzed in 2 treatment cohorts: Enneking-appropriate (EA) and Enneking-inappropriate (EI) cohorts. Patients were categorized as EA when the final pathological assessment of the margin matched the Enneking recommendation; otherwise, they were categorized as EI. METHODS Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data (Student t-test, chi-square, and Fisher exact tests). Recurrence and survival data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, log-rank tests, and multivariate Cox proportional hazard modeling. RESULTS A total of 166 patients (55 female and 111 male patients) with mobile spine chordoma were included. The median patient follow-up was 2.6 years (range 1 day to 22.5 years). Fifty-eight (41%) patients were EA and 84 (59%) patients were EI. The type of biopsy (p < 0.001), spinal location (p = 0.018), and if the patient received adjuvant therapy (p < 0.001) were significantly different between the 2 cohorts. Overall, 58 (35%) patients developed local recurrence and 57 (34%) patients died. Median survival was 7.0 years postoperative: 8.4 years postoperative for EA patients and 6.4 years postoperative for EI patients (p = 0.023). The multivariate analysis showed that the EI cohort was significantly associated with an increased risk of local recurrence in comparison with the EA cohort (HR 7.02; 95% CI 2.96–16.6; p < 0.001), although no significant difference in survival was observed. CONCLUSIONS EA resection plays a major role in decreasing the risk for local recurrence in patients with chordoma of the mobile spine.

Introduction Primary spinal osteosarcomas are rare and aggressive neoplasms with poor outcomes. Enneking appropriate, en bloc resection is recommended for appendicular osteosarcomas. Obtaining even marginal margins is technically demanding in the spine, resulting in significant morbidity and possible functional sacrifice. The aim of this study was to identify prognostic variables on local recurrence and mortality, in surgically treated patients diagnosed with a primary osteosarcoma of the spine. Methods A multicenter ambispective database of surgically treated patients with primary spine osteosarcomas was developed by the AOSpine knowledge forum tumor. Patient demographic, diagnosis, treatment, perioperative morbidity, local recurrence, and cross-sectional survival data were collected. Tumors were classified according to Enneking principles and analyzed in the following two cohorts: Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI). EA was defined by the final pathology margin matching the Enneking recommended surgical margin and EI by not matching. Prognostic variables including age, previous spine tumor operation, biopsy type, spine level, tumor size, and chemotherapy timing were analyzed in reference to local recurrence and survival. Results Between 1987 and 2012, 57 patients (31 females and 26 males) underwent surgical treatment for a primary spinal osteosarcoma at a mean age of 36 ± 16 years. Patients were followed for a mean period of 3.4 ± 3.5 years (range, 0.5 days–14.3 years). Median survival for the entire cohort was 6.7 years postoperative. Overall, 24 (42%) patients died and 17 (30%) patients suffered a local recurrence, 10 (59%) of which died. Overall, 28 (52%) patients underwent EA resection while 26 (48%) patients were treated by EI resection. Median survival for patients with EA was 6.8 years postoperative, whereas median survival for EI patients was 3.7 years postoperatively ( p = 0.062). EI patients were at a higher risk of local recurrence than EA patients ( p = 0.002). Patient age, previous spine tumor operation, tumor size, spine level, and chemotherapy timing did not significantly influence recurrence and survival. Conclusion Osteosarcoma of the spine presents a significant challenge and most patients die from their disease in spite of aggressive surgery. There is a significant decrease in recurrence with en bloc resection when compared with intralesional resection.