Versteeg, Anne L.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) is a standardized tool for assessing malnutrition in patients with cancer. The primary aim of this study was to assess the impact of preoperative nutritional status as measured by PG-SGA on survival in patients requiring surgical intervention and/or radiotherapy for spinal metastases. METHODS: Patients with spinal metastases who underwent surgery and/or radiation therapy for symptomatic spinal metastases were enrolled in the AO Spine Metastatic Tumor Research and Outcomes Network, a prospective international multicenter research registry, between September 2017 and August 2022. Using the PG-SGA, nutritional status was classified into 3 categories: A, well nourished; B, moderately malnourished; and C, severely malnourished. RESULTS: A total of 589 patients met the inclusion criteria; 362 were classified as well nourished (61%), 159 were moderately malnourished (27%), and 68 were severely malnourished (12%). The median survival was 491 days, 328 days, and 117 days for well-nourished, moderately malnourished, and severely malnourished patients, respectively. In the multivariate analyses, severe malnourishment (HR 2.5 95% CI 1.4-4.3, P < .01) and an ECOG performance status of 3 or 4 (HR 2.7 95% CI 1.2-6.0) remained associated with significantly worse survival. CONCLUSION: Malnutrition as measured by the PG-SGA demonstrated to be significantly and independently associated with postoperative survival. The PG-SGA is a simple and useful tool to identify spinal metastases patients at risk of early postoperative mortality, and inclusion in the preoperative evaluation of these patients should be considered.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The palliative impact of spine surgery for metastatic disease is evolving with improvements in surgical technique and multidisciplinary cancer care. The goal of this study was to prospectively evaluate long-term clinical outcomes including health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) measures, using spine cancer–specific patient-reported-outcome (PRO) measures, in patients with symptomatic spinal metastases who underwent surgical management. METHODS: The Epidemiology, Process, and Outcomes of Spine Oncology (EPOSO, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01825161) trial is a prospective-observational cohort study that included 10 specialist centers in North America and Europe. Patients aged 18 to 75 years who underwent surgery for spinal metastases were included. Prospective assessments included both spine tumor–specific and generic PRO tools which were collected for a minimum of 2 years post-treatment or until death. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty patients (51.8% female, mean age 57.9 years) were included. At presentation, the mean Charlson Comorbidity Index was 6.0, 35.7% had neurological deficits as defined by the American Spinal Cord Injury Association scores, 47.2% had high-grade epidural spinal cord compression (2-3), and 89.6% had impending or frank instability as measured by a Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score of ≥7. The most common primary tumor sites were breast (20.2%), lung (18.8%), kidney (16.2%), and prostate (6.5%). The median overall survival postsurgery was 501 days, and the 2-year progression-free-survival rate was 38.4%. Compared with baseline, significant and durable improvements in HRQOL were observed at the 6-week, 12-week, 26-week, 1-year, and 2-year follow-up assessments from a battery of PRO questionnaires including the spine cancer–specific, validated, Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire v2.0, the Short Form 36 version 2, EuroQol-5 Dimension (3L), and pain numerical rating scale score. CONCLUSION: Multi-institutional, prospective-outcomes data confirm that surgical decompression and/or stabilization provides meaningful and durable improvements in multiple HRQOL domains, including spine-specific outcomes based on the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire v2.0, for patients with metastatic spine disease.

Study Design. Retrospective review of prospective, multicenter and international cohort study. Objective. To describe the effect of gender on HRQoL, clinical outcomes and survival for patients with spinal metastases treated with either surgery and/or radiation. Summary of Background Data. Gender differences in health-related outcomes are demonstrated in numerous studies, with women experiencing worse outcomes and receiving lower standards of care than men, however, the influence that gender has on low health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and clinical outcomes after spine surgery remains unclear. Methods. Patient demographic data, overall survival, treatment details, perioperative complications, and HRQoL measures including EQ-5D, pain NRS, the short form 36 version 2 (SF-36v2) and the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ2.0) were reviewed. Patients were stratified by sex, and a separate sensitivity analysis that excluded gender-specific cancers (i.e., breast, prostate, etc.) was performed. Results. The study cohort included 207 female and 183 male patients, with age, smoking status, and site of primary cancer being significantly different between the two cohorts (P<0.001). Both males and females experienced significantly improved SOSGOQ2.0, EQ-5D, and pain NRS scores at all study time points from baseline (P<0.001). Upon sensitivity analysis, (gender-specific cancers removed from analysis), the significant improvement in SOSGOQ physical, mental, and social subdomains and on SF-36 domains disappeared for females. Males experienced higher rates of postoperative complications. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of both the overall and sensitivity analysis cohorts showed females lived longer than males after treatment (P=0.001 and 0.043, respectively). Conclusion. Both males and females experienced significantly improved HRQoL scores after treatment, but females demonstrated longer survival and a lower complication rate. This study suggests that gender may be a prognostic factor in survival and clinical outcomes for patients undergoing treatment for spine metastases and should be taken into consideration when counseling patients accordingly.

Study Design: International multicenter prospective observational cohort study on patients undergoing radiation +/− surgical intervention for the treatment of symptomatic spinal metastases. Objectives: To investigate the association between the total Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS), individual SINS components and PROs. Methods: Data regarding patient demographics, diagnostics, treatment, and PROs (SF-36, SOSGOQ, EQ-5D) was collected at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks post-treatment. The SINS was assessed using routine diagnostic imaging. The association between SINS, PRO at baseline and change in PROs was examined with the Spearmans rank test. Results: A total of 307 patients, including 174 patients who underwent surgery+/− radiotherapy and 133 patients who underwent radiotherapy were eligible for analyses. In the surgery+/− radiotherapy group, 18 (10.3%) patients with SINS score between 0-6, 118 (67.8%) with a SINS between 7-12 and 38 (21.8%) with a SINS between 13-18, as compared to 55 (41.4%) SINS 0-6, 71(53.4%) SINS 7-12 and 7 (5.2%) SINS 13-18 in the radiotherapy alone group. At baseline, the total SINS and the presence of mechanical pain was significantly associated with the SOSGOQ pain domain (r = −0.519, P < 0.001) and the NRS pain score (r = 0.445, P < 0.001) for all patients. The presence of mechanical pain demonstrated to be moderately associated with a positive change in PROs at 12 weeks post-treatment. Conclusion: Spinal instability, as defined by the SINS, was significantly correlated with PROs at baseline and change in PROs post-treatment. Mechanical pain, as a single SINS component, showed the highest correlations with PROs.

Abstract BACKGROUND Despite our inability to accurately predict survival in many cancer patients, a life expectancy of at least 3 mo is historically necessary to be considered for surgical treatment of spinal metastases. OBJECTIVE To compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients surviving <3 mo after surgical treatment to patients surviving >3 mo to assess the validity of this inclusion criteria. METHODS Patients who underwent surgery for spinal metastases between August 2013 and May 2017 were retrospectively identified from an international cohort study. HRQOL was evaluated using generic and disease-specific outcome tools at baseline and at 6 and 12 wk postsurgery. The primary outcome was the HRQOL at 6 wk post-treatment measured by the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ). RESULTS A total of 253 patients were included: 40 patients died within the first 3 mo after surgery and 213 patients survived more than 3 mo. Patients surviving <3 mo after surgery presented with lower baseline performance status. Adjusted analyses for baseline performance status did not reveal a significant difference in HRQOL between both groups at 6 wk post-treatment. No significant difference in patient satisfaction at 6 wk with regard to their treatment could be detected between both groups. CONCLUSION When controlled for baseline performance status, quality of life 6 wk after surgery for spinal metastasis is independent of survival. To optimize improvement in HRQOL for this patient population, baseline performance status should take priority over expected survival in the surgical decision-making process.

BackgroundPatient satisfaction is infrequently investigated despite its importance in assessing efficacy and patient comprehension. The purpose of this study was to investigate patient satisfaction with treatment outcomes after surgery and/or radiotherapy for spinal metastases and to evaluate how health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) is related to patient satisfaction.MethodsPatients with spinal metastases treated with surgery and/or radiotherapy were enrolled in a prospective, international, observational study. Demographic, histologic, treatment, and HRQOL data were collected. HRQOL was evaluated with the Numeric Rating Scale pain score, the 3‐level version of the EuroQol 5‐Dimension (EQ‐5D‐3L) instrument, and the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ2.0). Patient satisfaction was derived from the SOSGOQ2.0 at 6, 12, and 26 weeks after treatment. Patients were classified as satisfied, neutral, or dissatisfied.ResultsTwelve weeks after treatment, 183 of the surgically treated patients (84%) were satisfied, and only 11 (5%) were dissatisfied; in contrast, 101 of the patients treated with radiotherapy alone (77%) were satisfied, and only 7 (5%) were dissatisfied. Significant improvements in pain, physical function, mental health, social function, leg function, and EQ‐5D were associated with satisfaction after surgery. Satisfaction after radiotherapy was associated with significant improvements in pain, mental health, and overall SOSGOQ2.0 scores. Dissatisfaction after treatment was associated with lower baseline values for leg strength and lower social functioning scores for surgically treated patients and with lower social functioning scores and being single for patients treated with radiotherapy.ConclusionsHigh levels of satisfaction with treatment outcomes are observed after surgery and/or radiotherapy for spinal metastases. Posttreatment satisfaction is associated with significant improvements in pain and different dimensions of HRQOL.

BackgroundA critical knowledge gap exists regarding the impact of neurologic deficits on surgical outcomes and health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) for patients surgically treated for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC).MethodsThis prospective, multicenter and international study analyzed the impact of the neurologic status on functional status, HRQOL, and postoperative survival. The collected data included the patient demographics, overall survival, American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) impairment scale, Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score, treatment details and complications and HRQOL measures, including version 2 of the 36‐Item Short Form Health Survey (SF‐36v2) and version 2.0 of the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ2.0).ResultsA total of 239 patients surgically treated for spinal metastases were included. Six weeks after treatment, 99 of the 108 patients with a preoperative ASIA grade of E remained stable, 8 deteriorated to ASIA D, and 1 deteriorated to ASIA A. Of 55 patients with ASIA D, 27 improved to ASIA E, 27 remained stable and 1 deteriorated to ASIA C. Of 11 patients with ASIA A to C, 2 improved to ASIA E, 4 improved to ASIA D, and 5 remained stable. At the 6‐ and 12‐week follow‐up, better ASIA scores were associated with better scores on multiple SF‐36v2 and SOSGOQ items. Postoperatively, patients with ASIA grades of A to D were more likely to have urinary tract infections and wound complications. Patients with a baseline ASIA grade of E or D survived significantly longer.ConclusionsPatients with neurologic deficits due to MESCC have worse HRQOL and decreased overall survival. Nevertheless, surgery can result in stabilization or improvement of neurologic function which may translate into better HRQOL. Postoperative care and follow‐up are challenging for patients with neurologic deficits because they experience more complications.

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.