Search

Background: The ability to predict survival accurately in patients with osseous metastatic disease of the extremities is vital for patient counseling and guiding surgical intervention. We, the Skeletal Oncology Research Group (SORG), previously developed a machine-learning algorithm (MLA) based on data from 1999 to 2016 to predict 90-day and 1-year survival of surgically treated patients with extremity bone metastasis. As treatment regimens for oncology patients continue to evolve, this SORG MLA-driven probability calculator requires temporal reassessment of its accuracy., Question/purpose: Does the SORG-MLA accurately predict 90-day and 1-year survival in patients who receive surgical treatment for a metastatic long-bone lesion in a more recent cohort of patients treated between 2016 and 2020?, Methods: Between 2017 and 2021, we identified 674 patients 18 years and older through the ICD codes for secondary malignant neoplasm of bone and bone marrow and CPT codes for completed pathologic fractures or prophylactic treatment of an impending fracture. We excluded 40% (268 of 674) of patients, including 18% (118) who did not receive surgery; 11% (72) who had metastases in places other than the long bones of the extremities; 3% (23) who received treatment other than intramedullary nailing, endoprosthetic reconstruction, or dynamic hip screw; 3% (23) who underwent revision surgery, 3% (17) in whom there was no tumor, and 2% (15) who were lost to follow-up within 1 year. Temporal validation was performed using data on 406 patients treated surgically for bony metastatic disease of the extremities from 2016 to 2020 at the same two institutions where the MLA was developed. Variables used to predict survival in the SORG algorithm included perioperative laboratory values, tumor characteristics, and general demographics. To assess the models' discrimination, we computed the c-statistic, commonly referred to as the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve for binary classification. This value ranged from 0.5 (representing chance-level performance) to 1.0 (indicating excellent discrimination) Generally, an AUC of 0.75 is considered high enough for use in clinical practice. To evaluate the agreement between predicted and observed outcomes, a calibration plot was used, and the calibration slope and intercept were calculated. Perfect calibration would result in a slope of 1 and intercept of 0. For overall performance, the Brier score and null-model Brier score were determined. The Brier score can range from 0 (representing perfect prediction) to 1 (indicating the poorest prediction). Proper interpretation of the Brier score necessitates a comparison with the null-model Brier score, which represents the score for an algorithm that predicts a probability equal to the population prevalence of the outcome for each patient. Finally, a decision curve analysis was conducted to compare the potential net benefit of the algorithm with other decision-support methods, such as treating all or none of the patients. Overall, 90-day and 1-year mortality were lower in the temporal validation cohort than in the development cohort (90 day: 23% versus 28%; p < 0.001, and 1 year: 51% versus 59%; p<0.001)., Results: Overall survival of the patients in the validation cohort improved from 28% mortality at the 90-day timepoint in the cohort on which the model was trained to 23%, and 59% mortality at the 1-year timepoint to 51%. The AUC was 0.78 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.82) for 90-day survival and 0.75 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.79) for 1-year survival, indicating the model could distinguish the two outcomes reasonably. For the 90-day model, the calibration slope was 0.71 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.89), and the intercept was -0.66 (95% CI -0.94 to -0.39), suggesting the predicted risks were overly extreme, and that in general, the risk of the observed outcome was overestimated. For the 1-year model, the calibration slope was 0.73 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.91) and the intercept was -0.67 (95% CI -0.90 to -0.43). With respect to overall performance, the model's Brier scores for the 90-day and 1-year models were 0.16 and 0.22. These scores were higher than the Brier scores of internal validation of the development study (0.13 and 0.14) models, indicating the models' performance has declined over time., Conclusion: The SORG MLA to predict survival after surgical treatment of extremity metastatic disease showed decreased performance on temporal validation. Moreover, in patients undergoing innovative immunotherapy, the possibility of mortality risk was overestimated in varying severity. Clinicians should be aware of this overestimation and discount the prediction of the SORG MLA according to their own experience with this patient population. Generally, these results show that temporal reassessment of these MLA-driven probability calculators is of paramount importance because the predictive performance may decline over time as treatment regimens evolve. The SORG-MLA is available as a freely accessible internet application at https://sorg-apps.shinyapps.io/extremitymetssurvival/ .Level of Evidence Level III, prognostic study., Competing Interests: This study was supported by “Stichting de Drie Lichten,” the Michael van Vloten Fund, the Hendrik-Muller fund, and the Nijbakker Morra foundation from the Netherlands. Each author certifies that there are no funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article related to the author or any immediate family members. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons.)

Background: Desmoid tumors of the extremities often present with pain and functional limitation, but treatment can lead to morbidity and recurrence is common. The impact of treatment with respect to traditional "oncologic" metrics (such as recurrence rate) has been studied extensively, with a shift in recent years away from local therapies as first-line management; however, little is known about the association between treatment modality and long-term functional outcomes for patients with this benign disease., Questions/purposes: In a retrospective review of consecutive patients treated at two institutions, we asked: (1) Is event-free survival (EFS) different between patients who undergo local treatment and those who do not for primary as well as for recurrent desmoid tumors? (2) What treatment-related factors are associated with worse Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) function scores at a minimum of 1 year after treatment?, Methods: Between 1991 and 2017, 102 patients with desmoid tumors of the extremities (excluding those of the hands and feet) were treated at two institutions; of those, 85 patients with 90 tumors were followed clinically for at least 1 year (median [range] 59 months follow-up [12 to 293]) and were included in the present analysis. We attempted to contact all patients for administration of PROMIS function (Physical Function Short Form [SF] 10a and Upper Extremity SF v2.0 7a) and Pain Interference (SF 8a) questionnaires. Complete survey data (minimum 1 year follow-up) were available for 46% (39 of 102) of patients with 40 tumors at a median of 125 months follow-up; only these patients were included in PROMIS data analyses. Though there was no formal institutional treatment algorithm in place during the study period, surgical resection typically was the preferred modality for primary tumors; radiation therapy and systemic treatments (including cytotoxic or hormonal agents earlier in the study period, and tyrosine kinase inhibitors later) were often added for recurrent or very symptomatic disease. We coded treatment for each patient into discrete episodes, each defined by a particular treatment strategy: local treatment only (surgery and/or radiation), systemic treatment only, local plus systemic treatment, or observation; treatment episodes rendered at other institutions (that is, before referral) were not included in the analyses. Treatment failure was defined as recurrence after surgical resection, or clinically significant radiologic and/or symptomatic progression after systemic treatment, and EFS was defined as time from treatment initiation to treatment failure or final follow-up. Episodes of treatment for recurrent tumors were analyzed in a pooled fashion, wherein discrete treatment episodes for patients with multiple recurrences were included separately as independent events. We analyzed 56 primary tumors (54 patients), and 101 discrete treatment episodes for recurrent tumors (88 patients). Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed separately for the primary and recurrence cohorts, both comparing EFS among patients who received any local treatment (local treatment and local plus systemic treatment groups) versus those who did not (systemic treatment and observation groups). PROMIS function data were analyzed on the bases of patient- and treatment-specific variables, including the PROMIS Pain Interference score as a potential explanatory variable., Results: Within both the primary and recurrence cohorts, there were no differences between the local treatment, systemic treatment, and local plus systemic treatment groups with respect to gender, age, axillary/hip girdle location, or tumor volume. Among primary tumors, 5-year EFS was 44% (95% CI 24 to 80) for the systemic-only group versus 15% (95% CI 5 to 44) for the local treatment group (p = 0.087). Within the pooled recurrence treatment episode cohort, 5-year EFS after systemic-only treatment was 70% (95% CI 52 to 94) versus 56% among patients receiving any local treatment (95% CI 44 to 70; p = 0.46). PROMIS function scores were lowest among patients who underwent two or more resections (39 versus 51 versus 47 for ≥2, 1, and 0 resections, respectively; p = 0.025); among those who received both surgery and radiation at any point, either concurrently or in separate treatment episodes, as compared with those who did not (39 versus 46; p = 0.047); and among those with higher levels of pain interference (38 versus 47 for pain interference scores > 50 versus < 50; p = 0.006)., Conclusions: Patients treated with local modalities (surgery and/or radiation, with or without additional systemic therapy) did not experience improved EFS as compared with those treated without local modalities; this was the case for both the primary and the recurrent tumor cohorts. However, PROMIS function scores were lowest among patients who underwent two or more surgical interventions and among those treated with surgery and radiation at any time, suggesting that more aggressive local treatment may be associated with poorer long-term functional outcomes. Prospective collection of patient-reported outcomes data at multiple time points will allow for more direct correlations between treatment modality and impact on function and will help to elucidate the ideal management strategy for these benign but often-symptomatic tumors., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study.

Background: Cancer and spinal surgery are both considered risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, the risk of symptomatic VTE for patients undergoing surgery for spine metastases remains undefined., Questions/purposes: The purposes of this study were to: (1) identify the proportion of patients who develop symptomatic VTE within 90-days of surgical treatment for spine metastases; (2) identify the factors associated with the development of symptomatic VTE among patients receiving surgery for spine metastases; (3) assess the association between the development of postoperative symptomatic VTE and 1-year survival among patients who underwent surgery for spine metastases; and (4) assess if chemoprophylaxis increases the risk of wound complications among patients who underwent surgery for spine metastases., Methods: Between 2002 and 2014, 637 patients at two hospitals underwent spine surgery for metastases. We considered eligible for analysis adult patients whose procedures were to treat cervical, thoracic, or lumbar metastases (including lymphoma and multiple myeloma). At followup after 90 days and 1 year, respectively, 21 of 637 patients (3%) and 41 of 637 patients (6%) were lost to followup. In general, we used 40 mg of enoxaparin or 5000 IUs subcutaneous heparin every 12 hours. Patients on preoperative chemoprophylaxis continued their initial medication postoperatively. All chemoprophylaxis was started 48 hours after surgery and continued day to day but was discontinued if a bleeding complication developed. Low-molecular-weight heparin (including enoxaparin and dalteparin, in general dosages of respectively 40 mg and 5000 IUs daily) was the most commonly used chemoprophylaxis in 308 patients (48%). Subcutaneous heparin was injected into 127 patients (20%); aspirin was used for 92 patients (14%); and warfarin was administered in 21 patients (3.3%). No form of chemoprophylaxis was prescribed for 89 patients (14%). The primary outcome variable, VTE, was defined as any symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) or symptomatic deep venous thromboembolism (DVT) within 90 days of surgery as determined by chart review. The secondary outcome was defined as any documented wound complication within 90 days of surgery that might be attributable to chemoprophylaxis. Statistical analysis was performed using multivariable logistic and Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier., Results: Overall, 72 of 637 patients (11%) had symptomatic VTE; 38 (6%) developed a PE-eight (1.3%) of which were fatal-and 40 (6%) a DVT. After controlling for relevant confounding variables such as age, the modified Charlson Comorbidity Index, visceral metastases, and chemoprophylaxis, longer duration of surgery was independently associated with an increased risk of symptomatic VTE (odds ratio 1.15 for each additional hour of surgery; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.28; p = 0.009). After controlling for relevant confounding variables such as age, the modified Charlson Comorbidity Index, visceral metastases, and primary tumor type, patients with symptomatic VTE had a worse 1-year survival rate (VTE, 38%; 95% CI, 27-49 versus nonVTE, 47%; 95% CI, 42-51; p = 0.044). After controlling for relevant confounding variables, no association was found between wound complications and the use of chemoprophylaxis (odds ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.62-2.90; p = 0.459). The overall proportion of patients who developed a wound complication was 10% (66 of 637), including 1.1% (seven of 637) spinal epidural hematomas., Conclusions: The risk of both symptomatic PE and fatal PE is high in this patient population, and those with symptomatic VTE were less likely to survive 1-year than those who did not, though this may reflect overall infirmity as much as anything else, because many of these patients did not die from VTE-related complications. Further study, such as randomized controlled trials with consistent postoperative VTE screening comparing different chemoprophylaxis regimens, are needed to identify better VTE prevention strategies., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study.

Background: No consensus exists on the best method of articular reconstruction in patients who require proximal humerus resection for the management of primary bone sarcomas, soft-tissue sarcomas extending into the bone, benign and locally aggressive primary bone tumors, and metastatic disease., Methods: We identified patients from two institutions who underwent wide resection of the proximal humerus along with oncologic reconstruction using osteoarticular allografts (OAs), endoprostheses, or allograft-prosthesis composites. We prospectively collected functional outcomes and retrospectively assessed complications and implant survival., Results: A total of 150 patients were included in this study. The average Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire score was 26 for 25 patients, of which we gathered their functional data, with no differences in physical function among the three constructional methods according to the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, upper extremity Toronto Extremity Salvage Score, upper extremity Musculoskeletal Tumor Society, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores. Overall, the survival rate of the prosthesis was >50%. A trend was noted for a higher risk of failure in the OA group secondary to the allograft fracture., Discussion: All three articular oncologic shoulder reconstructions were comparable in terms of function. This large series confirms a higher fracture rate in OAs, which explains the observed higher revision rate and apparent lower survival rate in this subgroup.

Background: It would be helpful for the decision-making process of patients with metastatic bone disease to understand which patients are at risk for worse quality of life (QOL), pain, anxiety, and depression. Normative data, and where these stand compared with general population scores, can be useful to compare and interpret results of similar patients or patient groups, but to our knowledge, there are no such robust data., Questions/purposes: We wished (1) to assess what factors are independently associated with QOL, pain interference, anxiety, and depression in patients with metastatic bone disease, and (2) to compare these outcomes with general US population values., Methods: Between November 2011 and February 2015, 859 patients with metastatic bone disease presented to our orthopaedic oncology clinic; 202 (24%) were included as they completed the EuroQOL-5 Dimension (EQ-5D TM ), PROMIS ® Pain Interference, PROMIS ® Anxiety, and PROMIS ® Depression questionnaires as part of a quality improvement program. We did not record reasons for not responding and found no differences between survey respondents and nonrespondents in terms of age (63 versus 64 years; p = 0.916), gender (51% men versus 47% men; p = 0.228), and race (91% white versus 88% white; p = 0.306), but survey responders were more likely to be married or living with a partner (72%, versus 62%; p = 0.001). We assessed risk factors for QOL, pain interference, anxiety, and depression using multivariable linear regression analysis. We used the one-sample signed rank test to assess whether scores differed from US population averages drawn from earlier large epidemiologic studies., Results: Younger age (β regression coefficient [β], < 0.01; 95% CI, 0.00-0.01; p = 0.041), smoking (β, -0.12; 95% CI, -0.22 to -0.01; p = 0.026), pathologic fracture (β, -0.10; 95% CI, -0.18 to -0.02; p = 0.012), and being unemployed (β, -0.09; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.02; p = 0.017) were associated with worse QOL. Current smoking status was associated with more pain interference (β, 6.0; 95% CI, 1.6-11; p = 0.008). Poor-prognosis cancers (β, 3.8; 95% CI, 0.37-7.2; p = 0.030), and pathologic fracture (β, 6.3; 95% CI, 2.5-7.2; p = 0.001) were associated with more anxiety. Being single (β, 5.9; 95% CI, 0.83-11; p = 0.023), and pathologic fracture (β, 4.4; 95% CI, 0.8-8.0; p = 0.017) were associated with depression. QOL scores (0.68 versus 0.85; p < 0.001), pain interference scores (65 versus 50; p < 0.001), and anxiety scores (53 versus 50; p = 0.011) were worse for patients with bone metastases compared with general US population values, whereas depression scores were comparable (48 versus 50; p = 0.171)., Conclusions: Impending pathologic fractures should be treated promptly to prevent deterioration in QOL, anxiety, and depression. Our normative data can be used to compare and interpret results of similar patients or patient groups. Future studies could focus on specific cancers metastasizing to the bone, to further understand which patients are at risk for worse patient-reported outcomes., Level of Evidence: Level III, prognostic study.