Search

Study Design. Predictive study utilized retrospectively collected data. Objective. The primary objective was to evaluate the predictive association between the Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) and Skeletal-related events (SREs). Secondary objectives included examining characteristics of cases with SINS ≤ 6 among those who developed SRE and evaluating the impact of additional predictors on prediction accuracy. Summary of Background Data. Advances in cancer treatment have prolonged the lives of cancer patients, emphasizing the importance of maintaining quality of life. SREs from metastatic spinal tumors significantly impact the quality of life. However, currently, there is no scientifically established method to predict the occurrence of SRE. SINS, developed by the Spine Oncology Study Group, assesses spinal instability using six categories. Therefore, the predictive performance of SINS for SRE occurrence is of considerable interest to clinicians. Methods. This predictive study utilized retrospectively collected data from a single-center registry comprising over 1000 patients with metastatic spinal tumors. SINS and clinical data were collected. Logistic regression was used to create a prediction equation for SRE using SINS. Additional analyses explored factors associated with SRE in patients with SINS ≤ 6. Results. The study included 1041 patients with metastatic spinal tumors. SRE occurred in 121 cases (12%). The prediction model for SRE using SINS demonstrated an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.832. Characteristics associated with SRE included lower female prevalence, surgeries to primary sites, bone metastases to nonspinal sites, and metastases to other organs. A post hoc analysis incorporating additional predictors improved the AUC to 0.865. Conclusions. The SINS demonstrated reasonable predictive performance for SRE within one month of the initial visit. Incorporating additional factors improved prediction accuracy. The study emphasizes the need for a comprehensive clinical prediction model for SRE in metastatic spinal tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Instrumentation surgery in combination with radiotherapy (RT) is one of the key management strategies for patients with spinal metastases. However, the use of materials can affect the RT dose delivered to the tumor site and surrounding tissues, as well as hinder optimal postoperative tumor evaluation. The association of the preoperative Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) with the need for spinal stabilization and life expectancy are unclear. This multicenter prospective study aimed to investigate the current situation and make recommendations regarding the choice of surgical procedure based on the preoperative SINS and prospectively collected postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs)., Methods: The study prospectively included 317 patients with spinal metastases who underwent palliative surgery and had a minimum follow-up period of 6 months. The survey items included SINS, patient background, and clinical data including surgical procedure, history of RT, prognosis, and PROs (i.e., the visual analog scale score, Faces Scale, Barthel Index, Vitality Index, and 5-level EQ-5D health survey) at baseline, and at 1 and 6 months after surgery. The association of preoperative SINS with life expectancy, PROs, and surgical procedures was examined using statistical analysis., Results: Preoperative SINS (three categories) had no association with life expectancy. All PROs evaluated in the study improved up to 6 months after surgery. Pain categories (visual analog scale score and/or Faces Scale) at baseline were correlated with preoperative SINS. As many as 90.9% of enrolled patients underwent fusion surgery, and even in SINS 0-6 cases, implants were used in 64.3% of patients. Postoperative RT was performed in 42.9% of the patients. However, prospective assessments of PROs showed no significant difference between surgical procedures (with and without fusion) in patients with SINS 0-9. In addition, no cases required conversion from noninstrumentation surgery to fusion surgery., Conclusions: Although the choice of surgical procedure should be made on a case-by-case basis on the NOMS (neurological, oncological, mechanical, and systemic) framework, careful consideration is required to determine whether spinal stabilization is needed in patients with SINS ≤ 9, considering the patient's background and the plan for postoperative adjuvant therapy.

Study Design: Narrative review., Objective: Metastatic spine disease is an increasingly common clinical challenge that requires individualised multidisciplinary care from spine surgeons and oncologists. In this article, the authors describe the recent surgical advances in patients presenting with spinal metastases., Methods: We present an overview of the presentation, assessment, and management of spinal metastases from the perspective of the spine surgeon, highlighting advances in surgical technology and techniques, to facilitate multidisciplinary care for this complex patient group. Neither institutional review board approval nor patient consent was needed for this review., Results: Advances in radiotherapy delivery and systemic therapy (including immunotherapy and targeted therapy) have refined operative indications for decompression of neural structures and spinal stabilisation, while advances in surgical technology and technique enable these goals to be achieved with reduced morbidity. Formulating individualised management strategies that optimise outcome, while meeting patient goals and expectations, requires a comprehensive understanding of the factors important to patient management., Conclusion: Spinal metastases require prompt diagnosis and expert management by a multidisciplinary team. Improvements in systemic, radiation, and surgical therapies have broadened operative indications and increased operative candidacy, and future advances are likely to continue this trend., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

• Vertebral compression fracture (VCF) occurred in 34.4% of treated lesions. • VCF was symptomatic in only 5% of patients. • Best predictors are: vertebral body involvement, osteolytic volume and pre-SBRT VCF. To identify frequency, clinical relevance and risk factors for vertebral compression fracture (VCF) after spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) with long-term follow up (FU). From 2012 to 2015, 61 lesions (56 patients) were treated within a prospective multicenter phase 2 study (NCT01594892) of SBRT for painful vertebral metastases. Post-SBRT VCF were identified. Anatomical segments, normal and tumor tissue of treated vertebrae were segmented for volumetric analyses. Predictive factors for VCF were identified by logistic regression. Median clinical and radiological FU for all patients was 16.2 months (range, 0–68.2) and 7.8 months (range, 0–66.9), respectively. Local metastasis control was observed in 82% of lesions at last imaging FU. Post-SBRT VCF occurred in 21 lesions (34.4%): 16.4% showed a progressive VCF, while a new VCF occurred in 18.0%. 3/56 (5.4%) patients developed painful VCF defined as pain increase by ≥2 on the visual analogue scale (VAS) and 2 (3.6%) patients required surgical stabilization. Pre-SBRT VCF, localization in the thoracic spine, Bilsky score >0, SINS score, pre-SBRT osteolytic volume and metastatic vertebral body (VB) involvement were predictive factors for VCF on univariate analysis. Relative VB involvement, osteolytic volume and pre-SBRT VCF remained in the multivariate logistic regression model that had AUC = 0.930, 83.3% sensitivity and 96.6% specificity. Spine SBRT resulted in favorable long-term pain and local metastasis control. Despite post-SBRT VCF being observed after one third of treatments, this was symptomatic in only 5% of patients. Predictive factors for developing VCF were identified which could contribute to better selection of patients for spine SBRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Vertebral metastases are often causing pain and spine instability. Radiotherapy is of significant benefit for painful spine metastases but the response can be very variable. The spine instability neoplastic score (SINS) is a recent classification system for diagnosis of spinal instability caused by vertebral metastases. We analysed the degree of pain relief, the need of drug therapy and the imaging features and the SINS before and after radiotherapy. In particular, we investigated the possible correlation of spine instability defined by pre-treatment SINS with pretreatment pain and with response to radiotherapy. Material/methods: This study included 121 patients with spine metastases treated with palliative 3D conformal radiotherapy. Pain 'at rest' and 'breakthrough pain', need for drug therapy in terms of 'anti-inflammatory', 'weak opioid', 'strong opioid', imaging studies and SINS were assessed before and after radiotherapy. Statistical analysis was performed by the correlation coefficient of Spearman and Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: Pain relief after radiotherapy was observed in 50.4 and 57.8% of patients in terms of pain at rest and breakthrough pain, respectively. The correlation between pain before radiotherapy and SINS was not statistically significant for both pain at rest ( p = 0.4) and breakthrough pain ( p = 0.49). The correlation between pain response after radiotherapy and SINS was statistically significant for both pain at rest ( p = 0.007) and breakthrough pain ( p = 0.047). Discussion/conclusion: The degree of instability, classified according to SINS, resulted to be predictive factor for pain response after radiotherapy. SINS might become a valid tool to identify those patients who can benefit the most from radiotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Spine metastases are commonly treated with radiotherapy for local tumor control; pathologic fracture is a potential complication of spinal radiotherapy. Both Hounsfield units (HUs) on CT and vertebral bone quality (VBQ) on MRI have been argued to predict stability as measured by odds of pathologic fracture, although it is unclear if there is a difference in the predictive power between the two methodologies. The objective of the present study was to examine whether one methodology is a better predictor of pathologic fracture following radiotherapy for mobile spine metastases., Methods: Patients who underwent radiotherapy (conventional external-beam radiation therapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, or intensity-modulated radiation therapy) for mobile spine (C1-L5) metastases at a tertiary care center were retrospectively identified. Details regarding underlying pathology, patient demographics, and tumor morphology were collected. Vertebral involvement was assessed using the Weinstein-Boriani-Biagini (WBB) system. Bone quality of the non-tumor-involved bone was assessed on both pretreatment CT and MRI. Univariable analyses were conducted to identify independent predictors of fracture, and Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to identify significant predictors of time to pathologic fracture. Stepwise Cox regression analysis was used to determine independent predictors of time to fracture., Results: One hundred patients were included (mean age 62.7 ± 11.9 years; 61% male), of whom 35 experienced postradiotherapy pathologic fractures. The most common histologies were lung (22%), prostate (21%), breast (14%), and renal cell (13%). On univariable analysis, the mean HUs of the vertebrae adjacent to the fractured vertebra were significantly lower among those experiencing fracture; VBQ was not significantly associated with fracture odds. Survival analysis showed that average HUs ≤ 132, nonprostate pathology, involvement of ≥ 3 vertebral body segments on the WBB system, Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) ≥ 7, and the presence of axial pain all predicted increased odds of fracture (all p < 0.001). Cox regression found that HUs ≤ 132 (OR 2.533, 95% CI 1.257-5.103; p = 0.009), ≥ 3 WBB vertebral body segments involved (OR 2.376, 95% CI 1.132-4.987; p = 0.022), and axial pain (OR 2.036, 95% CI 0.916-4.526; p = 0.081) predicted increased fracture odds, while prostate pathology predicted decreased odds (OR 0.076, 95% CI 0.009-0.613; p = 0.016). Sensitivity analysis suggested that an HU threshold of ≤ 132 and a SINS of ≥ 7 identified patients at increased risk of fracture., Conclusions: The present results suggest that bone density surrogates as measured on CT, but not MRI, can be used to predict the risk of pathologic fracture following radiotherapy for mobile spine metastases. More extensive vertebral body involvement and the presence of mechanical axial pain additionally predict increased fracture odds.

Background Context: Spinal instability is an acknowledged complication of spinal metastases; in spite of recent suggested criteria, it is not clearly defined in the literature.Purpose: This study aimed to assess intra and interobserver agreement when using the Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) by all physicians involved in its management.Study Design: Independent multicenter reliability study for the recently created SINS, undertaken with a panel of medical oncologists, neurosurgeons, radiologists, orthopedic surgeons, and radiation oncologists, was carried out.Patient Sample: Ninety patients with biopsy-proven spinal metastases and magnetic resonance imaging, reviewed at the multidisciplinary tumor board of our institution, were included.Outcome Measures: Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used for SINS score agreement. Fleiss kappa statistic was used to assess agreement on the location of the most affected vertebral level; agreement on the SINS category ("stable," "potentially stable," or "unstable"); and overall agreement with the classification established by tumor board.Methods: Clinical data and imaging were provided to 83 specialists in 44 hospitals across 14 Spanish regions. No assessment criteria were pre-established. Each clinician assessed the SINS score twice, with a minimum 6-week interval. Clinicians were blinded to assessments made by other specialists and to their own previous assessment. Subgroup analyses were performed by clinicians' specialty, experience (≤7, 8-13, ≥14 years), and hospital category (four levels according to size and complexity). This study was supported by Kovacs Foundation.Results: Intra and interobserver agreement on the location of the most affected levels was "almost perfect" (κ>0.94). Intra-observer agreement on the SINS score was "excellent" (ICC=0.77), whereas interobserver agreement was "moderate" (ICC=0.55). Intra-observer agreement in SINS category was "substantial" (k=0.61), whereas interobserver agreement was "moderate" (k=0.42). Overall agreement with the tumor board classification was "substantial" (κ=0.61). Results were similar across specialties, years of experience, and hospital category.Conclusions: Agreement on the assessment of metastatic spine instability is moderate. The SINS can help improve communication among clinicians in oncology care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In the absence of spinal cord compression, it is unclear if surgery is more effective than radiation treatment for improving functional outcomes in metastatic spinal tumor patients with potentially unstable spines. The authors compared functional status outcomes assessed with Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scores after surgery or radiation in patients without spinal cord compression with Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) values of 7-12 indicating possible instability (SINS 7-12)., Methods: A retrospective review was performed of patients with metastatic spinal tumor SINS values of 7-12 at a single institution between 2004 and 2014. Patients were divided into two different groups: 1) those treated with surgery and 2) those treated with radiation. Baseline clinical characteristics were measured, and KPS and ECOG scores were obtained pre- and postradiation or postsurgery. The paired, nonparametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test and ordinal logistic regression analysis were used for statistical analysis., Results: A total of 162 patients met inclusion criteria; 63 patients were treated operatively and 99 patients were treated with radiation. The mean follow-up was 1.9 years, with a median of 1.1 years for the surgical cohort (ranging from 2.5 months to 13.8 years) and a mean of 2 years with a median of 0.8 years for the radiation cohort (ranging from 2 months to 9.3 years). After covariates were accounted for, the average posttreatment changes in KPS scores in the surgical cohort were 7.46 ± 17.3 and in the radiation cohort were -2 ± 13.6 (p = 0.045). No significant difference was observed in ECOG scores. KPS scores improved postoperatively in 60.3% of patients in the surgical group and postradiation in 32.3% of patients in the radiation cohort (p < 0.001). Subanalysis within the radiation cohort revealed no differences in fracture rates or local control between patients treated with external-beam radiation therapy versus stereotactic body radiation therapy. In patients initially treated with radiation, 21.2% eventually developed compression fractures at a treated level. Five of the 99 patients in the radiation cohort-all of whom had a fracture-eventually underwent either methyl methacrylate augmentation or instrumented fusion., Conclusions: Patients with SINS values of 7-12 who underwent surgery had greater improvement in KPS scores-but not in ECOG scores-than patients undergoing radiation alone. In patients treated with radiation, treatment was converted to a procedural intervention such as surgery only in patients who sustained fractures. Of the patients with fractures after radiation (21 of 99), 5 patients underwent an invasive procedure and 16 did not.

Purpose: Determine the risk of vertebral compression fracture (VCF) following stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), specific to osteolytic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) spinal metastases, and associated predictive factors. Methods: 187 RCC osteolytic spinal tumor segments in 116 patients obtained from a multi-institutional pooled database were reviewed. Each segment was evaluated according to the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS). Results: The median follow-up was 8.0 months. 34 VCF (34/187, 18%) were observed and median time to VCF was 2.4 months. VCF was observed in 43% (10/23), 24% (4/17) and 14% (20/147) of segments treated with 24Gy/fraction (fx), 20-23Gy/fx and ≤19Gy/fx, respectively. Multivariate analysis identified dose per fx (p=0.005), baseline VCF (p<0.001) and spinal misalignment (p=0.002) as predictors of VCF. Prior conventional radiotherapy (p=0.029) was found to be protective. Conclusions: 18% of osteolytic RCC spinal metastases fractured post-SBRT. The presence of a baseline fracture, spinal mal-alignment and treatment with ≥20Gy/fx predicted for VCF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Within the Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) classification, tumor-related potential spinal instability (SINS 7-12) may not have a clear treatment approach. The authors aimed to examine the proportion of patients in this indeterminate zone who later required surgical stabilization after initial nonoperative management. By studying this patient population, they sought to determine if a clear SINS cutoff existed whereby the spine is potentially unstable due to a lesion and would be more likely to require stabilization., Methods: Records from patients treated at the University of California, San Francisco, for metastatic spine disease from 2005 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Seventy-five patients with tumor-related potential spinal instability (SINS 7-12) who were initially treated nonoperatively were included. All patients had at least a 1-year follow-up with complete medical records. A univariate chi-square test and Student t-test were used to compare categorical and continuous outcomes, respectively, between patients who ultimately underwent surgery and those who did not. A backward likelihood multivariate binary logistic regression model was used to investigate the relationship between clinical characteristics and surgical intervention. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) and single-variable logistic regression were performed as a function of SINS., Results: Seventy-five patients with a total of 292 spinal metastatic sites were included in this study; 26 (34.7%) patients underwent surgical intervention, and 49 (65.3%) did not. There was no difference in age, sex, comorbidities, or lesion location between the groups. However, there were more patients with a SINS of 12 in the surgery group (55.2%) than in the no surgery group (44.8%) (p = 0.003). On multivariate analysis, SINS > 11 (OR 8.09, CI 1.96-33.4, p = 0.004) and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) score < 60 (OR 0.94, CI 0.89-0.98, p = 0.008) were associated with an increased risk of surgery. KPS score was not correlated with SINS (p = 0.4). RPA by each spinal lesion identified an optimal cutoff value of SINS > 10, which were associated with an increased risk of surgical intervention. Patients with a surgical intervention had a higher incidence of complications on multivariable analysis (OR 2.96, CI 1.01-8.71, p = 0.048)., Conclusions: Patients with a mean SINS of 11 or greater may be at increased risk of mechanical instability requiring surgery after initial nonoperative management. RPA showed that patients with a KPS score of 60 or lower and a SINS of greater than 10 had increased surgery rates.

Objective: Multidisciplinary treatment including medical oncology, radiation oncology, and surgical consultation is necessary to provide comprehensive therapy for patients with spinal metastases. The goal of this study was to review the use of radiation therapy and/or surgical intervention and their impact on patient outcomes., Methods: In this retrospective series, the authors identified at their institution those patients with spinal metastases who had received radiation therapy alone or had undergone surgery with or without radiation therapy within a 6-year period. Data on patient age, chemotherapy, surgical procedure, radiation therapy, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), primary tumor pathology, Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS), and survival after treatment were collected from the patient electronic medical records. N - 1 chi-square testing was used for comparisons of proportions. The Student t-test was used for comparisons of means. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. A survival analysis was completed using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model., Results: Two hundred thirty patients with spinal metastases were identified, 109 of whom had undergone surgery with or without radiation therapy. Among the 104 patients for whom the surgical details were reviewed, 34 (33%) had a history of preoperative radiation to the surgical site but ultimately required surgical intervention. In this surgical group, a significantly increased frequency of death within 30 days was noted for the SINS unstable patients (23.5%) as compared to that for the SINS stable patients (2.3%; p < 0.001). The SINS was a significant predictor of time to death among surgical patients (HR 1.11, p = 0.037). Preoperative KPS was not independently associated with decreased survival (p > 0.5) on univariate analysis. One hundred twenty-six patients met the criteria for inclusion in the radiation-only analysis. Ninety-eight of these patients (78%) met the criteria for potential instability (PI) at the time of treatment, according to the SINS system. Five patients (5%) with PI in the radiation therapy group had a documented neurosurgical or orthopedic surgery consultation prior to radiation therapy., Conclusions: At the authors' institution, patients with gross mechanical instability per the SINS system had an increased rate of 30-day postoperative mortality, which remained significant when controlling for other factors. Surgical consultation for metastatic spine patients receiving radiation oncology consultation with PI is low. The authors describe an institutional pathway to encourage multidisciplinary treatment from the initial encounter in the emergency department to expedite surgical evaluation and collaboration.