前瞻性验证住院患者转移性脊柱肿瘤评分,以评估最佳放射治疗干预模式。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Shearwood McClelland
{"title":"前瞻性验证住院患者转移性脊柱肿瘤评分,以评估最佳放射治疗干预模式。","authors":"Shearwood McClelland","doi":"10.1097/COC.0000000000001184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Metastatic spine disease is typically treated with conventional external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Recently, an inpatient metastatic spine score evaluated retrospectively produced promising results in selecting patients with prognoses favorable enough to benefit from the durability advantages of SBRT over EBRT, with scores of 0 to 3 warranting recommendation of SBRT over EBRT compared with scores of 4 to 7 yielding median survival <90 days. This study represents a prospective evaluation of this algorithm to further assess its potential utility.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From July to November 2023, 11 spine metastases referred for inpatient radiation oncology consultation were prospectively assessed according to the inpatient metastatic spine score: scores of 0 to 3 were recommended for SBRT, and 4 to 7 for EBRT or no radiation therapy. The timeframe from consultation to death/hospice was correlated with the cumulative score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median age was 68.5 years. Patients with a score of 0 to 3 (n=5) had a median survival of 278 days, compared with scores of 4 to 7 (n=6) having a median survival of 37.5 days; this difference was statistically significant (P=0.0146).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prospective validation of the inpatient metastatic spine score reveals the prognosis of patients with scores of 4 to 7 have median survival too brief to benefit from the durability advantages of SBRT over EBRT, while scores of 0 to 3 have a prognosis long enough to benefit from SBRT. These results concur with previous retrospective evaluation, and indicate that the inpatient metastatic spine score is a reliable tool for determining which inpatients with spine metastases are appropriate for SBRT over EBRT.</p>","PeriodicalId":50812,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prospective Validation of An Inpatient Metastatic Spine Neoplasm Score To Assess the Optimal Radiation Therapy Intervention Modality.\",\"authors\":\"Shearwood McClelland\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/COC.0000000000001184\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Metastatic spine disease is typically treated with conventional external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Recently, an inpatient metastatic spine score evaluated retrospectively produced promising results in selecting patients with prognoses favorable enough to benefit from the durability advantages of SBRT over EBRT, with scores of 0 to 3 warranting recommendation of SBRT over EBRT compared with scores of 4 to 7 yielding median survival <90 days. This study represents a prospective evaluation of this algorithm to further assess its potential utility.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From July to November 2023, 11 spine metastases referred for inpatient radiation oncology consultation were prospectively assessed according to the inpatient metastatic spine score: scores of 0 to 3 were recommended for SBRT, and 4 to 7 for EBRT or no radiation therapy. The timeframe from consultation to death/hospice was correlated with the cumulative score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median age was 68.5 years. Patients with a score of 0 to 3 (n=5) had a median survival of 278 days, compared with scores of 4 to 7 (n=6) having a median survival of 37.5 days; this difference was statistically significant (P=0.0146).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prospective validation of the inpatient metastatic spine score reveals the prognosis of patients with scores of 4 to 7 have median survival too brief to benefit from the durability advantages of SBRT over EBRT, while scores of 0 to 3 have a prognosis long enough to benefit from SBRT. These results concur with previous retrospective evaluation, and indicate that the inpatient metastatic spine score is a reliable tool for determining which inpatients with spine metastases are appropriate for SBRT over EBRT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0000000000001184\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0000000000001184","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:转移性脊柱疾病通常采用传统的体外放射治疗(EBRT)或立体定向体放射治疗(SBRT)。最近,对住院转移性脊柱评分进行了回顾性评估,结果表明,在选择预后良好的患者时,SBRT 比 EBRT 更具耐久性优势,评分为 0 到 3 分时,推荐使用 SBRT,评分为 4 到 7 分时,推荐使用中位生存法:从 2023 年 7 月到 11 月,根据住院转移性脊柱评分对转诊至放射肿瘤科住院会诊的 11 例脊柱转移患者进行了前瞻性评估:评分为 0 到 3 分的患者建议接受 SBRT 治疗,评分为 4 到 7 分的患者建议接受 EBRT 治疗或不接受放疗。从就诊到死亡/临终的时间范围与累计评分相关:中位年龄为 68.5 岁。评分为 0 至 3 分(5 人)的患者的中位生存期为 278 天,而评分为 4 至 7 分(6 人)的患者的中位生存期为 37.5 天;这一差异具有统计学意义(P=0.0146):住院转移性脊柱评分的前瞻性验证显示,评分为4至7分的患者的中位生存期太短,无法从SBRT相对于EBRT的耐久性优势中获益,而评分为0至3分的患者的预后足够长,可以从SBRT中获益。这些结果与之前的回顾性评估结果一致,表明住院转移性脊柱评分是一种可靠的工具,可用于确定哪些脊柱转移住院患者适合接受 SBRT 而非 EBRT。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prospective Validation of An Inpatient Metastatic Spine Neoplasm Score To Assess the Optimal Radiation Therapy Intervention Modality.

Objectives: Metastatic spine disease is typically treated with conventional external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). Recently, an inpatient metastatic spine score evaluated retrospectively produced promising results in selecting patients with prognoses favorable enough to benefit from the durability advantages of SBRT over EBRT, with scores of 0 to 3 warranting recommendation of SBRT over EBRT compared with scores of 4 to 7 yielding median survival <90 days. This study represents a prospective evaluation of this algorithm to further assess its potential utility.

Methods: From July to November 2023, 11 spine metastases referred for inpatient radiation oncology consultation were prospectively assessed according to the inpatient metastatic spine score: scores of 0 to 3 were recommended for SBRT, and 4 to 7 for EBRT or no radiation therapy. The timeframe from consultation to death/hospice was correlated with the cumulative score.

Results: The median age was 68.5 years. Patients with a score of 0 to 3 (n=5) had a median survival of 278 days, compared with scores of 4 to 7 (n=6) having a median survival of 37.5 days; this difference was statistically significant (P=0.0146).

Conclusions: Prospective validation of the inpatient metastatic spine score reveals the prognosis of patients with scores of 4 to 7 have median survival too brief to benefit from the durability advantages of SBRT over EBRT, while scores of 0 to 3 have a prognosis long enough to benefit from SBRT. These results concur with previous retrospective evaluation, and indicate that the inpatient metastatic spine score is a reliable tool for determining which inpatients with spine metastases are appropriate for SBRT over EBRT.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
130
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​American Journal of Clinical Oncology is a multidisciplinary journal for cancer surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, GYN oncologists, and pediatric oncologists. The emphasis of AJCO is on combined modality multidisciplinary loco-regional management of cancer. The journal also gives emphasis to translational research, outcome studies, and cost utility analyses, and includes opinion pieces and review articles. The editorial board includes a large number of distinguished surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, GYN oncologists, pediatric oncologists, and others who are internationally recognized for expertise in their fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信