A multivariate analysis of 416 patients with glioblastoma multiforme: prognosis, extent of resection, and survivalOBJECT: The extent of tumor resection that should be undertaken in patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to identify significant independent predictors of survival in these patients and to determine whether the extent of resection was associated with increased survival time. METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed 416 consecutive patients with histologically proven GBM who underwent tumor resection at the authors' institution between June 1993 and June 1999. Volumetric data and other tumor characteristics identified on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging were collected prospectively. CONCLUSIONS: Five independent predictors of survival were identified: age, Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) score, extent of resection, and the degree of necrosis and enhancement on preoperative MR imaging studies. A significant survival advantage was associated with resection of 98% or more of the tumor volume (median survival 13 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] 11.4-14.6 months), compared with 8.8 months (95% CI 7.4-10.2 months; p < 0.0001) for resections of less than 98%. Using an outcome scale ranging from 0 to 5 based on age, KPS score, and tumor necrosis on MR imaging, we observed significantly longer survival in patients with lower scores (1-3) who underwent aggressive resections, and a trend toward slightly longer survival was found in patients with higher scores (4-5). Gross-total tumor resection is associated with longer survival in patients with GBM, especially when other predictive variables are favorable.
A Novel Classification System for Spinal Instability in Neoplastic DiseaseIn Brief Study Design. Systematic review and modified Delphi technique. Objective. To use an evidence-based medicine process using the best available literature and expert opinion consensus to develop a comprehensive classification system to diagnose neoplastic spinal instability. Summary of Background Data. Spinal instability is poorly defined in the literature and presently there is a lack of guidelines available to aid in defining the degree of spinal instability in the setting of neoplastic spinal disease. The concept of spinal instability remains important in the clinical decision-making process for patients with spine tumors. Methods. We have integrated the evidence provided by systematic reviews through a modified Delphi technique to generate a consensus of best evidence and expert opinion to develop a classification system to define neoplastic spinal instability. Results. A comprehensive classification system based on patient symptoms and radiographic criteria of the spine was developed to aid in predicting spine stability of neoplastic lesions. The classification system includes global spinal location of the tumor, type and presence of pain, bone lesion quality, spinal alignment, extent of vertebral body collapse, and posterolateral spinal element involvement. Qualitative scores were assigned based on relative importance of particular factors gleaned from the literature and refined by expert consensus. Conclusion. The Spine Instability Neoplastic Score is a comprehensive classification system with content validity that can guide clinicians in identifying when patients with neoplastic disease of the spine may benefit from surgical consultation. It can also aid surgeons in assessing the key components of spinal instability due to neoplasia and may become a prognostic tool for surgical decision-making when put in context with other key elements such as neurologic symptoms, extent of disease, prognosis, patient health factors, oncologic subtype, and radiosensitivity of the tumor. Spinal instability is poorly defined especially in neoplastic disease. The SOSG has developed a comprehensive classification system to define neoplastic spinal instability (the Spine Instability Neoplastic Score). The Spine Instability Neoplastic Score will aid oncologists and primary care physicians in determining timing of referral to spine surgeons and will aid surgeons in assessing need for surgical stabilization.
Reliability analysis of the epidural spinal cord compression scaleMark H. Bilsky, Ilya Laufer, Daryl R. Fourney et al.|Journal of Neurosurgery Spine|2010 OBJECTIVE: The evolution of imaging techniques, along with highly effective radiation options has changed the way metastatic epidural tumors are treated. While high-grade epidural spinal cord compression (ESCC) frequently serves as an indication for surgical decompression, no consensus exists in the literature about the precise definition of this term. The advancement of the treatment paradigms in patients with metastatic tumors for the spine requires a clear grading scheme of ESCC. The degree of ESCC often serves as a major determinant in the decision to operate or irradiate. The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability and validity of a 6-point, MR imaging-based grading system for ESCC. METHODS: To determine the reliability of the grading scale, a survey was distributed to 7 spine surgeons who participate in the Spine Oncology Study Group. The MR images of 25 cervical or thoracic spinal tumors were distributed consisting of 1 sagittal image and 3 axial images at the identical level including T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and Gd-enhanced T1-weighted images. The survey was administered 3 times at 2-week intervals. The inter- and intrarater reliability was assessed. RESULTS: The inter- and intrarater reliability ranged from good to excellent when surgeons were asked to rate the degree of spinal cord compression using T2-weighted axial images. The T2-weighted images were superior indicators of ESCC compared with T1-weighted images with and without Gd. CONCLUSIONS: The ESCC scale provides a valid and reliable instrument that may be used to describe the degree of ESCC based on T2-weighted MR images. This scale accounts for recent advances in the treatment of spinal metastases and may be used to provide an ESCC classification scheme for multicenter clinical trial and outcome studies.
Percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty for painful vertebral body fractures in cancer patientsDaryl R. Fourney, Donald F. Schomer, Remi Nader et al.|Journal of Neurosurgery Spine|2003 OBJECT: The current North American experience with minimally invasive vertebro- and kyphoplasty is largely limited to the treatment of benign osteoporotic compression fractures. The objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of these procedures for painful vertebral body (VB) fractures in cancer patients. METHODS: The authors reviewed a consecutive group of cancer patients (21 with myeloma and 35 with other primary malignancies) undergoing vertebro- and kyphoplasty at their institution. Ninety-seven (65 vertebro- and 32 kyphoplasty) procedures were performed in 56 patients during 58 treatment sessions. The mean patient age was 62 years (+/- 13 years [standard deviation]) and the median duration of symptoms was 3.2 months. All patients suffered intractable spinal pain secondary to VB fractures. Patients noted marked or complete pain relief after 49 procedures (84%), and no change after five procedures (9%); early postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores were unavailable in four patients (7%). No patient was worse after treatment. Reductions in VAS pain scores remained significant up to 1 year (p = 0.02, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). Analgesic consumption was reduced at 1 month (p = 0.03, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). Median follow-up length was 4.5 months (range 1 day-19.7 months). Asymptomatic cement leakage occurred during vertebroplasty at six (9.2%) of 65 levels; no cement extravasation was seen during kyphoplasty. There were no deaths or complications related to the procedures. The mean percentage of restored VB height by kyphoplasty was 42 +/- 21%. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous vertebro- and kyphoplasty provided significant pain relief in a high percentage of patients, and this appeared durable over time. The absence of cement leakage-related complications may reflect the use of 1) high-viscosity cement; 2) kyphoplasty in selected cases; and 3) relatively small volume injection. Precise indications for these techniques are evolving; however, they are safe and feasible in well-selected patients with refractory spinal pain due to myeloma bone disease or metastases.
Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score: An Analysis of Reliability and Validity From the Spine Oncology Study GroupDaryl R. Fourney, Evan Frangou, Timothy C. Ryken et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2011 PURPOSE: Standardized indications for treatment of tumor-related spinal instability are hampered by the lack of a valid and reliable classification system. The objective of this study was to determine the interobserver reliability, intraobserver reliability, and predictive validity of the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS). METHODS: Clinical and radiographic data from 30 patients with spinal tumors were classified as stable, potentially unstable, and unstable by members of the Spine Oncology Study Group. The median category for each patient case (consensus opinion) was used as the gold standard for predictive validity testing. On two occasions at least 6 weeks apart, each rater also scored each patient using SINS. Each total score was converted into a three-category data field, with 0 to 6 as stable, 7 to 12 as potentially unstable, and 13 to 18 as unstable. RESULTS: The κ statistics for interobserver reliability were 0.790, 0.841, 0.244, 0.456, 0.462, and 0.492 for the fields of location, pain, bone quality, alignment, vertebral body collapse, and posterolateral involvement, respectively. The κ statistics for intraobserver reliability were 0.806, 0.859, 0.528, 0.614, 0.590, and 0.662 for the same respective fields. Intraclass correlation coefficients for inter- and intraobserver reliability of total SINS score were 0.846 (95% CI, 0.773 to 0.911) and 0.886 (95% CI, 0.868 to 0.902), respectively. The κ statistic for predictive validity was 0.712 (95% CI, 0.676 to 0.766). CONCLUSION: SINS demonstrated near-perfect inter- and intraobserver reliability in determining three clinically relevant categories of stability. The sensitivity and specificity of SINS for potentially unstable or unstable lesions were 95.7% and 79.5%, respectively.