» Articles » PMID: 32002346

Surgical or Radiation Therapy for the Treatment of Cervical Spine Metastases: Results From the Epidemiology, Process, and Outcomes of Spine Oncology (EPOSO) Cohort

Abstract

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, < .001) and higher NRS pain scores and lower HRQOL scores compared to the radiation alone group ( < .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.

Citing Articles

Temporary halo fixation and radiotherapy as alternative to long-construct spondylodesis in patients with multiple unstable cervical metastases.

Huele E, van der Velden J, Verkooijen H, Kasperts N, Verlaan J Clin Transl Radiat Oncol. 2024; 49:100858.

PMID: 39381627 PMC: 11458975. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100858.


The Clinical Outcomes of Cervical Spine Chordoma: A Nationwide Multicenter Retrospective Study.

Park H, Choi Y, Lee S, Lee S, Kim E, Jang S Neurospine. 2024; 21(3):942-953.

PMID: 39363489 PMC: 11456934. DOI: 10.14245/ns.2448448.224.


Timing of Resection of Spinal Meningiomas and Its Influence on Quality of Life and Treatment.

Schwake M, Said W, Gallus M, Maragno E, Schipmann S, Spille D Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(13).

PMID: 39001397 PMC: 11240410. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16132336.


Implant Materials for Anterior Column Reconstruction of Cervical Spine Tumor.

Chen J, Zhai S, Zhou H, Hu P, Liu X, Liu Z Orthop Surg. 2023; 15(5):1219-1227.

PMID: 36959773 PMC: 10157698. DOI: 10.1111/os.13702.


Risk-adapted stereotactic body radiotherapy for patients with cervical spinal metastases.

Wang H, Tian S, Yang J, Sun B, Chen Y, Song Y Cancer Sci. 2022; 113(12):4277-4288.

PMID: 36056609 PMC: 9746029. DOI: 10.1111/cas.15559.


References
1.
Miller D, Lang F, Walsh G, Abi-Said D, Wildrick D, Gokaslan Z . Coaxial double-lumen methylmethacrylate reconstruction in the anterior cervical and upper thoracic spine after tumor resection. J Neurosurg. 2000; 92(2 Suppl):181-90. DOI: 10.3171/spi.2000.92.2.0181. View

2.
Caspar W, Pitzen T, Papavero L, Geisler F, Johnson T . Anterior cervical plating for the treatment of neoplasms in the cervical vertebrae. J Neurosurg. 1999; 90(1 Suppl):27-34. DOI: 10.3171/spi.1999.90.1.0027. View

3.
Brazier J, Harper R, Jones N, OCathain A, Thomas K, Usherwood T . Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ. 1992; 305(6846):160-4. PMC: 1883187. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.305.6846.160. View

4.
Street J, Lenehan B, Berven S, Fisher C . Introducing a new health-related quality of life outcome tool for metastatic disease of the spine: content validation using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health; on behalf of the Spine Oncology Study Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010; 35(14):1377-86. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181db96a5. View

5.
Childs J, Piva S, Fritz J . Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(11):1331-4. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000164099.92112.29. View