Association of neurologic deficits with surgical outcomes and health‐related quality of life after treatment for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A critical knowledge gap exists regarding the impact of neurologic deficits on surgical outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for patients surgically treated for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). METHODS: This prospective, multicenter and international study analyzed the impact of the neurologic status on functional status, HRQOL, and postoperative survival. The collected data included the patient demographics, overall survival, American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) impairment scale, Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score, treatment details and complications and HRQOL measures, including version 2 of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36v2) and version 2.0 of the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ2.0). RESULTS: A total of 239 patients surgically treated for spinal metastases were included. Six weeks after treatment, 99 of the 108 patients with a preoperative ASIA grade of E remained stable, 8 deteriorated to ASIA D, and 1 deteriorated to ASIA A. Of 55 patients with ASIA D, 27 improved to ASIA E, 27 remained stable and 1 deteriorated to ASIA C. Of 11 patients with ASIA A to C, 2 improved to ASIA E, 4 improved to ASIA D, and 5 remained stable. At the 6- and 12-week follow-up, better ASIA scores were associated with better scores on multiple SF-36v2 and SOSGOQ items. Postoperatively, patients with ASIA grades of A to D were more likely to have urinary tract infections and wound complications. Patients with a baseline ASIA grade of E or D survived significantly longer. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with neurologic deficits due to MESCC have worse HRQOL and decreased overall survival. Nevertheless, surgery can result in stabilization or improvement of neurologic function which may translate into better HRQOL. Postoperative care and follow-up are challenging for patients with neurologic deficits because they experience more complications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".