Mature Imaging-Based Outcomes Supporting Local Control for Complex Reirradiation Salvage Spine Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Upon progression after upfront radiotherapy to spinal metastases, low-dose re-irradiation conventional external beam radiation (cEBRT) provides limited clinical benefit. Spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) allows for dose escalation in the salvage setting with the potential for improved local control. OBJECTIVE: To report mature clinical and imaging-based outcomes for salvage SBRT. METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of consecutive patients with spinal metastases treated with re-irradiation spine SBRT having failed either cEBRT (n = 60 with 1 prior course and n = 17 with 2 or more prior cEBRT courses), or prior SBRT (n = 6) to the same spinal segment. The primary outcome was local failure (LF), and secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and the rate of vertebral compression fracture (VCF). RESULTS: A total of 43 patients with 83 spinal segments treated with salvage SBRT were reviewed. The crude risk of LF was 18%, and actuarial LF rates at 6, 12, and 24 mo were 7%, 14%, and 19%, respectively. The presence of extensive paraspinal disease (hazard ratio [HR] = 7.1, 95% CI 1.5-34) significantly predicted for LF. The median OS was 13.2 (95% CI 6.1-16.3) mo, and the presence of neurological deficits (HR = 4.7, 95% CI 1.8-12.1) and brain metastases (HR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.1-6.3) were significant prognostic factors. The crude risk of VCF was 4%, and radiation myelopathy was not observed. CONCLUSION: These data support the safety and efficacy of spinal re-irradiation with SBRT including patients with prior SBRT and multiple courses of prior cEBRT.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".