Surgical Intervention for Patients With Spinal Metastasis From Lung Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the prognosis and surgical outcomes of patients with spinal metastasis from lung cancer undergoing surgical treatment. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The spine is the most common site of metastatic lesions in patients with lung cancer. There have been a few studies, all small cohorts studying prognosis and surgical outcomes and the results were discordant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study on a prospectively collected database was conducted. Data collected were the following: age, tobacco use, tumor histology, American Spinal Injury Association score, revised Tokuhashi score, ambulatory status, perioperative complications, postoperative adjuvant treatment, and survival time. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the prognostic factors of survival. RESULTS: The authors studied 87 patients with a mean age of 61.3±1.9 years. Median survival was 4.1±0.8 months. Twenty-eight patients (32.2%) lived >6 months and 14 patients (16.1%) lived >12 months. The medical complication rate was 13.8% and the surgical complication rate was 5.7%. The 30-day mortality rate was 4.6%. Univariate analysis showed tobacco use, revised Tokuhashi score, preoperative and postoperative American Spinal Injury Association score, postoperative walking ability, postoperative radiotherapy, and postoperative chemotherapy were prognostic factors. There was no significant difference in survival between adenoma lung cancers, nonadenoma lung cancers, and small cell lung cancers (P=0.51). Multivariate analysis revealed tobacco use, revised Tokuhashi score, postoperative walking ability, postoperative radiotherapy, and postoperative chemotherapy affected the survival. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest reported study of patients with spinal metastasis from lung cancer undergoing spinal surgery. It is the first study showing that tobacco use has a negative impact on survival. Spinal surgery improves the quality of life and offers nonambulatory patients a high chance of regaining walking ability with an acceptable risk of 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".