MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093966486 · doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2020.10.017

Health related quality of life outcomes following surgery and/or radiation for patients with potentially unstable spinal metastases

2020· article· en· W3093966486 on OpenAlexaff
Anne L. Versteeg, Arjun Sahgal, Laurence D. Rhines, Daniel M. Sciubba, James M. Schuster, Michael H. Weber, Áron Lazáry, Stefano Boriani, Chetan Bettegowda, Michael G. Fehlings, Michelle J. Clarke, Paul M. Arnold, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Charles G. Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Spine Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaToronto Western HospitalMcGill UniversityMontreal General HospitalUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersAOSpineOrthopaedic Research and Education Foundation
KeywordsMedicineSpinal surgeryQuality of life (healthcare)Quality (philosophy)Intensive care medicineSurgeryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Currently there is no prospective pain and health related quality of life (HRQOL) data of patients with potentially unstable spinal metastases who were treated with surgery ± radiation or radiation alone. METHODS: An international prospective cohort multicenter study of patients with potentially unstable spinal metastases, defined by a SINS score 7 to 12, treated with surgery ± radiation or radiotherapy alone was conducted. HRQOL was evaluated with the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, the SOSGOQ2.0, the SF-36, and the EQ-5D at baseline and 6, 12, 26, and 52 weeks after treatment. RESULTS: A total of 136 patients were treated with surgery ± radiotherapy and 84 with radiotherapy alone. At baseline, surgically treated patients were more likely to have mechanical pain, a lytic lesion, a greater median Spinal Instability Neoplastic score, vertebral compression fracture, lower performance status, HRQOL, and pain scores. From baseline to 12 weeks post-treatment, surgically treated patients experienced a 3.0-point decrease in NRS pain score (95% CI -4.1 to -1.9, p<.001), and a 12.7-point increase in SOSGOQ2.0 score (95% CI 6.3-19.1, p<.001). Patients treated with radiotherapy alone experienced a 1.4-point decrease in the NRS pain score (95% CI -2.9 to 0.0, p=.046) and a 6.2-point increase in SOSGOQ2.0 score (95% CI -2.0 to 14.5, p=.331). Beyond 12 weeks, significant improvements in pain and HRQOL metrics were maintained up to 52-weeks follow-up in the surgical cohort, as compared with no significant changes in the radiotherapy alone cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with surgery demonstrated clinically and statistically significant improvements in pain and HRQOL up to 1-year postsurgery. Treatment with radiotherapy alone resulted in improved pain scores, but these were not sustained beyond 3 months and HRQOL outcomes demonstrated nonsignificant changes over time. Within the SINS potentially unstable group, distinct clinical profiles were observed in patients treated with surgery or radiotherapy alone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Spine JournalSame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207