Prognostic Factors Associated With Surviving Less Than 3 Months vs Greater Than 3 Years Specific to Spine Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy and Late Adverse Events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient selection is critical for spine stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) given potential for serious adverse effects and the associated costs. OBJECTIVE: To identify prognostic factors associated with dying within 3 mo, or living greater than 3 yr, following spine SBRT, to better inform patient selection. METHODS: Patients living ≤3 mo after spine SBRT and >3 yr after spine SBRT were identified, and multivariable regression analyses were performed. We report serious late toxicities observed, including vertebral compression fractures (VCF) and plexopathy. RESULTS: A total of 605 patients (1406 spine segments) were treated from 2009 to 2018. A total of 51 patients (8.4%) lived ≤3 mo, and 79 patients (13%) survived >3 yr. Significant differences in baseline features were observed. On multivariable analysis, nonbreast/prostate primaries (odds ratio [ORs]: 28.8-104.2, P = .0004), eastern cooperative oncology group (ECOG) ≥2 (OR: 23.7, 95% CI: 3.2-177, P = .0020), polymetastatic disease (OR: 6.715, 95% CI: 1.89-23.85, P = .0032), painful lesions (OR: 3.833-8.898, P = .0118), and paraspinal disease (OR: 2.874, 95% CI: 1.118-7.393, P = .0288) were prognostic for ≤3 mo survival. The 3- and 5-yr rates of VCF were 10.4% and 14.4%, respectively, and 3- and 5-yr rates of plexopathy were 2.2% and 5.1%, respectively. A single duodenal perforation was observed, and there was no radiation myelopathy events. CONCLUSION: Shorter survival after spine SBRT was seen in patients with less radiosensitive histologies (ie, not breast or prostate), ECOG ≥2, and polymetastatic disease. Pain and paraspinal disease were also associated with poor survival. Fractionated spine SBRT confers a low risk of late serious adverse events.
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".