A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes and Prognostic Factors for Patients Undergoing Surgery for Spinal Metastases Secondary to Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Surgical treatment and cement augmentation procedures are effective palliative techniques for the treatment of symptomatic spinal metastases. However, clinical results specific to a breast cancer cohort are generally lacking. We aim to systematically review the literature for clinical outcomes following operative interventions and prognostic factors for the treatment of breast metastases to the spine. Specifically, we describe the survival and clinical outcomes of surgery and cement augmentation procedures for breast metastases to the spine and to determine prognostic variables that may help recognize which patients will perform better or worse following surgery. Methods We performed a literature review using PubMed to identify articles that reported outcomes and/or prognostic factors of the breast cancer patient population with spinal metastases treated with any surgical technique since 1990. Results A total of 19 surgical studies, 4 cement augmentation studies, and 6 nonsurgical prognostic variable studies met the preset inclusion criteria. All but three studies (two surgical and one cement augmentation) were retrospective in nature, and all studies were of level of evidence IV. Median postoperative survival for metastatic breast cancer was 21.7 months (8.2–36 months), mean rate of pain improvement was 92.9% (76–100%), mean rate of neurological improvement was 63.8% (53–100%), mean rate neurological decline was 4.1% (0–8%), and mean rate LTC was 92.6% (89–100%). Kyphoplasty studies reported a high rate of pain control in selected patients. Negative prognostic variables included: hormonal (estrogen and progesterone) and HER2 receptor refractory tumor status, high degree of axillary lymph node involvement, and short disease-free interval (DFI). All other clinical or prognostic parameters were of low or insufficient strength. Conclusion With respect to clinical outcomes, studies consistently found that surgery resulted in neurological improvement for a majority of patients, with a minimal risk of worsening, and kyphoplasty studies reported a high rate of pain control. Increased postoperative survival 2002 onwards was likely due to FDA approval of new chemotherapies. However, specific factors associated with shorter survival following surgery involve hormone and HER2 receptor status and disease-free interval.
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 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| 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".