Acute Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression: Urgent Surgery versus Radiotherapy and Treatment Result Prediction versus Actual Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Context: The role of radiotherapy versus surgery in treating acute metastatic spinal cord compression (AMSCC) has changed over the years. Purpose: Our study evaluates neurological and functional outcomes following urgent surgery and radiotherapy (USFR) versus urgent radiotherapy alone in treating AMSCC. Study Design/Setting: A retrospective cohort of 54 patients with AMSCC with variable neurological deficits. Overall, 32 patients were treated with USFR, and 22 received urgent radiotherapy alone. Outcome Measures: Neurological status regarding the Asia and Frankel scores, continence and ambulation, and Kranofsky’s functional score and patient life span comprised the outcome measures. Methods: This was a retrospective EMR study. Results: USFR and radiotherapy cohorts were similar in age, gender, tumor origin, and the number of spinal metastases. The most common cause of AMSCC was carcinoma of the breast (24.1%), followed by carcinoma of the lung (16.7%) and multiple myeloma (13%). Neurological status at AMSCC presentation was similar between cohorts regarding Asia and Frankel scores, continence and ambulation, and Kranofsky’s functional score. Following USFR, 59.3% of the patients had a motor strength improvement, 31.3% regained sphincter function, and 34.4% regained ambulation, while 90% of the patients treated by radiotherapy did not show any improvement. One patient under radiotherapy lost sphincter function. The treatment received did not affect the patient’s survival. A subanalysis of patients with a short life expectancy, by Tomita and Tokuhashi scores, showed missed prediction in 29.4% of cases. Conclusion: The study supports the beneficial effect of UFSR compared to urgent radiotherapy alone in treating AMSCC in all subgroups. Early surgery improved function, motor strength, sphincter control, and ambulation without affecting life span. Prognostic scores failed to predict life span in almost one-third of the patients, requiring further investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".