MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400807958 · doi:10.3390/curroncol31070304

Characteristics and Outcome of Surgically Treated Patients with Intradural Extra- and Intramedullary Spinal Metastasis—A Single-Center Retrospective Case Series and Review

2024· review· en· W4400807958 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hanna Salvotti, Alexander Lein, Martin Proescholdt, Nils Ole Schmidt, Sebastian Siller

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSingle CenterIntramedullary rodSeries (stratigraphy)SurgeryOutcome (game theory)Retrospective cohort studyCenter (category theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Intradural spinal metastases are considered rare. At present, limited information is available on incidence, surgical management, and outcomes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective patient chart review from 2002 to 2024, identifying all patients surgically treated for intradural spinal metastases. Clinical, surgical and survival data were collected and compared to literature data for patients surgically treated for extradural spinal metastases. Results: A total of 172 patients with spinal metastases were identified with 13 patients meeting inclusion criteria (7.6%). The mean age at diagnosis of intradural spinal metastases was 52 ± 22 years, with diverse primaries including lung (n = 3), breast (n = 2), sarcoma (n = 2), and six unique entities. Intradural spinal metastasis was diagnosed on average of 3.3 years after primary diagnosis. In total, we observed five (38%) intradural-extramedullary and eight (62%) intramedullary metastases, located in the cervical (38.5%), thoracic (46.1%) and lumbar spine (15.4%). The most common preoperative symptoms were pain, sensory changes, and gait ataxia (each 76.9%). Gross total resection was achieved in 54%, and local tumor control in 85%. Postoperatively, 92% exhibited clinical improvement or stability. Most frequent adjuvant treatment was radio- and/or chemotherapy in 85%. The average survival after operation for spinal intradural metastases was 5 months, ranging from 1 month to 120 months. The location of the intradural metastasis in the cervical spine was associated with a significantly more favorable survival outcome (compared to thoracic/lumbar location, p = 0.02). Conclusions: Intradural location of spinal metastases is rare (7.6%). Even so, surgical resection is safe and effective for neurological improvement, and survival appears lower compared to the reported survival of extradural spinal metastases.

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)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207