Cargando…

Evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a Chinese cohort

INTRODUCTIONS: The spine is one of the most common sites of metastasis for malignancies. This study aimed to compare the predictive performance of seven commonly used prognostic scoring systems for surgically treated spine metastases. It is expected to assist surgeons in selecting appropriate scorin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Zhehuang, Guo, Liangyu, Guo, Bairu, Zhang, Peng, Wang, Jiaqiang, Wang, Xin, Yao, Weitao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9972034/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36128836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.5272
_version_ 1784898233978322944
author Li, Zhehuang
Guo, Liangyu
Guo, Bairu
Zhang, Peng
Wang, Jiaqiang
Wang, Xin
Yao, Weitao
author_facet Li, Zhehuang
Guo, Liangyu
Guo, Bairu
Zhang, Peng
Wang, Jiaqiang
Wang, Xin
Yao, Weitao
author_sort Li, Zhehuang
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTIONS: The spine is one of the most common sites of metastasis for malignancies. This study aimed to compare the predictive performance of seven commonly used prognostic scoring systems for surgically treated spine metastases. It is expected to assist surgeons in selecting appropriate scoring systems to support clinical decision‐making and better inform patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study involving 268 surgically treated patients with spine metastases between 2017 and 2020 at a single regional oncology center in China. The revised Tokuhashi, Tomita, modified Bauer, revised Katagiri, van der Linden, Skeletal Oncology Research Group (SORG) nomogram, and SORG machine‐learning (ML) scoring systems were externally validated. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve was used to evaluate sensitivity and specificity at different postoperative time points. The actual survival time was compared with the reference survival time provided in the original publication. RESULTS: In the present study, the median survival was 16.6 months. The SORG ML scoring system demonstrated the highest accuracy in predicting 90‐day (AUC: 0.743) and 1‐year survival (AUC: 0.787). The revised Katagiri demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC: 0.761) in predicting 180‐day survival. The revised Katagiri demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC: 0.779) in predicting 2‐year survival. Based on this series, the actual life expectancy was underestimated compared with the original reference survival time. CONCLUSIONS: None of the scoring systems can perform optimally at all time points and for all pathology types, and the reference survival times provided in the original study need to be updated. A cautious awareness of the underestimation by these models is of paramount importance in relation to current patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9972034
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99720342023-03-01 Evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a Chinese cohort Li, Zhehuang Guo, Liangyu Guo, Bairu Zhang, Peng Wang, Jiaqiang Wang, Xin Yao, Weitao Cancer Med RESEARCH ARTICLES INTRODUCTIONS: The spine is one of the most common sites of metastasis for malignancies. This study aimed to compare the predictive performance of seven commonly used prognostic scoring systems for surgically treated spine metastases. It is expected to assist surgeons in selecting appropriate scoring systems to support clinical decision‐making and better inform patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study involving 268 surgically treated patients with spine metastases between 2017 and 2020 at a single regional oncology center in China. The revised Tokuhashi, Tomita, modified Bauer, revised Katagiri, van der Linden, Skeletal Oncology Research Group (SORG) nomogram, and SORG machine‐learning (ML) scoring systems were externally validated. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve was used to evaluate sensitivity and specificity at different postoperative time points. The actual survival time was compared with the reference survival time provided in the original publication. RESULTS: In the present study, the median survival was 16.6 months. The SORG ML scoring system demonstrated the highest accuracy in predicting 90‐day (AUC: 0.743) and 1‐year survival (AUC: 0.787). The revised Katagiri demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC: 0.761) in predicting 180‐day survival. The revised Katagiri demonstrated the highest accuracy (AUC: 0.779) in predicting 2‐year survival. Based on this series, the actual life expectancy was underestimated compared with the original reference survival time. CONCLUSIONS: None of the scoring systems can perform optimally at all time points and for all pathology types, and the reference survival times provided in the original study need to be updated. A cautious awareness of the underestimation by these models is of paramount importance in relation to current patients. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-09-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9972034/ /pubmed/36128836 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.5272 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle RESEARCH ARTICLES
Li, Zhehuang
Guo, Liangyu
Guo, Bairu
Zhang, Peng
Wang, Jiaqiang
Wang, Xin
Yao, Weitao
Evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a Chinese cohort
title Evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a Chinese cohort
title_full Evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a Chinese cohort
title_fullStr Evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a Chinese cohort
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a Chinese cohort
title_short Evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a Chinese cohort
title_sort evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a chinese cohort
topic RESEARCH ARTICLES
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9972034/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36128836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.5272
work_keys_str_mv AT lizhehuang evaluationofdifferentscoringsystemsforspinalmetastasesbasedonachinesecohort
AT guoliangyu evaluationofdifferentscoringsystemsforspinalmetastasesbasedonachinesecohort
AT guobairu evaluationofdifferentscoringsystemsforspinalmetastasesbasedonachinesecohort
AT zhangpeng evaluationofdifferentscoringsystemsforspinalmetastasesbasedonachinesecohort
AT wangjiaqiang evaluationofdifferentscoringsystemsforspinalmetastasesbasedonachinesecohort
AT wangxin evaluationofdifferentscoringsystemsforspinalmetastasesbasedonachinesecohort
AT yaoweitao evaluationofdifferentscoringsystemsforspinalmetastasesbasedonachinesecohort