Home Duke University Press
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     
  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents


Neuro Oncol 2005 7(1):64-76; DOI:10.1215/S1152851704000262
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (34)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Klimo, P.
Right arrow Articles by Schmidt, M. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Duke University Press

Clinical Investigations

A meta-analysis of surgery versus conventional radiotherapy for the treatment of metastatic spinal epidural disease

Paul Klimo, Jr., Clinton J. Thompson, John R.W. Kestle and Meic H. Schmidt1

Departments of Neurosurgery (P.K., J.R.W.K., M.H.S.) and Family & Preventive Medicine (C.S.T.) and Spinal Oncology Service, Huntsman Cancer Institute (M.H.S.), University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA

1 Address correspondence to Meic H. Schmidt, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Utah, 30 North 1900 East, Suite #3B-409 SOM, Salt Lake City, UT 84132-2303, USA (meic.schmidt{at}hsc.utah.edu).

Abstract

Radiotherapy has been the primary therapy for managing metastatic spinal disease; however, surgery that decompresses the spinal cord circumferentially, followed by reconstruction and immediate stabilization, has also proven effective. We provide a quantitative comparison between the "new" surgery and radiotherapy, based on articles that report on ambulatory status before and after treatment, age, sex, primary neoplasm pathology, and spinal disease distribution. Ambulation was categorized as "success" or "rescue" (proportion of patients ambulatory after treatment and proportion regaining ambulatory function, respectively). Secondary outcomes were also analyzed. We calculated cumulative success and rescue rates for our ambulatory measurements and quantified heterogeneity using a mixed-effects model. We investigated the source of the heterogeneity in both a univariate and multivariate manner with a meta-regression model. Our analysis included data from 24 surgical articles (999 patients) and 4 radiation articles (543 patients), mostly uncontrolled cohort studies (Class III). Surgical patients were 1.3 times more likely to be ambulatory after treatment and twice as likely to regain ambulatory function. Overall ambulatory success rates for surgery and radiation were 85% and 64%, respectively. Primary pathology was the principal factor determining survival. We present the first known formal meta-analysis using data from nonrandomized clinical studies. Although we attempted to control for imbalances between the surgical and radiation groups, significant heterogeneity undoubtedly still exists. Nonetheless, we believe the differences in the outcomes indicate a true difference resulting from treatment. We conclude that surgery should usually be the primary treatment with radiation given as adjuvant therapy. Neurologic status, overall health, extent of disease (spinal and extraspinal), and primary pathology all impact proper treatment selection.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JBJSHome page
J. S. Biermann, G. E. Holt, V. O. Lewis, H. S. Schwartz, and M. J. Yaszemski
Metastatic Bone Disease: Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., June 1, 2009; 91(6): 1518 - 1530.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am Soc Clin Oncol Ed BookHome page
J. L. Abrahm, R. A. Patchell, and D. Rades
Personalized Treatment for Malignant Spinal Cord Compression: A Multidisciplinary Approach
ASCO Educational Book, January 1, 2009; 2009(1): 555 - 562.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
S. M. Dy, S. M. Asch, A. Naeim, H. Sanati, A. Walling, and K. A. Lorenz
Evidence-Based Standards for Cancer Pain Management
J. Clin. Oncol., August 10, 2008; 26(23): 3879 - 3885.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Postgrad. Med. J.Home page
N Walji, A K Chan, and D R Peake
Common acute oncological emergencies: diagnosis, investigation and management
Postgrad. Med. J., August 1, 2008; 84(994): 418 - 427.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CA Cancer J ClinHome page
R. H. M. A. Bartels, Y. M. van der Linden, and W. T. A. van der Graaf
Spinal Extradural Metastasis: Review of Current Treatment Options
CA Cancer J Clin, July 1, 2008; 58(4): 245 - 259.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
J. L. Abrahm, M. B. Banffy, and M. B. Harris
Spinal Cord Compression in Patients With Advanced Metastatic Cancer: "All I Care About Is Walking and Living My Life"
JAMA, February 27, 2008; 299(8): 937 - 946.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents


Copyright 2005 by Society for Neuro-Oncology