Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Despite our inability to accurately predict survival in many cancer patients, a life expectancy of at least 3 mo is historically necessary to be considered for surgical treatment of spinal metastases. OBJECTIVE:To compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients surviving <3 mo after surgical treatment to patients surviving >3 mo to assess the validity of this inclusion criteria. METHODS:Patients who underwent surgery for spinal metastases between August 2013 and May 2017 were retrospectively identified from an international cohort study. HRQOL was evaluated using generic and disease-specific outcome tools at baseline and at 6 and 12 wk postsurgery. The primary outcome was the HRQOL at 6 wk post-treatment measured by the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ). RESULTS:A total of 253 patients were included: 40 patients died within the first 3 mo after surgery and 213 patients survived more than 3 mo. Patients surviving <3 mo after surgery presented with lower baseline performance status. Adjusted analyses for baseline performance status did not reveal a significant difference in HRQOL between both groups at 6 wk post-treatment. No significant difference in patient satisfaction at 6 wk with regard to their treatment could be detected between both groups. CONCLUSION:When controlled for baseline performance status, quality of life 6 wk after surgery for spinal metastasis is independent of survival. To optimize improvement in HRQOL for this patient population, baseline performance status should take priority over expected survival in the surgical decision-making process.

Innovation in surgical technique and contemporary spinal instrumentation paired with intraoperative navigation/imaging concepts allows for safer and less-invasive surgical approaches. The combination of stereotactic body radiotherapy, contemporary surgical adjuncts, and less-invasive techniques serves to minimize blood loss, soft tissue injury, and length of hospital stay without compromising surgical efficacy, potentially enabling patients to begin adjuvant treatment sooner.

OBJECTIVE:To characterize the clinical outcomes when stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) alone is used to treat high-grade epidural disease without prior surgical decompression, the authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients treated at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 2014 and 2018. The authors report locoregional failure (LRF) for a cohort of 31 cases treated with hypofractionated SBRT alone for grade 2 epidural spinal cord compression (ESCC) with radioresistant primary cancer histology. METHODS:High-grade epidural disease was defined as grade 2 ESCC, which is notable for radiographic deformation of the spinal cord by metastatic disease. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and cumulative incidence functions were generated to examine the survival and incidence experiences of the sample level with respect to overall survival, LRF, and subsequent requirement of vertebral same-level surgery (SLS) due to tumor progression or fracture. Associations with dosimetric analysis were also examined. RESULTS:Twenty-nine patients undergoing 31 episodes of hypofractionated SBRT alone for grade 2 ESCC between 2014 and 2018 were identified. The 1-year and 2-year cumulative incidences of LRF were 10.4% (95% CI 0-21.9) and 22.0% (95% CI 5.5-38.4), respectively. The median survival was 9.81 months (95% CI 8.12-18.54). The 1-year cumulative incidence of SLS was 6.8% (95% CI 0-16.0) and the 2-year incidence of SLS was 14.5% (95% CI 0.6-28.4). All patients who progressed to requiring surgery had index lesions at the thoracic apex (T5-7). CONCLUSIONS:In carefully selected patients, treatment of grade 2 ESCC disease with hypofractionated SBRT alone offers a 1-year cumulative incidence of LRF similar to that in low-grade ESCC and postseparation surgery adjuvant hypofractionated SBRT. Use of SBRT alone has a favorable safety profile and a low cumulative incidence of progressive disease requiring open surgical intervention (14.5%).

The incidence of metastatic spinal disease is increasing as systemic treatment options are improving and concurrently increasing the life expectancy of patients, and the interventions are becoming increasingly complex. Treatment decisions are also complicated by the increasing armamentarium of surgical treatment options. Decision-making frameworks such as NOMS (neurologic, oncologic, mechanical, and systemic) help guide practitioners in their decision making and provide a structure that would be readily adaptable to the evolving landscape of systemic, surgical, and radiation treatments. This article describes these decision-making frameworks, discusses their relative benefits and shortcomings, and details our approach to treating these complex patients.

BACKGROUND:As of May 4, 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected >3.5 million people and touched every inhabited continent. Accordingly, it has stressed health systems worldwide, leading to the cancellation of elective surgical cases and discussions regarding health care resource rationing. It is expected that rationing of surgical resources will continue even after the pandemic peak and may recur with future pandemics, creating a need for a means of triaging patients for emergent and elective spine surgery. METHODS:Using a modified Delphi technique, a cohort of 16 fellowship-trained spine surgeons from 10 academic medical centers constructed a scoring system for the triage and prioritization of emergent and elective spine surgeries. Three separate rounds of videoconferencing and written correspondence were used to reach a final scoring system. Sixteen test cases were used to optimize the scoring system so that it could categorize cases as requiring emergent, urgent, high-priority elective, or low-priority elective scheduling. RESULTS:The devised scoring system included 8 independent components: neurologic status, underlying spine stability, presentation of a high-risk postoperative complication, patient medical comorbidities, expected hospital course, expected discharge disposition, facility resource limitations, and local disease burden. The resultant calculator was deployed as a freely available Web-based calculator (https://jhuspine3.shinyapps.io/SpineUrgencyCalculator/). CONCLUSIONS:We present the first quantitative urgency scoring system for the triage and prioritizing of spine surgery cases in resource-limited settings. We believe that our scoring system, although not all encompassing, has potential value as a guide for triaging spine surgical cases during the COVID pandemic and post-COVID period.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Vertebral body compression fracture (VCF) is a complication following spinal stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). However, the incidence of VCF in vertebrae adjacent to the level of SRS is unknown. This study aimed to determine the incidence of adjacent level VCF (adjVCF) following spinal SRS. Methods/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective review of 239 lesions treated with single-fraction SRS from 2011-2014 was performed. Clinical and pathologic factors were collected including evaluation of VCFs in adjacent levels to SRS site. In patients with adjVCFs, dose-volume histograms for adjacent-level endplates were calculated. Cox regression analysis was performed to determine any association among clinical factors and adjVCF occurrence. Results/UNASSIGNED:Median follow-up was 14.7 months. Twenty-six adjVCFs occurred (10.8%). Of the adjVCFs, 19 had metastases following SRS, and seven did not (2.9% of total treatments). Median time to fracture post-SRS was 13.5 months. In adjVCFs, median of the mean dose to adjacent level fractured endplate was 23.3 Gy, and median of the mean dose of sixteen non-fractured endplates immediately adjacent to the SRS site was 19.1 Gy. Age, gender, and histology were not associated with adjVCF. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:AdjVCF after spinal SRS occurs at a rate of 2.9%, when excluding metastatic sites of disease. Adjacent level endplates should be investigated as an organ at risk during SRS planning.

OBJECTIVE:Dedifferentiated chordomas (DC) are genetically and clinically distinct from conventional chordomas (CC), exhibiting frequent SMARCB1 alterations and a more aggressive clinical course. We compared treatment and outcomes of DC and CC patients in a retrospective cohort study from a single, large-volume cancer center. METHODS:Overall, 11 DC patients were identified from 1994 to 2017 along with a cohort of 68 historical control patients with CC treated during the same time frame. Clinical variables and outcomes were collected from the medical record and Wilcoxon rank sum or Fisher exact tests were used to make comparisons between the two groups. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank tests were used to compare DC and CC overall survival. RESULTS:DC demonstrated a bimodal age distribution at presentation (36% age 0-24; 64% age > 50). DC patients more commonly presented with metastatic disease than CC patients (36% vs. 3% p = 0.000). DC patients had significantly shorter time to local treatment failure after radiation therapy (11.1 months vs. 34.1 months, p = 0.000). The rate of distant metastasis following treatment was significantly higher in DC compared to CC (57% vs. 5%, p = 0.000). The median overall survival after diagnosis for DC was 20 months (95% CI 0-48 months) compared to 155 months (95% CI 94-216 months) for CC (p = 0.007). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:DC patients exhibit significantly higher rates of both synchronous and metachronous metastases, as well as shorter overall survival rates compared to conventional chordoma. The relatively poor survival outcomes with conventional therapies indicate the need to study targeted therapies for the treatment of DC.

OBJECTIVEAs patients with metastatic cancer live longer, an increased emphasis is placed on long-term therapeutic outcomes. The current study evaluates outcomes of long-term cancer survivors following surgery for spinal metastases.METHODSThe study population included patients surgically treated at a tertiary cancer center between January 2010 and December 2015 who survived at least 24 months postoperatively. A retrospective chart and imaging review was performed to collect data regarding patient demographics; tumor histology; type and extent of spinal intervention; radiation data, including treatment dose and field; long-term sequelae, including local tumor control; and reoperations, repeat irradiation, or postoperative kyphoplasty at a previously treated level.RESULTSEighty-eight patients were identified, of whom 44 were male, with a mean age of 61 years. The mean clinical follow-up for the cohort was 44.6 months (range 24.2-88.3 months). Open posterolateral decompression and stabilization was performed in 67 patients and percutaneous minimally invasive surgery in 21. In the total cohort, 84% received postoperative adjuvant radiation and 27% were operated on for progression following radiation. Posttreatment local tumor progression was identified in 10 patients (11%) at the index treatment level and 5 additional patients had a marginal failure; all of these patients were treated with repeat irradiation with 5 patients requiring a reoperation. In total, at least 1 additional surgical intervention was performed at the index level in 20 (23%) of the 88 patients: 11 for hardware failure, 5 for progression of disease, 3 for wound complications, and 1 for postoperative hematoma. Most reoperations (85%) were delayed at more than 3 months from the index surgery. Wound infections or dehiscence requiring additional surgical intervention occurred in 3 patients, all of which occurred more than a year postoperatively. Kyphoplasty at a previously operated level was performed in 3 cases due to progressive fractures.CONCLUSIONSDurable tumor control can be achieved in long-term cancer survivors surgically treated for symptomatic spinal metastases with limited complications. Complications observed after long-term follow-up include local tumor recurrence/progression, marginal tumor control failures, early or late hardware complications, late wound complications, and progressive spinal instability or deformity.

BACKGROUND:Despite major advances in radiation and systemic treatments, surgery remains a critical step in the multidisciplinary treatment of metastatic spinal cord tumors. OBJECTIVE:To describe the indications, rationale, and technique of "hybrid therapy" (separation surgery and concomitant spine stereotactic radiosurgery [SRS]) along with practical nuances. METHODS:Separation surgery describes a posterolateral approach for circumferential epidural decompression and stabilization. The goal is to decompress the spinal cord, stabilize the spine, and create adequate separation between the neural elements and the tumor for SRS to achieve durable tumor control. RESULTS:A transpedicular route to achieve ventrolateral access and limited resection of the tumorous vertebral body is carried out. In the setting of high-grade cord compression, caution must be taken when performing the tumor decompression. "Separation" of the ventral epidural tumor component anteriorly creates space for concomitant SRS while a simple laminectomy would not adequately achieve this goal. Dissection of the posterior longitudinal ligament allows maximal ventral decompression. Gross total tumor resection is not crucial for durable tumor control using the "hybrid therapy" model. Thus, attempts at ventral tumor resection may unnecessarily increase operative morbidity. Cement augmentation of the construct or vertebral body may improve construct stability. CT myelogram is the preferred exam for postoperative SRS planning. Radiosurgical planning constitutes a multidisciplinary effort and guidelines for contouring in the postoperative setting have recently become available. CONCLUSION:Separation surgery is an effective, well-tolerated, and reproducible surgery. It provides safe margins for concomitant SRS. Combined, this "Hybrid Therapy" allows durable local control, maintenance of spinal stability, and palliation of symptoms, while minimizing operative morbidity.

An improved understanding of tumor biology, the ability to target tumor drivers, and the ability to harness the immune system have dramatically improved the expected survival of patients diagnosed with cancer. However, many patients continue to develop spine metastases that require local treatment with radiotherapy and surgery. Fortunately, the evolution of radiation delivery and operative techniques permits durable tumor control with a decreased risk of treatment-related toxicity and a greater emphasis on restoration of quality of life and daily function. Stereotactic body radiotherapy allows delivery of ablative radiation doses to the majority of spine tumors, reducing the need for surgery. Among patients who still require surgery for decompression of the spinal cord or spinal column stabilization, minimal access approaches and targeted tumor excision and ablation techniques minimize the surgical risk and facilitate postoperative recovery. Growing interdisciplinary collaboration among scientists and clinicians will further elucidate the synergistic possibilities among systemic, radiation, and surgical interventions for patients with spinal tumors and will bring many closer to curative therapies.