Comparison between different prognostic models to be used for metastatic bone disease on appendicular skeleton in a Chilean population

Alfaro-Toloza, Patricio; Delgado, Javier; Dumas, Andrés; Mesa, C. Julio Díaz; Wevar, Orlando; Herrera, Carlos; Padilla, Fabian; Botello, Eduardo

doi:10.1007/s00590-021-03153-3

Cited by 5 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The final two studies are comparative publications. The models included in our analysis are as follows: [16,17,31] (Table 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most common methods to assess the performance of a prognostic score are considerations of the discrimination accuracy and the calibration score. [16,17], using different populations including six models: OPTIModel, SPRING 2013, PATHfx 1.0, 7SSG, Janssen and IOR. SORG model was not externally validated.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These 66 studies were screened in full text. Eleven studies [ 16 , 17 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 ] met the inclusion criteria and were considered in the evidence synthesis and this is depicted in Figure 1 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The final two studies are comparative publications. The models included in our analysis are as follows: Ratasvuori et al (Scandinavian Sarcoma Group—referred to as the 7SSG score), Janssen et al (referred to as Janssen score), Willeumier et al (referred to as the OptiModel), Sorensen et al (referred to as the SPRING 2008 and SPRING 2013 nomograms), Forsberg et al (referred to as the PathFx 1.0 model, Anderson et al (referred to as PATHfx 3.0 model), Thio et al (referred to as SORG model) and Errani et al (referred to as IOR score) [ 16 , 17 , 31 ] ( Table 1 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some landmark prognostic scoring systems are designed for MBD in the spine, alone or in the extremities as well, such as in Bauer and Wedin or Tokuhashi et al [ 10 , 15 ]. However, our review, along with more recent studies, deal with them separately due to differences in morbidity and treatment [ 16 , 17 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The Prediction of Survival after Surgical Management of Bone Metastases of the Extremities—A Comparison of Prognostic Models

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individualized survival prognostic models for symptomatic patients with appendicular metastatic bone disease are key to guiding clinical decision-making for the orthopedic surgeon. Several prognostic models have been developed in recent years; however, most orthopedic surgeons have not incorporated these models into routine practice. This is possibly due to uncertainty concerning their accuracy and the lack of comparison publications and recommendations. Our aim was to conduct a review and quality assessment of these models. A computerized literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed up to February 2022 was done, using keywords: “Bone metastasis”, “survival”, “extremity” and “prognosis”. We evaluated each model’s performance, assessing the estimated discriminative power and calibration accuracy for the analyzed patients. We included 11 studies out of the 1779 citations initially retrieved. The 11 studies included seven different models for estimating survival. Among externally validated survival prediction scores, PATHFx 3.0, 2013-SPRING and potentially Optimodel were found to be the best models in terms of performance. Currently, it is still a challenge to recommend any of the models as the standard for predicting survival for these patients. However, some models show better performance status and other quality characteristics. We recommend future, large, multicenter, prospective studies to compare between PATHfx 3.0, SPRING 2013 and OptiModel using the same external validation dataset.

show abstract

“…The final two studies are comparative publications. The models included in our analysis are as follows: [16,17,31] (Table 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Prediction of Survival after Surgical Management of Bone Metastases of the Extremities—A Comparison of Prognostic Models

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison of survival prediction models for bone metastases of the extremities following surgery

Park,

Won,

Kim

et al. 2024

Bone Joint J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimsThis study aimed to compare the performance of survival prediction models for bone metastases of the extremities (BM-E) with pathological fractures in an Asian cohort, and investigate patient characteristics associated with survival.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included 469 patients, who underwent surgery for BM-E between January 2009 and March 2022 at a tertiary hospital in South Korea. Postoperative survival was calculated using the PATHFx3.0, SPRING13, OPTIModel, SORG, and IOR models. Model performance was assessed with area under the curve (AUC), calibration curve, Brier score, and decision curve analysis. Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate the factors contributing to survival.ResultsThe SORG model demonstrated the highest discriminatory accuracy with AUC (0.80 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.85)) at 12 months. In calibration analysis, the PATHfx3.0 and OPTIModel models underestimated survival, while the SPRING13 and IOR models overestimated survival. The SORG model exhibited excellent calibration with intercepts of 0.10 (95% CI -0.13 to 0.33) at 12 months. The SORG model also had lower Brier scores than the null score at three and 12 months, indicating good overall performance. Decision curve analysis showed that all five survival prediction models provided greater net benefit than the default strategy of operating on either all or no patients. Rapid growth cancer and low serum albumin levels were associated with three-, six-, and 12-month survival.ConclusionState-of-art survival prediction models for BM-E (PATHFx3.0, SPRING13, OPTIModel, SORG, and IOR models) are useful clinical tools for orthopaedic surgeons in the decision-making process for the treatment in Asian patients, with SORG models offering the best predictive performance. Rapid growth cancer and serum albumin level are independent, statistically significant factors contributing to survival following surgery of BM-E. Further refinement of survival prediction models will bring about informed and patient-specific treatment of BM-E.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(2):203–211.

show abstract

Treatment of Bone Metastasis

Errani

2022

Current Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison between different prognostic models to be used for metastatic bone disease on appendicular skeleton in a Chilean population

Cited by 5 publications

References 23 publications

The Prediction of Survival after Surgical Management of Bone Metastases of the Extremities—A Comparison of Prognostic Models

The Prediction of Survival after Surgical Management of Bone Metastases of the Extremities—A Comparison of Prognostic Models

Comparison of survival prediction models for bone metastases of the extremities following surgery

Treatment of Bone Metastasis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About