Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32860536›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2021

Patient outcomes in idiopathic scoliosis are associated with biological endophenotypes: 2020 SOSORT award winner.

Marie Beauséjour, François Vaillancourt, Marie-Yvonne Akoume, Anita Franco, Stefan Parent, Hubert Labelle, Julie Joncas, Frédérique Desbiens-Blais, Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, Marjolaine Roy-Beaudry and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Marie BeauséjourSainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
François VaillancourtSainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Marie-Yvonne AkoumeDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Faculty of Medicine, Université des Sciences de la Santé (USS) de Libreville, Libreville, Gabon.
Anita FrancoViscogliosi Laboratory in Molecular Genetics of Musculoskeletal Diseases, Sainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Stefan ParentSainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Hubert LabelleSainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Julie JoncasSainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Frédérique Desbiens-BlaisSainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jean-Marc Mac-ThiongSainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Marjolaine Roy-BeaudrySainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Carl-Éric AubinSainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Alain MoreauViscogliosi Laboratory in Molecular Genetics of Musculoskeletal Diseases, Sainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada. alain.moreau@recherche-ste-justine.qc.ca.

Funding

The Canadian Institutes of Health Research PP2-99466
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBracing is the treatment of choice for idiopathic scoliosis (IS), unfortunately factors underlying brace response remain unknown. Clinicians are currently unable to identify patients who may benefit from bracing, and therefore, better molecular stratification is critically needed. The aim of this study is to evaluate IS patient outcomes at skeletal maturity in relation to biological endophenotypes, and determine specific endophenotypes associated to differential bracing outcomes. This is a retrospective cohort with secondary cross-sectional comparative studies.

methodsClinical and radiological data were collected from 563 IS patients, stratified into biological endophenotypes (FG1, FG2, FG3) based on a cell-based test. Measured outcomes were maximum Cobb angle at skeletal maturity, and if severe, spinal deformity (≥ 45°) or surgery was attained. Treatment success/failure was determined by standard progression thresholds (Cobb ≥ 45° or surgery; Cobb angle progression ≥ 6°). Multivariable analyses were performed to evaluate associations between endophenotypes and clinical outcome.

resultsHigher Cobb angles at maturity for FG1 and FG2 patients were observed (p = 0.056 and p = 0.05), with increased likelihood of ≥ 45° and/or surgery for FG1 (OR = 2.181 [1.002-4.749] and FG2 (OR = 2.141 [1.038-4.413]) compared to FG3. FG3 was 9.31 [2.58-33.61] and 5.63 [2.11-15.05] times more likely for bracing success at treatment termination and based on the < 6° progression criterion, respectively, compared to FG1.

conclusionAssociations between biological endophenotypes and outcomes suggest differences in progression and/or bracing response among IS patients. Outcomes were most favorable in FG3 patients. The results pave the way for establishing personalized treatments, distinguishing who may benefit or not from treatment.

Indexed as

Awards and PrizesScoliosisBracesCross-Sectional StudiesDisease ProgressionEndophenotypesHumansRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBiological endophenotypesBracingIdiopathic scoliosisSpinal deformity progressionTreatment outcome

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.