Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34677661›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2021

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

Patricio A Alfaro, Javier Delgado, Andrés Dumas, Cecilia Mesa, Orlando Wevar, Carlos Herrera, Fabian Padilla, Eduardo Botello

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Treatment of Bone Metastasis.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Patricio A AlfaroHospital Traumatológico de Concepción, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Concepción, San Martin 1580, Concepción, Chile. patricioalfaro@udec.cl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4837-1938
Javier DelgadoHospital Base de Valdivia, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Austral, Valdivia, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2386-1949
Andrés DumasOrthopedic Oncology Department, Instituto Traumatológico, Santiago, Chile.
Cecilia MesaFaculty of Medicine, Universidad Católica del Maule, Talca, Chile.
Orlando WevarOrthopedic Oncology Department, Instituto Traumatológico, Santiago, Chile.
Carlos HerreraHospital Traumatológico de Concepción, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Concepción, San Martin 1580, Concepción, Chile.
Fabian PadillaHospital Traumatológico de Concepción, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Concepción, San Martin 1580, Concepción, Chile.
Eduardo BotelloHospital Clínico Universidad Católica, Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
University of Concepción · CLInstituto Nacional del Tórax · CLAustral University of Chile · CLCatholic University of the Maule · CLPontificia Universidad Católica de Chile · CL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSeveral preoperation prognosis models used on the treatment of metastatic bone disease on appendicular skeleton have been devised. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of different survival prognostic models on patients with metastatic bone disease in long bones in a Chilean population.

methodsThis is a multicentric retrospective study. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 136 patients who were confirmed with metastatic bone disease of the appendicular skeleton and who were treated surgically from 2016 to 2019. The minimum follow-up time was 12 months. All patients were assessed using four appendicular metastatic bone disease scoring systems. A preoperative predicted survival time for all 136 patients was retrospectively calculated making use of the revised Katagiri, PathFx, Optimodel and IOR score model.

resultsThe PathFx model demonstrated an accuracy at predicting 3 (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.61) and 6-month (AUC = 0.65) survival time after surgical management. IOR score model demonstrated an accuracy at predicting 12-month survival time (AUC = 0.64). The survival rate reached the 44% in a year. The median survival time to death or last follow-up time was 14.9 months (SD ± 15).

conclusionPathFx score model demonstrated the highest accuracy at predicting a survival time of 3 and 6 months. IOR score model was the most accurate measure at predicting a survival time of 12-months. To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting a comparative analysis of metastatic bone disease with predicting models in a country located in Latin America. PathFx's and IOR score models are the ones to be used in the Chilean population as the predictive models in metastatic bone disease of the appendicular skeleton.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsArea Under CurveBone and BonesHumansPrognosisRetrospective StudiesImpending and pathologic fracturesMetastatic bone diseaseMetastatic cancerPrognostic scoreSkeletal metastases

Identifiers

PMID34677661
OpenAlexW3206305674

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.