ArticleJournal of surgical oncology2022
Fifty-year history of the evolution of spinal metastatic disease management.
Article in Journal of surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Surgical management of spinal metastases].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Surgical Treatment of Spinal Metastases-A Retrospective Single-Center Study of 268 Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Application of the NSE score (Neurology-Stability-Epidural compression assessment) to establish the need for surgery in spinal metastases of elderly patients: a multicenter investigation.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 · 2024Article
- Spinal Metastases of the Vertebrae: Three Main Categories of Pain.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The Efficacy of Cervical Pedicle Screw Is Enhanced When Used With 5.5-mm Rods for Metastatic Cervical Spinal Tumor Surgery.Neurospine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Spine metastases are a significant source of morbidity in oncology. Treatment of these spine metastases largely remains palliative, but advances over the past 50 years have improved the effectiveness of interventions for preserving functional status and obtaining local control while minimizing morbidity. While the field began with conventional external beam radiation as the primary treatment modality, a series of paradigm shifts and technological advances in the 2000s led to a change in treatment patterns. These advances allowed for an increased role of surgical decompression of neural elements, a shift in the stereotactic capabilities of radiation oncologists, and an improved understanding of the radiobiology of metastatic disease. The result was improved local control while minimizing treatment morbidity. These advances fit within the larger framework of metastatic spine tumor management known as the Neurologic, Oncologic, Mechanical, and Systemic disease decision framework. This dynamic framework takes into account the neurological function of the patient, the radiobiology of their tumor, their degree of mechanical instability, and their systemic disease control and treatment options to help determine appropriate interventions based on the individual patient. Herein, we describe the 50-year evolution of metastatic spine tumor management and the impact of various advances on the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.