Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40450134›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 Society2025

Oxford spinal sarcoma service: excellent oncological outcomes with a centralised multidisciplinary approach to primary spinal tumour care.

Jonathan Jiong Hao Tan, Euan Stirling, Radek Kaiser, Gerard Mawhinney, Dominique Rothenfluh, Yiong Huak Chan, Shilin Wang, Ruxandra Mihai, Stana Bojanic, Jeremy Reynolds

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, 2025. 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. 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

10 authors.

Jonathan Jiong Hao TanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Hospital, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore. jonathan_jh_tan@nuhs.edu.sg.
Euan StirlingOxford Spinal Surgery Unit, Oxford University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Radek KaiserOxford Spinal Surgery Unit, Oxford University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Gerard MawhinneyOxford Spinal Surgery Unit, Oxford University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Dominique RothenfluhDepartment of Spinal Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Yiong Huak ChanBiostatistics Unit, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Shilin WangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Hospital, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.
Ruxandra MihaiDepartment of Anaesthesia, Oxford University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Stana BojanicDepartment of Neurosurgery, Oxford University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Jeremy ReynoldsOxford Spinal Surgery Unit, Oxford University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe Oxford Spinal Sarcoma Service is a designated primary spinal tumour referral centre in the United Kingdom serving over ten million residents. We report the outcomes of this centralised approach to primary spinal tumour care.

methodsThis is a retrospective review of surgically treated primary spinal tumour patients during 2008-2022. Patients were classified based on tumour resection margins - Enneking Appropriate (EA) or Enneking Inappropriate (EI). Outcomes studied include local recurrence and overall survival.

results119 patients were included. 86/119(72%) cases involved the mobile spine; 33/119(28%), the sacrum. 96/119(81%) patients were virgin cases. EA margins were achieved in 68%(81/119) of cases. There were 38/119(32%) EI patients; 23/38(61%) were non-virgin cases which precluded EA resection. EA resection was achieved 90%(81/90) of the time when attempted. In EA patients with mobile spine tumours, local recurrence rate was 2%(1/51), vs. 18%(5/28) in EA patients with sacral tumours, 20%(7/35) in EI patients with mobile spine tumours, and 80%(4/5) in EI patients with sacral tumours. Mean local recurrence-free survival was 5.2(range 1-13.5) years; local recurrence rate, 18.5%(22/119). Mortality rate was 21.0%(25/119); mean overall survival was 5.63(range 1-13.5) years post-surgery. On multivariate analysis, EI margins and post-operative systemic treatment were significant predictors for local recurrence; presence of metastases and pre-operative systemic therapy, significant predictors for mortality.

conclusionCentralisation of primary spinal tumour care has led to excellent oncological results comparable to most large spinal tumour centres. In mobile spine primary tumours where EA margins were achieved, our local recurrence rate (2.0%) is one of the lowest reported in literature.

Indexed as

SarcomaSpinal NeoplasmsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMargins of ExcisionMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUnited KingdomYoung AdultMultidisciplinary careOncologyOutcomesPrimary spinal tumoursQuarternary referral centreRecurrenceSpinal sarcomasSpinal surgerySurvival

Identifiers

PMID40450134

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.