SynthesisNeurosurgical review2026
Outcomes of stereotactic radiosurgery for spine multiple myeloma-a systematic review.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal involvement in multiple myeloma (MM) commonly results in pain, vertebral instability, epidural spinal cord compression, and neurological deficits. Although conventional external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) remains the standard radiation modality because of the radiosensitive nature of MM, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has emerged as a highly conformal treatment option capable of delivering focal high-dose radiation while sparing adjacent spinal cord structures and uninvolved bone marrow. This systematic review evaluated the clinical outcomes and safety profile of SRS for spinal MM. A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies evaluating SRS for spinal MM. Extracted variables included patient demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment parameters, radiographic outcomes, pain response, neurological outcomes, local control, overall survival, and adverse events. Three retrospective studies comprising 133 patients and 181 treated spinal lesions met the inclusion criteria. Median patient age ranged from 59 to 65 years, with a slight male predominance across studies. Thoracic spine lesions represented the most treated region (55.5-67.7%). Median prescribed SRS dose was 14-16 Gy, predominantly delivered in a single fraction. Median follow-up ranged from 11.2 to 27.8 months. Local control rates ranged from 89.4 to 100%, with 6- and 12-month local control rates of 94% and 91%, respectively, in one study. Pain improvement was reported in 41-88% of treated patients/sites, with a median time to pain relief of 1.6 months in one cohort. Neurological improvement occurred in 56-71.4% of patients with preexisting deficits. Reported adverse events included vertebral compression fractures, fracture progression, pain flare, and tracheoesophageal fistula. De novo vertebral fractures ranged from 3.6 to 7%, while fracture progression ranged from 14 to 18%. SRS appears to provide excellent local control and meaningful pain and neurological improvement in patients with spinal MM, with acceptable toxicity profiles. The highly conformal nature of SRS may preserve uninvolved bone marrow and facilitate continuation of systemic therapy. However, the current evidence is limited to small retrospective studies with heterogeneous reporting, and further prospective comparative studies are needed to better define the role of SRS relative to conventional EBRT in spinal MM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42733030What 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.