This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nathan, S. S. Articles by Boland, P. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nathan, S. S. Articles by Boland, P. J. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Survival in Patients Operated on for Pathologic Fracture: Implications for End-of-Life Orthopedic Care

From the Orthopaedic Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York; and Weill Medical College of Cornell University, Ithaca, NY

Address reprint requests to Patrick J. Boland, MD, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021; e-mail: bolandp{at}mskcc.org

PURPOSE: Life expectancy is routinely used as part of the decision-making process in deciding the value of surgery for the treatment of bone metastases. We sought to investigate the validity of frequently used indices in the prognostication of survival in patients with metastatic bone disease.

METHODS: The study prospectively assessed 191 patients who underwent surgery for metastatic bone disease. Diagnostic, staging, nutritional, and hematologic parameters cited to be related to life expectancy were evaluated. Preoperatively, the surgeon recorded an estimate of projected life expectancy for each patient. The time until death was recorded.

RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier survival analyses indicated that the survival estimate, primary diagnosis, use of systemic therapy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, number of bone metastases, presence of visceral metastases, and serum hemoglobin, albumin, and lymphocyte counts were significant for predicting survival (P < .004). Cox regression analysis indicated that the independently significant predictors of survival were diagnosis (P < .006), ECOG performance status (P < .04), number of bone metastases (P < .008), presence of visceral metastases (P < .03), hemoglobin count (P < .009), and survival estimate (P < .00005). Diagnosis, ECOG performance status, and visceral metastases covaried with surgeon survival estimate. Linear regression and receiver-operator characteristic assessment confirmed that clinician estimation was the most accurate predictor of survival, followed by hemoglobin count, number of visceral metastases, ECOG performance status, primary diagnosis, and number of bone metastases. Nevertheless, survival estimate was accurate in predicting actual survival in only 33 (18%) of 181 patients.

CONCLUSION: A better means of prognostication is needed. In this article, we present a sliding scale for this purpose.

Supported by grants from the Biomet Oncology Fellowship and the Pearlman Limb Preservation Fund.

Presented in part at the 12th International Symposium of Limb Salvage, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, September 15-16, 2003.

This work is original and solely owned by the authors and their institution.

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found at the end of this article.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Bickels, S. Dadia, and Z. Lidar Surgical Management of Metastatic Bone Disease J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., June 1, 2009; 91(6): 1503 - 1516. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. S. Biermann, G. E. Holt, V. O. Lewis, H. S. Schwartz, and M. J. Yaszemski Metastatic Bone Disease: Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., June 1, 2009; 91(6): 1518 - 1530. [Full Text] [PDF]