TY - JOUR
T1 - Focused versus conventional radiotherapy in spinal oncology
T2 - is there any difference in fusion rates and pseudoarthrosis?
AU - Akinduro, Oluwaseun O.
AU - De Biase, Gaetano
AU - Goyal, Anshit
AU - Meyer, Jenna H.
AU - Sandhu, Sukhwinder J.S.
AU - Kowalchuk, Roman O.
AU - Trifiletti, Daniel M.
AU - Sheehan, Jason
AU - Merrell, Kenneth W.
AU - Vora, Sujay A.
AU - Broderick, Daniel F.
AU - Clarke, Michelle J.
AU - Bydon, Mohamad
AU - McClendon, Jamal
AU - Kalani, Maziyar A.
AU - Quiñones-Hinojosa, Alfredo
AU - Abode-Iyamah, Kingsley
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2022/1
Y1 - 2022/1
N2 - Introduction: Radiotherapy is considered standard of care for adjuvant peri-operative treatment of many spinal tumors, including those with instrumented fusion. Unfortunately, radiation treatment has been linked to increased risk of pseudoarthrosis. Newer focused radiotherapy strategies with enhanced conformality could offer improved fusion rates for these patients, but this has not been confirmed. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients at three tertiary care academic institutions with primary and secondary spinal malignancies that underwent resection, instrumented fusion, and peri-operative radiotherapy. Two board certified neuro-radiologists used the Lenke fusion score to grade fusion status at 6 and 12-months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included clinical pseudoarthrosis, wound complications, the effect of radiation timing and radiobiological dose delivered, the use of photons versus protons, tumor type, tumor location, and use of autograft on fusion outcomes. Results: After review of 1252 spinal tumor patients, there were 60 patients with at least 6 months follow-up that were included in our analyses. Twenty-five of these patients received focused radiotherapy, 20 patients received conventional radiotherapy, and 15 patients were treated with protons. There was no significant difference between the groups for covariates such as smoking status, obesity, diabetes, intraoperative use of autograft, and use of peri-operative chemotherapy. There was a significantly higher rate of fusion for patients treated with focused radiotherapy compared to those treated with conventional radiotherapy at 6-months (64.0% versus 30.0%, Odds ratio: 4.15, p = 0.036) and 12-months (80.0% versus 42.1%, OR: 5.50, p = 0.022). There was a significantly higher rate of clinical pseudoarthrosis in the conventional radiotherapy cohort compared to patients in the focused radiotherapy cohort (19.1% versus 0%, p = 0.037). There was no difference in fusion outcomes for any of the secondary outcomes except for use of autograft. The use of intra-operative autograft was associated with an improved fusion at 12-months (66.7% versus 37.5%, OR: 3.33, p = 0.043). Conclusion: Focused radiotherapy may be associated with an improved rate of fusion and clinical pseudoarthrosis when compared to conventional radiation delivery strategies in patients with spinal tumors. Use of autograft at the time of surgery may be associated with improved 12-month fusion rates. Further large-scale prospective and randomized controlled studies are needed to better stratify the effects of radiation delivery modality in these patients.
AB - Introduction: Radiotherapy is considered standard of care for adjuvant peri-operative treatment of many spinal tumors, including those with instrumented fusion. Unfortunately, radiation treatment has been linked to increased risk of pseudoarthrosis. Newer focused radiotherapy strategies with enhanced conformality could offer improved fusion rates for these patients, but this has not been confirmed. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients at three tertiary care academic institutions with primary and secondary spinal malignancies that underwent resection, instrumented fusion, and peri-operative radiotherapy. Two board certified neuro-radiologists used the Lenke fusion score to grade fusion status at 6 and 12-months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included clinical pseudoarthrosis, wound complications, the effect of radiation timing and radiobiological dose delivered, the use of photons versus protons, tumor type, tumor location, and use of autograft on fusion outcomes. Results: After review of 1252 spinal tumor patients, there were 60 patients with at least 6 months follow-up that were included in our analyses. Twenty-five of these patients received focused radiotherapy, 20 patients received conventional radiotherapy, and 15 patients were treated with protons. There was no significant difference between the groups for covariates such as smoking status, obesity, diabetes, intraoperative use of autograft, and use of peri-operative chemotherapy. There was a significantly higher rate of fusion for patients treated with focused radiotherapy compared to those treated with conventional radiotherapy at 6-months (64.0% versus 30.0%, Odds ratio: 4.15, p = 0.036) and 12-months (80.0% versus 42.1%, OR: 5.50, p = 0.022). There was a significantly higher rate of clinical pseudoarthrosis in the conventional radiotherapy cohort compared to patients in the focused radiotherapy cohort (19.1% versus 0%, p = 0.037). There was no difference in fusion outcomes for any of the secondary outcomes except for use of autograft. The use of intra-operative autograft was associated with an improved fusion at 12-months (66.7% versus 37.5%, OR: 3.33, p = 0.043). Conclusion: Focused radiotherapy may be associated with an improved rate of fusion and clinical pseudoarthrosis when compared to conventional radiation delivery strategies in patients with spinal tumors. Use of autograft at the time of surgery may be associated with improved 12-month fusion rates. Further large-scale prospective and randomized controlled studies are needed to better stratify the effects of radiation delivery modality in these patients.
KW - Conventional radiotherapy
KW - External beam radiation
KW - Focused radiotherapy
KW - Non-union
KW - Pseudoarthrosis
KW - Stereotactic body radiotherapy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85122400386&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85122400386&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11060-021-03915-3
DO - 10.1007/s11060-021-03915-3
M3 - Article
C2 - 34993721
AN - SCOPUS:85122400386
SN - 0167-594X
VL - 156
SP - 329
EP - 339
JO - Journal of neuro-oncology
JF - Journal of neuro-oncology
IS - 2
ER -