ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2026
Tumor-specific outcomes in spinal metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Spinal metastases (SMs) are common, debilitating, and often associated with severe pain and neurologic disability. Treatment decisions hinge on anticipated life expectancy, yet survival and recurrence outcomes remain poorly defined across primary tumor types. This study is to systematically review and meta-analyze outcomes of SM stratified by primary cancer, with focus on survival, recurrence, and treatment patterns. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, and Embase (Ovid) were searched from inception to April 16, 2025. Eligible studies reported outcomes in patients with SM from any primary tumor. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for survival and recurrence. Study quality was assessed with ROBINS-I. Results: One hundred twenty-three studies (38,780 patients) across nine primary tumors were included; 61 studies (9,222 patients) contributed to meta-analysis. Lung cancer accounted for the largest cohort (n=26,918), followed by gynecologic (n=3,679), breast (n=1,961), and renal (n=1,732). Pooled 1-year survival ranged from 46% in lung SM to 74% in prostate SM. Median survival was shortest for liver (8.2 months) and lung (12.1 months), and longest for thyroid (59.9 months) and melanoma (57.9 months). Recurrence rates were consistently low (<5%), though thyroid SM carried a slightly higher long-term risk. Conclusions: Outcomes in SMs are strongly influenced by primary tumor biology. These data provide benchmarks for clinical decision-making and highlight the need for prospective studies integrating molecular and functional outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.