Which one is a valuable surrogate for predicting survival between Tomita and Tokuhashi scores in patients with spinal metastases? A meta-analysis for diagnostic test accuracy and individual participant data analysis

Chang Hyun Lee, Chun Kee Chung, Tae Ahn Jahng, Ki jeong Kim, Chi Heon Kim, Seung Jae Hyun, Hyun Jib Kim, Sang Ryong Jeon, Ung Kyu Chang, Sun Ho Lee, Seong Hwan Moon, Haroon Majeed, Dan Zhang, Gwenaelle Gravis, Christine Wibmer, Naresh Kumar, Kyung Yun Moon, Jin Hoon Park, Emeline Tabouret, Stephane Fuentes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study is to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of Tokuhashi and Tomita scores that assures 6-month predicting survival regarded as a standard of surgical treatment. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, European PubMed central, and the Cochrane library for papers about the sensitivities and specificities of the Tokuhashi and/or Tomita scores to estimate predicting survival. Studies with cut-off values of ≥9 for Tokuhashi and ≤7 for Tomita scores based on prior studies were enrolled. Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under the curve (AUC), and the best cut-off value were calculated via meta-analysis and individual participant data analysis. Finally, 22 studies were enrolled in the meta-analysis, and 1095 patients from 8 studies were included in the individual data analysis. In the meta-analysis, the pooled sensitivity/specificity/DOR for 6-month survival were 57.7 %/76.6 %/4.70 for the Tokuhashi score and 81.8 %/47.8 %/4.93 for Tomita score. The AUC of summary receiver operating characteristic plots was 0.748 for the Tokuhashi score and 0.714 for the Tomita score. Although Tokuhashi score was more accurate than Tomita score slightly, both showed low accuracy to predict 6 months residual survival. Moreover, the best cut-off values of Tokuhashi and Tomita scores were 8 and 6, not 9 and 7, for predicting 6-month survival, respectively. Estimation of 6-month predicting survival to decide surgery in patients with spinal metastasis is quite limited by using Tokuhashi and Tomita scores alone. Tokuhashi and Tomita scores could be incorporated as part of a multidisciplinary approach or perhaps interpreted in the context of a multidisciplinary approach.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)267-275
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Neuro-Oncology
Volume123
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015 Jun 5

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Oncology
  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Cancer Research

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Which one is a valuable surrogate for predicting survival between Tomita and Tokuhashi scores in patients with spinal metastases? A meta-analysis for diagnostic test accuracy and individual participant data analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Lee, C. H., Chung, C. K., Jahng, T. A., Kim, K. J., Kim, C. H., Hyun, S. J., Kim, H. J., Jeon, S. R., Chang, U. K., Lee, S. H., Moon, S. H., Majeed, H., Zhang, D., Gravis, G., Wibmer, C., Kumar, N., Moon, K. Y., Park, J. H., Tabouret, E., & Fuentes, S. (2015). Which one is a valuable surrogate for predicting survival between Tomita and Tokuhashi scores in patients with spinal metastases? A meta-analysis for diagnostic test accuracy and individual participant data analysis. Journal of Neuro-Oncology, 123(2), 267-275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-015-1794-1