Survival in Patients Operated on for Pathologic Fracture: Implications for End-of-Life Orthopedic Care Saminathan S. Nathan, John H. Healey, Danilo Mellano, Bang Hoang, Isobel Lewis, Carol D. Morris, Edward A. Athanasian, and Patrick J. Boland A B S T R A C T 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, num- ber 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 character- istic 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. J Clin Oncol 23:6072-6082. © 2005 by American Society of Clinical Oncology INTRODUCTION Decisions regarding potential surgery for met- astatic disease require reliable data about patient survival and quality of life. This inves- tigation evaluated factors that have been cited as important correlates to patient post- operative survival and compared them to sur- geon preoperative survival estimates. This information is sought for many reasons. It helps to set appropriate expecta- tions for the patient, family, and medical staff. Data about cost, risk, and quality of life are often conflicting, but if these data could be weighed properly, it would help to define the most appropriate treatment for patients with metastatic bone disease. 1-7 Utility analysis is an effective method to evaluate From the Orthopaedic Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York; and Weill Medical College of Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Submitted August 17, 2004; accepted April 22, 2005. 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 con- flicts of interest are found at the end of this article. Address reprint requests to Patrick J. Boland, MD, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021; e-mail: bolandp@mskcc.org. © 2005 by American Society of Clinical Oncology 0732-183X/05/2325-6072/$20.00 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.08.104 JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY O R I G I N A L R E P O R T VOLUME 23  NUMBER 25  SEPTEMBER 1 2005 6072 Downloaded from jco.ascopubs.org on February 13, 2016. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright © 2005 American Society of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved.