Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Oct;3(5):1359-67.
doi: 10.1002/cam4.292. Epub 2014 Jul 10.

New Prognostic Factors and Scoring System for Patients With Skeletal Metastasis

Free PMC article

New Prognostic Factors and Scoring System for Patients With Skeletal Metastasis

Hirohisa Katagiri et al. Cancer Med. .
Free PMC article


The aim of this study was to update a previous scoring system for patients with skeletal metastases, that was proposed by Katagiri et al. in 2005, by introducing a new factor (laboratory data) and analyzing a new patient cohort. Between January 2005 and January 2008, we treated 808 patients with symptomatic skeletal metastases. They were prospectively registered regardless of their treatments, and the last follow-up evaluation was performed in 2012. There were 441 male and 367 female patients with a median age of 64 years. Of these patients, 749 were treated nonsurgically while the remaining 59 underwent surgery for skeletal metastasis. A multivariate analysis was conducted using the Cox proportional hazards model. We identified six significant prognostic factors for survival, namely, the primary lesion, visceral or cerebral metastases, abnormal laboratory data, poor performance status, previous chemotherapy, and multiple skeletal metastases. The first three factors had a larger impact than the remaining three. The prognostic score was calculated by adding together all the scores for individual factors. With a prognostic score of ≥7, the survival rate was 27% at 6 months, and only 6% at 1 year. In contrast, patients with a prognostic score of ≤3 had a survival rate of 91% at 1 year, and 78% at 2 years. Comparing the revised system with the previous one, there was a significantly lower number of wrongly predicted patients using the revised system. This revised scoring system was able to predict the survival rates of patients with skeletal metastases more accurately than the previous system and may be useful for selecting an optimal treatment.

Keywords: Laboratory data; multivariate analysis; prognostic factor; prognostic scoring system; skeletal metastasis.


Figure 1
Figure 1
Kaplan–Meier cumulative survival rate for the 808 patients.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Kaplan–Meier survival curves for different prognostic scores. Values in parentheses and brackets indicate the prognostic scores and the number of patients, respectively. Survival rates deteriorate with increase in the prognostic scores.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Kaplan–Meier survival curves for patients with prognostic scores of 0–3 (low-risk group), 4–6 (intermediate-risk group), and 7–10 (high-risk group). The rates of survival for these three groups are significantly different.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 38 articles

See all "Cited by" articles


    1. van der Linden YM, Steenland E, van Houwelingen HC, Post WJ, Oei B, Marijnen CA, et al. Dutch Bone Metastasis Study Group: patients with a favourable prognosis are equally palliated with single and multiple fraction radiotherapy: results on survival in the Dutch Bone Metastasis Study. Radiother. Oncol. 2006;78:245–253. - PubMed
    1. Rades D, Stalpers LJ, Veninga T, Schulte R, Hoskin PJ, Obralic N, et al. Evaluation of 5 radiation schedules and prognostic factors for metastatic spinal cord compression. J. Clin. Oncol. 2005;23:3366–3375. - PubMed
    1. Rades D, Fehlauer F, Schulte R, Veninga T, Stalpers LJ, Basic H, et al. Prognostic factors for local control and survival after radiotherapy of metastatic spinal cord compression. J. Clin. Oncol. 2006;24:3388–3393. - PubMed
    1. Rompe JD, Eysel P, Hopf C, Heine J. Metastatic instability at the proximal end of the femur: comparison of endoprosthetic replacement and plate osteosynthesis. Arch. Orthop. Trauma Surg. 1994;113:260–264. - PubMed
    1. Wedin R, Bauer HC. Surgical treatment of skeletal metastatic lesions of the proximal femur: endoprosthesis or reconstruction nail? J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 2005;87:1653–1657. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources