Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 343

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spine Disease: What Are the Options, Indications, and Outcomes?

Gerszten, Peter C., Mendel, Ehud, Yamada, Yoshiya·2009·Spine

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review. OBJECTIVE: To determine the options, indications, and outcomes for conventional radiotherapy and radiosurgery for metastatic spine disease. METHODS: Three research questions were determined through a consensus among a multidisciplinary panel of spine oncology experts. A systematic review of the literature was conducted regarding radiotherapy and radiosurgery for metastatic spine disease using PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Evidence Based Medicine Database, and a review of bibliographies of reviewed articles. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: 1. What are the clinical outcomes of the current indications for conventional radiotherapy alone and stereotactic radiosurgery for metastatic spine disease? 2. What are the current dose recommendations and fractionation schedules for conventional spine radiotherapy and stereotactic radiosurgery for metastatic spine disease? 3. What are the current known patterns of failure and complications after conventional spine radiation and stereotactic radiosurgery for metastatic spine disease? RESULTS: For conventional radiotherapy, the initial literature search yielded a total of 531 potentially relevant abstracts. Each of these abstracts was reviewed for relevance, and 62 were selected for in-depth review. Forty-nine studies met all the inclusion criteria. References from the articles included in the analysis and review articles were also examined for potential inclusion in the study. For conventional radiotherapy, 3 randomized trials (high-quality evidence), 4 prospective studies (moderate-quality evidence), and over 40 nonprospective data sets (low- or very-low-quality evidence) that included over 5000 patients in the literature were included in this review. Drawing from the same databases, a systematic search for radiosurgery yielded 195 abstracts, of which 29 met all inclusion criteria. They all represented single-institution reports (low- or very-low-quality data). No randomized data are available for spine radiosurgery. CONCLUSION: A systematic review of the available evidence suggests that conventional radiotherapy is safe and effective with good symptomatic response and local control, particularly for radiosensitive histologies. A strong recommendation can be made with moderate quality evidence that conventional fractionated radiotherapy is an appropriate initial therapy option for patients with spine metastases in cases in which no relative contraindication exists. A systematic review of the available evidence suggests that radiosurgery is safe and provides an incremental benefit over conventional radiotherapy with more durable symptomatic response and local control independent of histology, even in the setting of prior fractionated radiotherapy. A strong recommendation can be made with low-quality evidence that radiosurgery should be considered over conventional fractionated radiotherapy for the treatment of solid tumor spine metastases in the setting of oligometastatic disease and/or radioresistant histology.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/brs.0b013e3181b8b6f5

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 343

Metadata

Authors
Gerszten, P. C., Mendel, E., & Yamada, Y.
Venue
Spine
Published
2009-10
Volume
34
Issue
Supplement
Pages
S78-S92
ISSN
0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2002039079
Cited by
343
References
1
FWCI
13.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spine Disease: What Are the Options, Indications, and Outcomes? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/brs.0b013e3181b8b6f5
The paper
Gerszten, P. C., Mendel, E., & Yamada, Y. (2009). Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spine Disease: What Are the Options, Indications, and Outcomes? Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0b013e3181b8b6f5

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.