Analysis of bone metastasis multidisciplinary team meeting activity in a university hospital: patient profiles, prognostic factors
5 affiliations
- 1Orthopaedic Surgery Unit, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, 47, Boulevard de l’hôpital, Paris, 75013 France
- 2Faculté de Médecine, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France
- 3Orthopaedic Surgery Unit, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, 20, rue Leblanc, Paris, 75015 France
- 4Université Paris-Cité, Paris, France
- 5Department of Medical Oncology, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, 47, Boulevard de l’hôpital, Paris, 75013 France
Abstract
Background: Bone metastases a represent a challenge in the oncological management of patients as the complications can be severe, as fractures or neurological impairment in spinal metastases. Recommendations on the management of bone metastases are constantly being improved. However, there are few recent prognostic data on bone metastases in the literature to assess the impact of advances in oncological treatment on patient survival.
Hypothesis: An analysis of the activity of an MDT (Multidisciplinary Team Meeting) over 2 years could provide recent data regarding prognosis of patients presenting with bone metastasis.
Materials and methods: This is a retrospective study of patients presented at an MDT from 2020 to 2021 in a university hospital. The objectives were to describe a representative cohort of patients with bone metastasis and the therapeutic decisions made (cementoplasty/radiotherapy/surgery) and patient survival according to tumor type, location of bone metastasis (spine/pelvis/other).
Results: Nine hundred ninety-two presentations of 630 patients were analyzed. The most frequent primary cancer was bronchopulmonary, followed by breast, myeloma, prostate and thyroid. 85% of patients had a spinal lesion, 51% a pelvic lesion and 52% another bone site. 49% of patients underwent radiotherapy, 39% cementoplasty and 22% surgery. Median survival was 17 months. Bronchopulmonary and prostate tumors patients had a poorer prognosis. 37% of operated patients died within 6 months of follow-up.
Conclusion: This study provides a description of bone MDT meeting activity in a university hospital setting, and gives a picture of the volume of activity, prognostic factors and decisions taken with significant recourse to cementoplasty, compared with older series. The presence of bone metastases still represents a turning point in the progression of oncological diseases.
Level of evidence: IV, retrospective study.
Graphical Abstract:
Related
- Prognostic factors in thyroid cancer with lung-only metastasis: SEER-based retrospective study
- Stemness-Associated Biomarkers in Breast Cancer Liver Metastasis: Hepatic Adaptation, Prognostic Relevance, and Monitoring
- Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of Ommaya reservoir-based intrathecal chemotherapy in lung cancer leptomeningeal metastasis: a retrospective cohort study
- Validity and prognostic value of the University of California, San Diego dyspnea questionnaire in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis: a multicenter prospective study
- Metabolic syndrome prevalence and correlates among university and hospital staff in southwestern Uganda
BibTeX
@article{chanzy2026analysis,
title = {{Analysis of bone metastasis multidisciplinary team meeting activity in a university hospital: patient profiles, prognostic factors}},
author = {Paul Chanzy and Marc Khalifé and Laetitia Morardet and Hugues Pascal-Moussellard and Raphael Bonaccorsi and Laura Marie-Hardy},
journal = {World Journal of Surgical Oncology},
year = {2026},
month = aug,
doi = {10.1186/s12957-026-04531-z},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-026-04531-z},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Analysis of bone metastasis multidisciplinary team meeting activity in a university hospital: patient profiles, prognostic factors
AU - Paul Chanzy
AU - Marc Khalifé
AU - Laetitia Morardet
AU - Hugues Pascal-Moussellard
AU - Raphael Bonaccorsi
AU - Laura Marie-Hardy
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/08/01
JO - World Journal of Surgical Oncology
DO - 10.1186/s12957-026-04531-z
UR - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-026-04531-z
AB - Background: Bone metastases a represent a challenge in the oncological management of patients as the complications can be severe, as fractures or neurological impairment in spinal metastases. Recommendations on the management of bone metastases are constantly being improved. However, there are few recent prognostic data on bone metastases in the literature to assess the impact of advances in oncological treatment on patient survival. Hypothesis: An analysis of the activity of an MDT (Multidisciplinary Team Meeting) over 2 years could provide recent data regarding prognosis of patients presenting with bone metastasis. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective study of patients presented at an MDT from 2020 to 2021 in a university hospital. The objectives were to describe a representative cohort of patients with bone metastasis and the therapeutic decisions made (cementoplasty/radiotherapy/surgery) and patient survival according to tumor type, location of bone metastasis (spine/pelvis/other). Results: Nine hundred ninety-two presentations of 630 patients were analyzed. The most frequent primary cancer was bronchopulmonary, followed by breast, myeloma, prostate and thyroid. 85% of patients had a spinal lesion, 51% a pelvic lesion and 52% another bone site. 49% of patients underwent radiotherapy, 39% cementoplasty and 22% surgery. Median survival was 17 months. Bronchopulmonary and prostate tumors patients had a poorer prognosis. 37% of operated patients died within 6 months of follow-up. Conclusion: This study provides a description of bone MDT meeting activity in a university hospital setting, and gives a picture of the volume of activity, prognostic factors and decisions taken with significant recourse to cementoplasty, compared with older series. The presence of bone metastases still represents a turning point in the progression of oncological diseases. Level of evidence: IV, retrospective study. Graphical Abstract:
SN - 1477-7819
ER -