Lessons Learned. Pregabalin is a medication that can decrease neuronal hyperexcitability, relieve neuropathic pain, and reach stable plasma levels after a titration period of only a few days.Its use during oxaliplatin infusions was not able to decrease the incidence of chronic, oxalipaltin‐related neuropathic pain, compared with placebo.Background.Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) receiving oxaliplatin (OXA) develop acute and chronic painful oxaliplatin‐induced peripheral neuropathy (OXAIPN). Acute and chronic OXA‐related neuropathies have different pathophysiological bases, but both lead to a common phenomenon: central sensitization (CS) of nociceptive neuronal networks, leading to increased sensitivity (hyperlgesia, allodynia) in the somatosensory system, the common ground of chronic neuropathic pain. Because CS is related to increased risk of painful OXAIPN, we hypothesized that preemptive use of the anti‐hyperalgesic drug pregabaline (known to decrease CS) during OXA infusions would decrease the incidence of chronic OXAIPN.Methods.Pain‐free, chemotherapy‐naïve CRC patients receiving at least one cycle of modified‐FLOX [5‐FU(500 mg/m2)+leucovorin(20 mg/m2)/week for] 6 weeks+oxaliplatin(85 mg/m2) at weeks 1‐3‐5 every 8 weeks] were randomized (1:1) into the study. Patients received either pregabalin or placebo for 3 days before and 3 days after each OXA infusion and were followed for up to 6 months. Clinical assessments were performed at baseline, at the end of chemotherapy, and after the follow‐up period. The main outcome was average pain at the last visit assessed by the visual analogic scale (0–10) item of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Secondary endpoints were presence of neuropathic pain according to the Douleur Neuropathique‐4 (DN‐4), pain dimensions (short‐ form McGill Pain Questionnaire [MPQ]), Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI), and changes in nerve conduction studies (NCS) and side effect profile.Results.One hundred ninety‐nine patients (57.0 ± 10.7 years old, 98 female, 101 male) were randomized. Data from 56 patients were not included in the analyses (as they did not receive at least one full cycle of modified FLOX). Data from 78 patients in the pregabalin group and 65 patients in the placebo group were retained for analyses. At the last visit, pain intensity in the pregabalin group was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.79–1.26), and 0.85 (95% CI = 0.64–1.06) in the placebo group, which did not reach significance. Scores from the BPI, MPQ, DN‐4, NPSI, and NCS and side‐effect profiles and incidence of death did not differ between groups. Quality of life (QoL) score did not differ between groups (placebo = 76.9 ± 23.1, pregabalin group 79.4 ± 20.6). Mood scores were not significantly different between groups (placebo 9.7 [8.1–11.2]; pregabalin 6.8 [5.6–8.0]).Conclusion.The preemptive use of pregabalin during OXA infusions was safe, but did not decrease the incidence of chronic pain related to OXAIPN.

OBJECTIVEThe purpose of this study was to investigate the spectrum of current treatment protocols for managing newly diagnosed chordoma of the mobile spine and sacrum.METHODSA survey on the treatment of spinal chordoma was distributed electronically to members of the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor, including neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons, and radiation oncologists from North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Survey participants were pre-identified clinicians from centers with expertise in the treatment of spinal tumors. The suvey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics.RESULTSThirty-nine of 43 (91%) participants completed the survey. Most (80%) indicated that they favor en bloc resection without preoperative neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT) when en bloc resection is feasible with acceptable morbidity. The main area of disagreement was with the role of postoperative RT, where 41% preferred giving RT only if positive margins were achieved and 38% preferred giving RT irrespective of margin status. When en bloc resection would result in significant morbidity, 33% preferred planned intralesional resection followed by RT, and 33% preferred giving neoadjuvant RT prior to surgery. In total, 8 treatment protocols were identified: 3 in which en bloc resection is feasible with acceptable morbidity and 5 in which en bloc resection would result in significant morbidity.CONCLUSIONSThe results confirm that there is treatment variability across centers worldwide for managing newly diagnosed chordoma of the mobile spine and sacrum. This information will be used to design an international prospective cohort study to determine the most appropriate treatment strategy for patients with spinal chordoma.

OBJECTIVE: To verify the frequency of late radiological com-plications in spinal fixation surgeries performed without fu-sion in oncological patientsMETHODS: This is a retrospective analysis analysing failure in cases of non-fused vertebral fixation in an oncology reference hospital between 2009 and 2014. Failure was defined as implant loosening or bre-akage, as well as new angular or translation deformitiesRESULTS: One hundred and five cases were analyzed. The most common site of primary tumor was the breast and the most common place of metastasis was the thoracic spine. The average follow-up was 22.7 months. Nine cases (8%) of failure were reported, with an average time until failure of 9.5 months. The most common failure was implant loosening. No case required further surgeryCONCLUSION: The occurrence of failure was not different than that reported for fused cases. The time interval until failure was higher than the median of survival of the majority (88%) of cases. Level of Evidence IV, Therapeutic Study.

OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the interobserver agreement for the Neoplastic Spine Instability Score (SINS) among spine surgeons with or without experience in vertebral metastasis treatment and physicians in other specialties.METHODS:Case descriptions were produced based on the medical records of 40 patients with vertebral metastases. The descriptions were then published online. Physicians were invited to evaluate the descriptions by answering questions according to the Neoplastic Spine Instability Score (SINS). The agreement among physicians was calculated using the kappa coefficient.RESULTS:Seventeen physicians agreed to participate: three highly experienced spine surgeons, seven less-experienced spine surgeons, three surgeons of other specialties, and four general practitioners (n = 17). The agreement for the final SINS score among all participants was fair, and it varied according to the SINS component. The agreement was substantial for the spine location only. The agreement was higher among experienced surgeons. The agreement was nearly perfect for spinal location among the spine surgeons who were highly experienced in vertebral metastases.CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates that the experience of the evaluator has an impact on SINS scale classification. The interobserver agreement was only fair among physicians who were not spine surgeons and among spine surgeons who were not experienced in the treatment of vertebral metastases, which may limit the use of the SINS scale for the screening of unstable lesions by less-experienced evaluators.