Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Other Publications
    • ijss

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
International Journal of Spine Surgery
  • My alerts
International Journal of Spine Surgery

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Follow ijss on Twitter
  • Visit ijss on Facebook
Research ArticleOther and Special Categories

Artificial Intelligence and Predictive Modeling in Spinal Oncology: A Narrative Review

Rene Harmen Kuijten, Hester Zijlstra, Olivier Quinten Groot and Joseph Hasbrouck Schwab
International Journal of Spine Surgery June 2023, 17 (S1) S45-S56; DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/8500
Rene Harmen Kuijten
1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
2 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan, The Netherlands
BSᴄ
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: rkuijten@mgh.harvard.edu rhkuijten@gmail.com
Hester Zijlstra
1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
2 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan, The Netherlands
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Olivier Quinten Groot
1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
2 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan, The Netherlands
MD, PHD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joseph Hasbrouck Schwab
1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
MD, MS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Supplementary Materials
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Gartner’s hype cycle. Source: Reprinted with permission from Oosterhoff JHF, Doornberg JN. Artificial intelligence in orthopaedics: false hope or not? A narrative review along the line of Gartner’s hype cycle. EFORT Open Rev. 2020;5(10):593–603. © 2020 Oosterhoff and Doornerg.

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    The first 3 stages in model development: preparation, development, and internal validation. TRIPOD, transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis; PROBAST, prediction model risk of bias assessment tool; EHR, electronic health record.

  • Figure 3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3

    The last 3 stages in model development: presentation, external validation, and implementation. TRIPOD, transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis; PROBAST, prediction model risk of bias assessment tool; EHR, electronic health record.

  • Figure 4
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4

    Overview of validation measures. C-statistic, concordance statistic; AUC, area under the curve; ROC, receiver operating characteristic.

  • Figure 5
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5

    Model specification. With a random forest algorithm, we created many different predictor sets (sets with different input variables) which we tested with 10-fold cross-validation to find the optimal set of predictors. This technique fits the model 10 times, with each fit being performed on a training set of a different 90% of the data with the remaining 10% as a holdout set for validation. Each fit produces a performance metric, and the average of all these fits results in the average performance of a predictor set.

  • Figure 6
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6

    Model estimation. For SORG-MLA, we used 5 different models: random forests, stochastic gradient boosting, neural network, support vector machine, and penalized logistic regression. SORG-MLA, the Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine learning algorithms.

  • Figure 7
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7

    Calibration: calibration plot of SORG-MLA predicting 90-d and 1-y mortality at (A) internal validation and (B) external validation (Taiwan). Comparing these plots demonstrates that SORG-MLA performs differently in other populations, highlighting the importance of external validation. SORG-MLA, the Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine learning algorithms. Source: Reprinted from with permission from The Spine Journal, Vol 21, Yang J-J, Chen C-W, Fourman MS, et al, International external validation of the SORG machine learning algorithms for predicting 90-day and one-year survival of patients with spine metastases using a Taiwanese cohort, 1670-1678, Copyright 2021, with permission from Elsevier.56

  • Figure 8
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8

    Decision curve analysis: decision curve of SORG-MLA predicting 90-d and 1-y mortality at external validation. SORG-MLA, the Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine learning algorithms. Source: Reprinted from The Spine Journal, Vol 21, Shah AA, Karhade AV, Park HY, et al, Updated external validation of the SORG machine learning algorithms for prediction of ninety-day and one-year mortality after surgery for spinal metastasis, 1679–1686, Copyright 2021, with permission from Elsevier.57

Tables

  • Figures
  • Supplementary Materials
    • View popup
    Table

    External validations of SORG-MLA predicting 90-d and 1-y mortality.

    StudyInstitution, City, CountryPatientsCalibration: InterceptCalibration: SlopeDiscriminationBrier Score ModelBrier Score NullDecision Curve Analysis Performed
    Karhade et al, 202054 John Hopkins University, School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA176
     90-d Mortality−0.100.640.750.1570.176Yes
     1-y Mortality0.430.770.770.1990.246Yes
    Bongers et al, 202055 Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA200
     90-d Mortality−0.070.640.810.170.20Yes
     1-y Mortality0.570.850.840.160.23Yes
    Yang et al, 202156 National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan427
     90-d Mortality0.810.510.730.170.19Yes
     1-y Mortality0.080.590.740.200.24Yes
    Shah et al, 202157 David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, USA298
     90-d Mortality−0.650.800.840.130.17Yes
     1-y Mortality0.081.200.900.130.25Yes
    • Abbreviation: UCLA, University of California, Los Angeles.

Supplementary Materials

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Figure S1.

    [8500supp001.docx]

  • Figure S2.

    [8500supp002.jpg]

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

International Journal of Spine Surgery: 17 (S1)
International Journal of Spine Surgery
Vol. 17, Issue S1
1 Jun 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on International Journal of Spine Surgery.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Artificial Intelligence and Predictive Modeling in Spinal Oncology: A Narrative Review
(Your Name) has sent you a message from International Journal of Spine Surgery
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the International Journal of Spine Surgery web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Artificial Intelligence and Predictive Modeling in Spinal Oncology: A Narrative Review
Rene Harmen Kuijten, Hester Zijlstra, Olivier Quinten Groot, Joseph Hasbrouck Schwab
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jun 2023, 17 (S1) S45-S56; DOI: 10.14444/8500

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Artificial Intelligence and Predictive Modeling in Spinal Oncology: A Narrative Review
Rene Harmen Kuijten, Hester Zijlstra, Olivier Quinten Groot, Joseph Hasbrouck Schwab
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jun 2023, 17 (S1) S45-S56; DOI: 10.14444/8500
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Development, Validation, and Implementation of Prediction Models
    • Recommendations and Challenges
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Patient Satisfaction Following Lumbar Fusion Is Associated With Functional Status and Pain More Than the Attainment of Minimal Clinically Important Difference: Implications for Value-Based Medicine
  • Prone Position for Preoperative Planning in Lumbar Endoscopic and Minimally Invasive Fusion Procedures: Insights From a Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study
  • Radiation Exposure Analysis on 274 Patients With Vertebral Augmentation Using the Surgivisio Intraoperative Navigation System
Show more Other and Special Categories

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • artificial intelligence
  • machine learning
  • orthopedic surgery
  • prediction tools
  • clinical decision support
  • spinal oncology

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Content
  • Archive

More Information

  • About IJSS
  • About ISASS
  • Privacy Policy

More

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Feedback

Other Services

  • Author Instructions
  • Join ISASS
  • Reprints & Permissions

© 2025 International Journal of Spine Surgery

International Journal of Spine Surgery Online ISSN: 2211-4599

Powered by HighWire