• Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. · Jul 2013

    Institutional, retrospective analysis of 777 patients with brain metastases: treatment outcomes and diagnosis-specific prognostic factors.

    • Delphine Antoni, Jean-Baptiste Clavier, Marius Pop, Catherine Schumacher, François Lefebvre, and Georges Noël.
    • Radiotherapy Department, Paul Strauss Cancer Center, Strasbourg, France. Dantoni@strasbourg.unicancer.fr
    • Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2013 Jul 15; 86 (4): 630-7.

    PurposeTo retrospectively evaluate the prognostic factors and survival of a series of 777 patients with brain metastases (BM) from a single institution.Methods And MaterialsPatients were treated with surgery followed by whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) or with WBRT alone in 16.3% and 83.7% of the cases, respectively. The patients were RPA (recursive partitioning analysis) class I, II, and III in 11.2%, 69.6%, and 18.4% of the cases, respectively; RPA class II-a, II-b, and II-c in 8.3%, 24.8%, and 66.9% of the cases, respectively; and with GPA (graded prognostic assessment) scores of 0-1.0, 1.5-2.0, 2.5-3.0, and 3.5-4.0 in 35%, 27.5%, 18.2%, and 8.6% of the cases, respectively.ResultsThe median overall survival (OS) times according to RPA class I, II, and III were 20.1, 5.1, and 1.3 months, respectively (P<.0001); according to RPA class II-a, II-b, II-c: 9.1, 8.9, and 4.0 months, respectively (P<.0001); and according to GPA score 0-1.0, 1.5-2.0, 2.5-3.0, and 3.5-4.0: 2.5, 4.4, 9.0, and 19.1 months, respectively (P<.0001). By multivariate analysis, the favorable independent prognostic factors for survival were as follows: for gastrointestinal tumor, a high Karnofsky performance status (KPS) (P=.0003) and an absence of extracranial metastases (ECM) (P=.003); for kidney cancer, few BM (P=.002); for melanoma, few BM (P=.01), an absence of ECM (P=.002), and few ECM (P=.0002); for lung cancer, age (P=.007), a high KPS (P<.0001), an absence of ECM (P<.0001), few ECM and BM (P<.0001 and P=.0006, respectively), and control of the primary tumor (P=.004); and for breast cancer, age (P=.001), a high KPS (P=.007), control of the primary tumor (P=.05), and few ECM and BM (P=.01 and P=.0002, respectively). The triple-negative subtype was a significant unfavorable factor (P=.007).ConclusionPrognostic factors varied by pathology. Our analysis confirms the strength of prognostic factors used to determine the GPA score, including the genetic subtype for breast cancer.Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…