PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 26, 2024Current Oncology6 citationsOpen Access

Prognosis versus Actual Outcomes in Stereotactic Radiosurgery of Brain Metastases: Reliability of Common Prognostic Parameters and Indices

View Full Paper
JMJulian MangesiusTSThomas SeppiCAC. Arnold

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcome of stereotactic radiosurgery as the sole treatment for brain metastases and to assess prognostic factors influencing survival. A total of 108 consecutive patients with 213 metastases were retrospectively analyzed. Treatment was determined with close-meshed MRI follow-up. Various prognostic factors were assessed, and several prognostic indices were compared regarding their reliability to estimate overall survival. Median overall survival was 15 months; one-year overall survival was 50.5%. Both one- and two-year local controls were 90.9%. The rate of new metastases after SRS was 49.1%. Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors revealed that the presence of extracranial metastases, male sex, lower KPI, and progressive extracranial disease were significant risk factors for decreased survival. Of all evaluated prognostic indices, the Basic Score for Brain Metastases (BSBMs) showed the best correlation with overall survival. A substantial survival advantage was found for female patients after SRS when compared to male patients (18 versus 9 months, p = 0.003). SRS of brain metastasis is a safe and effective treatment option when frequent monitoring for new metastases with MRI is performed. Common prognostic scores lack reliable estimation of survival times. Female sex should be considered as an additional independent positive prognostic factor influencing survival.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Mangesius et al. (2024) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e72441b6db64358769e832https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol31040132
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper