We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Metastatic brain disease is still a major contributor to cancer treatment failure. Various treatments have improved in the recent decades, which allow for better control of brain metastatic lesions. Various prognostic scoring tools have been developed and used worldwide to stratify patients with brain metastases to determine who will benefit most from aggressive treatment. The three most commonly used prognostic scoring tools are recursive partitioning analysis (RPA), basic score for brain metastases (BSBM) and graded prognostic assessment (GPA). The aim of this study is to validate these scoring tools using an Indonesian cancer patient population.
Method:
A retrospective analysis of all patients presenting with brain metastases from January 2012 until December 2014, through using hospital medical records, was conducted. All patients receiving whole brain radiotherapy during this period were included in this study. A follow-up with a telephone call was carried out to determine the patient’s health and survival status. Uncontactable patients were excluded from the analysis. Survival analysis was carried out by stratifying patients based on the three prognostic scoring systems.
Result:
A total of 80 patients were eligible to be included in the study, with 18 excluded due to being uncontactable. The remaining 62 patients’ data were analysed and stratified with all three scoring systems. The RPA was found to confer better stratification than BSBM and GPA in our study population.
Conclusion:
GPA was non-prognostic in our study population and BSBM was less prognostic, especially in the middle group, class 1 and class 2. Those BSBM class 1 and class 2 did not provide good prognostic stratification in our study population, whereas RPA was proven to be the best in stratifying patients’ prognosis with brain metastases in our study population.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.