Does Graded Prognostic Assessment outperform Recursive Partitioning Analysis in patients with moderate prognosis brain metastases?

Date
2016
Language
American English
Embargo Lift Date
Committee Members
Degree
Degree Year
Department
Grantor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Found At
Future Medicine
Abstract

AIM:

To compare the clinical utility of the Recursive Partitioning Analysis (RPA) and Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) in predicting outcomes for moderate prognosis patients with brain metastases. METHODS & MATERIALS:

We reviewed 101 whole brain radiotherapy cases. RPA and GPA were calculated. Overall survival was compared. RESULTS:

Sixty-eight patients had moderate prognosis. RPA patient characteristics for increased death hazard were ≤10 WBRT fractions or no surgery/radiosurgery. GPA patients had increased death risk with no surgery/radiosurgery or lower Karnofsky Performance Status. CONCLUSION:

The indices have similar predicted survival. Patients scored by RPA with longer radiation schedules had longer survival; patients scored by GPA did not. This indicates GPA is more clinically useful, leaving less room for subjective treatment choices.

Description
item.page.description.tableofcontents
item.page.relation.haspart
Cite As
Estabrook, N. C., Lutz, S. T., Johnson, C. S., Lo, S. S., & Henderson, M. A. (2016). Does Graded Prognostic Assessment outperform Recursive Partitioning Analysis in patients with moderate prognosis brain metastases?. CNS oncology, 5(2), 69–76. doi:10.2217/cns.15.45
ISSN
Publisher
Series/Report
Sponsorship
Major
Extent
Identifier
Relation
Journal
CNS Oncology
Rights
Publisher Policy
Source
PMC
Alternative Title
Type
Article
Number
Volume
Conference Dates
Conference Host
Conference Location
Conference Name
Conference Panel
Conference Secretariat Location
Version
Final published version
Full Text Available at
This item is under embargo {{howLong}}