ArticleJournal of Korean Neurosurgical Society2013
Gamma knife radiosurgery for brain metastases from breast cancer.
Article in Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurosurgical applications of MRI guided laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT).Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2019Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Fractionated Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Large Brain Metastases.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2015Article
- Do patients with very few brain metastases from breast cancer benefit from whole-brain radiotherapy in addition to radiosurgery?Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2014Article
- Volumetric modulated arc radiosurgery for brain metastases from breast cancer: A single-center study.Colombia medica (Cali, Colombia)Article
- Treatment Outcome of Brain Metastases from Breast Cancer Following Gamma Knife Radiosurgery: A Retrospective Study in Vietnam.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe authors conducted a retrospective cohort study to determine prognostic factors and treatment outcomes of brain metastases (BM) from breast cancer (BC) after Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKS).
methodsPathologic and clinical features, and outcomes were analyzed in a cohort of 62 patients with BM from BC treated by GKS. The Kaplan-Meier method, the log-rank test, and Cox's proportional hazards model were used to assess prognostic factors.
resultsMedian survival after GKS was 73.0 weeks (95% confidence interval, 46.0-100.1). HER2+ [hazard ratio (HR) 0.441; p=0.045], Karnofsky performance scale (KPS) ≥70 (RR 0.416; p=0.050) and systemic chemotherapy after GKS (RR 0.282; p=0.001) were found to be a favorable prognostic factor of overall survival. Actuarial local control (LC) rate were 89.5±4.5% and 70.5±6.9% at 6 and 12 months after GKS, respectively. No prognostic factors were found to affect LC rate. Uni- and multivariate analysis revealed that the distant control (DC) rate was higher in patients with; a small number (≤3) of metastasis (HR 0.300; p=0.045), no known extracranial metastasis (p=0.013, log-rank test), or the HER2+ subtype (HR 0.267; p=0.027). Additional whole brain radiation therapy and metastasis volume were not found to be significantly associated with LC, DC, or overall survival.
conclusionThe treatment outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed BM from BC treated with GKS could be affected primarily by intrinsic subtype, KPS, and systemic chemotherapy. Therapeutic strategy and prognosis scoring system should be individualized based on considerations of intrinsic subtype in addition to traditionally known parameters related to stereotactic radiosurgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.