ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2016
Comparison of nine prognostic scores in patients with brain metastases of breast cancer receiving radiotherapy of the brain.
Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology breast cancer expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer brain metastasis (2025).Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2026Review
- Review
- Prediction of Short and Long Survival after Surgery for Breast Cancer Brain Metastases.Cancers · 2022Article
- Article
- CSCO expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer brain metastasis.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2022Review
- Validation and comparison of Breast Graded Prognostic Assessment scores in patients with breast cancer and brain metastases.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021Article
- Article
- Beyond an Updated Graded Prognostic Assessment (Breast GPA): A Prognostic Index and Trends in Treatment and Survival in Breast Cancer Brain Metastases From 1985 to Today.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSeveral prognostic indices (PI) have been developed to stratify patients with brain metastases in groups with good or bad prognosis. The aim of our study was to compare nine prognostic scores for patients with brain metastases (BM) of breast cancer receiving radiotherapy.
methodsThe clinical data of 139 breast cancer patients with BM were collected retrospectively. All patients were treated with cerebral radiotherapy or surgery followed by radiotherapy between January 2007 and December 2012. The prognostic value and accuracy of recursive partitioning analysis (RPA), RPA II, graded prognostic assessment (GPA), basic score for BM, Breast-RPA, Breast-GPA, Rades Score 2011, Germany Score and Breast Rades Score were assessed.
resultsThe median survival after BM diagnosis in our cohort was 14 months. The overall 6-month, 1-, 2- and 3-year survival rates were 49.6, 37.4, 20.9 and 13.7 %, respectively. Most of the PI were associated with OS, but univariate analysis favored GPA regarding OS. GPA was the most accurate score to identify patients with long (longer than 12 months) and Breast-GPA patients with short (<3 months) life expectancy.
conclusionsGPA and Breast-GPA seem to be the most useful scores and perform better than other PI for breast cancer patients with BM receiving radiotherapy.
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.