ArticleJournal of radiosurgery and SBRT2017
Stereotactic radiosurgery in the treatment of brain metastases from gynecologic primary cancer.
Article in Journal of radiosurgery and SBRT, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Review
- Age, pathology and CA-125 are prognostic factors for survival in patients with brain metastases from gynaecological tumours.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 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
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBrain metastases from gynecologic primary cancers are rare events, but they can be a cause of morbidity and mortality when they occur.
methodsThis is a single institution retrospective study on patients with brain metastases from gynecologic primary cancer who received Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Between 2000 and 2013, a total of 33 patients with brain metastases from gynecologic primary including cervical (n=2), endometrial (n=6) and ovarian cancers (n=25) were treated with SRS at our institution. Electronic medical records were reviewed to determine survival, patterns of failure and cause of death.
resultsOverall survival at 1, 2 and 5 years for the entire population was 47.1%, 21.7%, and 14.5%, respectively. There was no difference in survival between the primary cancers (log-rank p = 0.33). 36.4% patients died of neurologic death. Local failure at 1 and 2 years for the entire population was 10.4% and 14.3%, respectively. There was no difference in local failure between the primary cancers. Distant brain failure at 1, 2 and 5 years for the entire population was 20.6%, 27.7%, and 31.3%, respectively. On multivariate Cox Proportional Hazards analysis, age was the only predictor of overall survival (HR = 1.03, p = 0.01). Ovarian cancer patients had decreased risk of distant brain failure (HR = 0.17, p=0.005), whereas cervical cancer patients had an increased risk of distant brain failure (HR = 35.7, p = 0.001).
conclusionsSRS represents a feasible treatment option for patients with brain metastases from gynecologic cancer. Younger age is a positive prognostic factor. Ovarian cancer patients have lower risk of distant brain failure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29296463PMC5675508W2955894744What 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.