ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2018
Validation of the Graded Prognostic Assessment for Melanoma Using Molecular Markers (Melanoma-molGPA).
Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Development and adaptations of the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) scale: a systematic review.Clinical & experimental metastasis · 2023Pooled it
- Stereotactic Radiosurgery as Treatment for Brain Metastases: An Update.Asian journal of neurosurgery · 2023Review
- Outcomes after stereotactic radiosurgery of brain metastases in patients with malignant melanoma and validation of the melanoma molGPA.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021Article
- Predicting survival in melanoma patients treated with concurrent targeted- or immunotherapy and stereotactic radiotherapy : Melanoma brain metastases prognostic score.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2020Article
- Validation of the graded prognostic assessment for gastrointestinal cancers with brain metastases (GI-GPA).Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2020Article
- Validation of a Graded Prognostic Model in Patients With Brain Metastases Treated With Whole-brain Radiotherapy Instead of Radiosurgery.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
- Patterns of Treatment and Outcome in Patients With 20 or More Brain Metastases.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt has been suggested to replace the diagnosis-specific graded prognostic assessment (DS-GPA, based on performance status and number of brain metastases) for patients with primary malignant melanoma with the new Melanoma-molGPA. The latter is a more complex assessment, which also includes BRAF mutation status, age and extracranial metastases. To test the performance of the Melanoma-molGPA, we performed a validation study of this new survival prediction tool.
methodsA retrospective analysis of patients treated at two different academic institutions was performed. The four-tiered Melanoma-molGPA was calculated as suggested in the original study.
resultsMedian overall survival was 5.4 months (95% confidence interval: 3.1 - 7.7 months). Median survival in the four prognostic classes was 2.1, 7.8, 11.8, and 18.0 months, respectively. The 1-year survival rates were 3%, 25%, 43%, and 80%, respectively. The difference between the Kaplan-Meier curves was significant (P = 0.0001, log-rank test).
conclusionsThe present survival outcomes support the use of the Melanoma-molGPA. However, survival was better in each of the four groups in the original study. Possible reasons include lead-time bias and different treatment policies.
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.