Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30906886›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2019

External validation of a prognostic score predicting overall survival for patients with brain metastases based on extracranial factors.

Victor Lewitzki, Rainer J Klement, Sebastian Hess, Rebekka Kosmala, Carsten Nieder, Michael Flentje

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Victor LewitzkiUniversity of Würzburg, Department of Radiation Oncology, Josef-Schneider-Str. 11, 97080 Würzburg, Germany.
Rainer J KlementDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Leopoldina Hospital Schweinfurt, 97422 Schweinfurt, Germany.
Sebastian HessUniversity of Würzburg, Department of Radiation Oncology, Josef-Schneider-Str. 11, 97080 Würzburg, Germany.
Rebekka KosmalaUniversity of Würzburg, Department of Radiation Oncology, Josef-Schneider-Str. 11, 97080 Würzburg, Germany.
Carsten NiederDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Michael FlentjeUniversity of Würzburg, Department of Radiation Oncology, Josef-Schneider-Str. 11, 97080 Würzburg, Germany.
University of Würzburg · DELeopoldina Krankenhaus Schweinfurt · DENordland Hospital Trust · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of our study was an external validation of the extracranial prognostic score predicting survival of patients with brain metastases receiving cranial irradiation on data from a single institution. MATERIALS AND

methodsA retrospective analysis of 524 patients with brain metastases treated with cranial radiotherapy in a single tertiary center was performed. Three predictive scores were calculated and assessed for their ability to discriminate prognostic groups: (i) The Recursive Partitioning Analysis (RPA) score (available for 524 patients); (ii) the Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (DS-GPA) score (464 patients); (iii) the extracranial score (EC-S) developed by Nieder et al. which is based on serum albumin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and the number of extracranial organs involved (157 patients). Discrimination of each score was assessed by Gönen & Heller's concordance probability estimate (CPE). The calibration was checked by comparing median survival estimates of each risk group with the corresponding values of the datasets from which the scores were derived. Finally, a multivariable Cox regression model was built by using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator on a large number of variables including all three scores.

resultsWith a CPE = 0.626 ± 0.022, the EC-S had the best discriminatory power. The EC-S also appeared to be better calibrated and had the best ability to separate patients with a very poor prognosis: patients with combination of low albumin, elevated LDH and more than 1 extracranial organ with metastatic involvement had a median survival time of only 0.6 months (CI95% 0.1-1.1) and a hazard ratio for death of 6.36 (2.67-15.14) compared to patients with no extracranial metastases and normal levels of albumin and LDH. In the multivariable Cox model serum albumin, LDH, treatment modality, DS-GPA and EC-S were retained as prognostic factors. An ad hoc combination of both DS-GPA and EC-S into a new score was possible for 134 patients and indicated a slightly better discrimination (CPE = 0.636 ± 0.023) than either DS-GPA or EC-S alone.

conclusionsThis study provides an independent validation of the prognostic EC-S which was the best prognostic model for defining the patients who obviously did not benefit from radiation therapy of brain metastases in terms of overall survival. The combination of the EC-S with the established DS-GPA score resulted in a slight increase in discriminatory ability. The new EC-GPA score needs further validation in larger patient cohorts.

Indexed as

Brain metastasesPrognostic scoreRadiotherapyValidation

Identifiers

PMID30906886
PMCPMC6411583
OpenAlexW2916589174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.