ArticleBMC cancer2021
The impact of treatment facility type on the survival of brain metastases patients regardless of the primary cancer type.
Article in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment patterns and survival outcomes in neuroendocrine neoplasms presenting with brain metastases.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Article
- A novel lesion severity index to predict 90-day postoperative survival in brain metastasis patients.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2025Article
- The impact of facility type on surgical outcomes in colon cancer patients: analysis of the national cancer database.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Role of Hospital Connectedness in Brain Metastasis Outcomes.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Article
- Building Team Medicine in the Management of CNS Metastases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Nationwide changes in radiation oncology travel and location of care before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.Radiation oncology journal · 2023Article
- Racial disparities in inpatient clinical presentation, treatment, and outcomes in brain metastasis.Neuro-oncology practice · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a National Quality Improvement Collaborative for Improving Cancer Screening.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Article
- A window into the care needs of patients with brain metastases.Neuro-oncology practice · 2021Article
- Addressing disparities in delivery of cancer care for patients with melanoma brain metastases-Not just a simple case of rurality.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer patients with brain metastases (BMs) require multidisciplinary care, and treatment facility may play a role. This study aimed to investigate the impact of receiving treatment at academic centers on the overall survival (OS) of cancer patients with brain metastases (BMs) regardless of the primary cancer site.
methodsThis retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Database (NCDB) included patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer, small-cell lung cancer, other types of lung cancer, breast cancer, melanoma, colorectal cancer, and kidney cancer and had brain metastases at the time of diagnosis. The data were extracted from the de-identified file of the NCDB, a joint program of the Commission on Cancer of the American College of Surgeons and the American Cancer Society. The Cox proportional hazard model adjusted for age at diagnosis, race, sex, place of living, income, education, primary tumor type, year of diagnosis, chemotherapy, radiation therapy (RT), and surgery of the primary cancer site was used to determine treatment facility-associated hazard ratios (HR) for survival. Overall survival was the primary outcome, which was analyzed with multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression modeling.
resultsA total of 93,633 patients were analyzed, among whom 31,579/93,633 (34.09%) were treated at academic centers. Based on the log-rank analysis, patients who received treatment at an academic facility had significantly improved OS (median OS: 6.18, CI: 6.05-6.31 vs. 4.57, CI: 4.50-4.63 months; p < 0.001) compared to patients who were treated at non-academic facilities. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, receiving treatment at an academic facility was associated with significantly improved OS (HR: 0.85, CI: 0.84-0.87; p < 0.001) compared to non-academic facility.
conclusionsIn this extensive analysis of the NCDB, receiving treatment at academic centers was associated with significantly improved OS compared to treatment at non-academic centers.
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.