Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35419752›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2022

The Clinical Frailty Scale as useful tool in patients with brain metastases.

Johannes Kerschbaumer, Aleksandrs Krigers, Matthias Demetz, Daniel Pinggera, Julia Klingenschmid, Nadine Pichler, Claudius Thomé, Christian F Freyschlag

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Johannes KerschbaumerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Aleksandrs KrigersDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Matthias DemetzDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Daniel PinggeraDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Julia KlingenschmidDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Nadine PichlerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Claudius ThoméDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Christian F FreyschlagDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. christian.freyschlag@i-med.ac.at.
Innsbruck Medical University · ATUniversität Innsbruck · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) evaluates patients' level of frailty on a scale from 1 to 9 and is commonly used in geriatric medicine, intensive care and orthopedics. The aim of our study was to reveal whether the CFS allows a reliable prediction of overall survival (OS) in patients after surgical treatment of brain metastases (BM) compared to the Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS).

methodsPatients operated for BM were included. CFS and KPS were retrospectively assessed pre- and postoperatively and at follow-up 3-6 months after resection.

results205 patients with a follow-up of 22.8 months (95% CI 18.4-27.1) were evaluated. CFS showed a median of 3 ("managing well"; IqR 2-4) at all 3 assessment-points. Median KPS was 80 preoperatively (IqR 80-90) and 90 postoperatively (IqR 80-100) as well as at follow-up after 3-6 months. CFS correlated with KPS both preoperatively (r = - 0.92; p < 0.001), postoperatively (r = - 0.85; p < 0.001) and at follow-up (r = - 0.93; p < 0.001). The CFS predicted the expected reduction of OS more reliably than the KPS at all 3 assessments. A one-point increase (worsening) of the preoperative CFS translated into a 30% additional hazard to decease (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.15-1.46; p < 0.001). A one-point increase in postoperative and at follow-up CFS represents a 39% (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.25-1.54; p < 0.001) and of 42% risk (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.27-1.59; p < 0.001).

conclusionThe CFS is a feasible, simple and reliable scoring system in patients undergoing resection of brain metastasis. The CFS 3-6 months after surgery specifies the expected OS more accurately than the KPS.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsFrailtyAgedHumansKarnofsky Performance StatusRetrospective StudiesBrain metastasisFrailtyKarnofskyNeurooncologicalPerformanceScoreSurgery

Identifiers

PMID35419752
PMCPMC9166853
OpenAlexW4223520906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.