Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37819546›Full record

SynthesisClinical & experimental metastasis2023

Development and adaptations of the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) scale: a systematic review.

Luana Marques Ribeiro, Fernanda Ferreira Bomtempo, Rebeka Bustamante Rocha, João Paulo Mota Telles, Eliseu Becco Neto, Eberval Gadelha Figueiredo

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical & experimental metastasis, 2023. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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.

Luana Marques RibeiroUniversity Vila Velha (UVV), Vila Velha, Espírito Santo, Brazil. luana403@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2589-9465
Fernanda Ferreira BomtempoFaculty of Medical Sciences of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Rebeka Bustamante RochaFederal University of Amazonas (UFAM), Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil.
João Paulo Mota TellesDepartment of Neurology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Eliseu Becco NetoDivision of Neurosurgery, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Eberval Gadelha FigueiredoDivision of Neurosurgery, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) score has the best accuracy among prognostic scales for patients with brain metastases (BM). A wide range of GPA-derived scales have been established to different types of primary tumor BM. However, there is a high variability between them, and their characteristics have not been described altogether yet. We aim to summarize the features of the existent GPA-derived scales and to compare their predictor factors and their uses in clinical setting. Medline was searched from inception until January 2023 to identify studies related to the development, update, or validation of GPA. The initial search yielded 1,083 results. 16 original studies and 16 validation studies were included, comprising a total of 33,348 patients. 13 different scales were assessed, including: GPA, Diagnosis-Specific GPA, Extracranial Score, Lung-molGPA, Updated Renal GPA, Updated Gastrointestinal GPA, Modified Breast GPA, Integrated Melanoma GPA, Melanoma Mol GPA, Sarcoma GPA, Hepatocellular Carcinoma GPA, Colorectal Cancer GPA, and Uterine Cancer GPA. The most prevalent prognostic predictors were age, Karnofsky Performance Status, number of BM, and presence or absence of extracranial metastases. Treatment modalities consisted of whole brain radiation therapy, stereotactic radiosurgery, surgery, cranial radiotherapy, gamma knife radiosurgery, and BRAF inhibitor therapy. Median survival rates with no treatment and with a specific treatment ranged from 6.1 weeks to 33 months and from 3.1 to 21 months, respectively. Original GPA and GPA-derived scales are valid prognostic tools, but with heterogeneous survival results when compared to each other. More studies are needed to improve scientific evidence of these scales.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsMelanomaRadiosurgeryCombined Modality TherapyHumansKarnofsky Performance StatusPrognosisRetrospective StudiesBrain metastasesGraded Prognostic AssessmentPrognostic indexPrognostic scale

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.