ArticleNeuro-oncology advances
Impact of systemic therapy after stereotactic radiosurgery in patients with limited brain-only metastasis.
Article in Neuro-oncology advances. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The impact of systemic therapy (ST) on outcomes for patients with brain-only metastases (BrM) in the absence of extracranial disease (ECD) is not well established. We compared outcomes between patients with BrM treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) who received ST ≤3 months (mos), >3 mos, or not at all after SRS. Methods: We identified BrM patients who completed SRS across two institutions from 1/2015 to 12/2020. Intracranial progression after SRS was determined by brain MRI radiographic recurrence. Overall survival (OS) and intracranial progression free survival (iPFS) estimates were also generated. Results: In total, 342 patients with BrM were identified. Primary sites included lung (73%), breast (12%), and additional sites (15%). Almost half, 169 (49%), received no ST, 80 (23%) received ST ≤3 mos, and 93 (27%) received ST >3 mos after SRS. Median age was younger in the ST >3 mos cohort (60.5years) compared with ST <3mo (67.7years) and no ST (67.0years), Conclusions: In our cohort of BrM patients, ST after SRS improves OS regardless of timing. ST ≤3 mos may improve iPFS compared with ST >3 mos after SRS, which warrants further investigation. Appropriate patients with BrM should be referred for a multi-disciplinary discussion of ST following SRS.
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.