Prognostic factors for patients with brain metastases vary by diagnosis, and for each diagnosis, a robust separation into different GPA scores was discerned, implying considerable heterogeneity in outcome, even within a single tumor type. In summary, these indices and related worksheet provide an accurate and facile diagnosis-specific tool to estimate survival, potentially select appropriate treatment, and stratify clinical trials for patients with brain metastases.
OBJECT
A prospectively collected cohort of 77 patients who underwent definitive radiosurgery between 2002 and 2010 for melanoma brain metastases was retrospectively reviewed to assess the impact of ipilimumab use and other clinical variables on survival.
METHODS
The authors conducted an institutional review board–approved chart review to assess patient age at the time of brain metastasis diagnosis, sex, primary disease location, initial radiosurgery date, number of metastases treated, performance status, systemic therapy and ipilimumab history, whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) use, follow-up duration, and survival at the last follow-up. The Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (DSGPA) score was calculated for each patient based on performance status and the number of brain metastases treated.
RESULTS
Thirty-five percent of the patients received ipilimumab. The median survival in this group was 21.3 months, as compared with 4.9 months in patients who did not receive ipilimumab. The 2-year survival rate was 47.2% in the ipilimumab group compared with 19.7% in the nonipilimumab group. The DS-GPA score was the most significant predictor of overall survival, and ipilimumab therapy was also independently associated with an improvement in the hazard for death (p = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
The survival of patients with melanoma brain metastases managed with ipilimumab and definitive radiosurgery can exceed the commonly anticipated 4–6 months. Using ipilimumab in a supportive treatment paradigm of radiosurgery for brain oligometastases was associated with an increased median survival from 4.9 to 21.3 months, with a 2-year survival rate of 19.7% versus 47.2%. This association between ipilimumab and prolonged survival remains significant even after adjustment for performance status without an increased need for salvage WBRT.
BACKGROUND
The diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) was published to clarify prognosis for patients with brain metastases. This study refines the existing Breast-GPA by analyzing a larger cohort and tumor subtype.
METHODS
A multi-institutional retrospective database of 400 breast cancer patients treated for newly-diagnosed brain metastases was generated. Prognostic factors significant for survival were analyzed by multivariate Cox regression (MCR) and recursive partitioning analysis (RPA). Factors were weighted by the magnitude of their regression coefficients to define the GPA index.
RESULTS
Significant prognostic factors by MCR and RPA were Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), HER2, ER/PR status, and the interaction between ER/PR and HER2. RPA showed age was significant for patients with KPS 60–80. The median survival time (MST) overall was 13.8 months, and for GPA scores of 0–1.0, 1.5–2.0, 2.5–3.0 and 3.5–4.0 was 3.4 (n=23), 7.7 (n=104), 15.1 (n=140) and 25.3 (n=133) months, respectively (p < 0.0001). Among HER2-negative patients, being ER/PR-positive improved MST from 6.4 to 9.7 months whereas in HER2-positive patients, being ER/PR-positive improved MST from 17.9 to 20.7 months. The log-rank statistic (predictive power) was 110 for the Breast-GPA versus 55 for tumor subtype.
CONCLUSIONS
The Breast-GPA documents wide variation in prognosis and shows clear separation between subgroups of patients with breast cancer and brain metastases. This tool will aid clinical decision-making and stratification of clinical trials. These data confirm the effect of tumor subtype on survival and show the Breast-GPA offers significantly more predictive power than the tumor subtype alone.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.