Does Graded Prognostic Assessment outperform Recursive Partitioning Analysis in patients with moderate prognosis brain metastases?. (April 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Estabrook, Neil C; Lutz, Stephen T; Johnson, Cynthia S; Lo, Simon S; Henderson, Mark A
• Is Part Of: CNS oncology. Volume 5:Number 2(2016)
• Page Start: 69
• Page End: 76
• Publication Date: 2016-04
• Subjects: brain metastasis -- prognosis -- radiotherapy; Central nervous system -- Tumors -- Periodicals; 616.99481
• DOI: 10.2217/cns.15.45
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2045-0907

Abstract

Aim: To compare the clinical utility of the Recursive Partitioning Analysis (RPA) and Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) in predicting outcomes for moderate prognosis patients with brain metastases.Methods & materials: We reviewed 101 whole brain radiotherapy cases. RPA and GPA were calculated. Overall survival was compared.Results: Sixty-eight patients had moderate prognosis. RPA patient characteristics for increased death hazard were ≤10 WBRT fractions or no surgery/radiosurgery. GPA patients had increased death risk with no surgery/radiosurgery or lower Karnofsky Performance Status.Conclusion: The indices have similar predicted survival. Patients scored by RPA with longer radiation schedules had longer survival; patients scored by GPA did not. This indicates GPA is more clinically useful, leaving less room for subjective treatment choices.