Norbert Kased

PURPOSE: Our group has previously published the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA), a prognostic index for patients with brain metastases. Updates have been published with refinements to create diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment indices. The purpose of this report is to present the updated diagnosis-specific GPA indices in a single, unified, user-friendly report to allow ease of access and use by treating physicians. METHODS: A multi-institutional retrospective (1985 to 2007) database of 3,940 patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases underwent univariate and multivariate analyses of prognostic factors associated with outcomes by primary site and treatment. Significant prognostic factors were used to define the diagnosis-specific GPA prognostic indices. A GPA of 4.0 correlates with the best prognosis, whereas a GPA of 0.0 corresponds with the worst prognosis. RESULTS: Significant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis. For lung cancer, prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance score, age, presence of extracranial metastases, and number of brain metastases, confirming the original Lung-GPA. For melanoma and renal cell cancer, prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance score and the number of brain metastases. For breast cancer, prognostic factors were tumor subtype, Karnofsky performance score, and age. For GI cancer, the only prognostic factor was the Karnofsky performance score. The median survival times by GPA score and diagnosis were determined. CONCLUSION: 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.

Cirrhotic livers are characterized by advanced fibrosis and the formation of hepatocellular nodules, which are classified histologically as either (a) regenerative lesions (eg, regenerative nodules, lobar or segmental hyperplasia, focal nodular hyperplasia) or (b) dysplastic or neoplastic lesions (eg, dysplastic foci and nodules, hepatocellular carcinomas). The differentiation of these lesions is important because regenerative nodules are benign, whereas dysplastic and neoplastic nodules are premalignant and malignant, respectively. However, their accurate characterization may be difficult even at histopathologic analysis. Differential diagnosis may be facilitated by comparing the clinical and pathologic findings with radiologic imaging features; in particular, nodule size, vascularity, hepatocellular function, and Kupffer cell density assessed at magnetic resonance (MR) imaging are suggestive of the correct diagnosis. MR imaging is more useful than computed tomography for such assessments because it provides better soft-tissue contrast and a more nuanced depiction of different tissue properties. Moreover, a wider variety of contrast agents is available for use in MR imaging. Familiarity with the MR imaging characteristics of cirrhosis-associated hepatocellular nodules is therefore important for optimal diagnosis and management of cirrhotic disease.

Extranodal lymphoproliferative diseases are common, and their prevalence is increasing. Non-Hodgkin lymphomas and Hodgkin disease, in particular, frequently involve extranodal structures in the abdomen and pelvis, including both the solid organs (liver, spleen, kidneys, and pancreas) and the hollow organs of the gastrointestinal tract. Because virtually any abdominopelvic tissue may be involved, many different imaging manifestations are possible, and lymphoproliferative diseases may mimic other disorders. Familiarity with the imaging manifestations that are diagnostically specific for extranodal lymphoproliferative diseases is important because imaging plays an important role in the noninvasive management of disease. However, a definitive diagnosis requires a biopsy (of bone marrow, a lymph node, or a mass), a peripheral blood analysis, and other laboratory tests. In patients with known disease, the goals of imaging are staging, evaluation of response to therapy, and identification of new or recurrent disease or of complications of therapy. In patients without known disease, imaging permits a provisional diagnosis.