Survival in Patients With Brain Metastases: Summary Report on the Updated Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment and Definition of the Eligibility Quotient

Paul W. Sperduto(University of Minnesota), Shane Mesko(The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center), Jing Li(The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center), Daniel Cagney(Dana-Farber Cancer Institute), Ayal A. Aizer(Dana-Farber Cancer Institute), Nancy U. Lin(Dana-Farber Cancer Institute), Eric Nesbit(Northwestern University), Tim J. Kruser(Northwestern University), Jason W. Chan(University of California, San Francisco), Steve Braunstein(University of California, San Francisco), Jessica Lee(Duke University), John P. Kirkpatrick(Duke University), Will Breen(Mayo Clinic in Arizona), Paul D. Brown(Mayo Clinic in Arizona), Diana D. Shi(Massachusetts General Hospital), Helen A. Shih(Massachusetts General Hospital), Hany Soliman(Sunnybrook Health Science Centre), Arjun Sahgal(Sunnybrook Health Science Centre), Ryan Shanley(University of Minnesota), William Sperduto(Duke University), Emil Lou(University of Minnesota), Ashlyn S. Everett(University of Alabama at Birmingham), Drexell H. Boggs(University of Alabama at Birmingham), Laura Masucci(Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal), David Roberge(Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal), Jill Remick(University of Maryland, Baltimore), Kristin A. Plichta(University of Iowa), John M. Buatti(University of Iowa), Supriya Jain(University of Colorado Denver), Laurie E. Gaspar(University of Colorado Denver), Cheng–Chia Wu(Columbia University), Tony J. C. Wang(Columbia University), John Bryant(Miami Heart Research Institute), Michael D. Chuong(Miami Heart Research Institute), Yi An(Yale University), Veronica Chiang(Yale University), Toshimichi Nakano, Hidefumi Aoyama(Hokkaido University), Minesh P. Mehta(Miami Heart Research Institute)
Journal of Clinical Oncology
September 15, 2020
Cited by 457Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

PURPOSE: Conventional wisdom has rendered patients with brain metastases ineligible for clinical trials for fear that poor survival could mask the benefit of otherwise promising treatments. Our group previously published the diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). Updates with larger contemporary cohorts using molecular markers and newly identified prognostic factors have been published. The purposes of this work are to present all the updated indices in a single report to guide treatment choice, stratify research, and define an eligibility quotient to expand eligibility. METHODS: A multi-institutional database of 6,984 patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases underwent multivariable analyses of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival for each primary site. Significant factors were used to define the updated GPA. GPAs of 4.0 and 0.0 correlate with the best and worst prognoses, respectively. RESULTS: < .01) between subgroups. Survival has improved, but varies widely by GPA for patients with non-small-cell lung, breast, melanoma, GI, and renal cancer with brain metastases from 7-47 months, 3-36 months, 5-34 months, 3-17 months, and 4-35 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Median survival varies widely and our ability to estimate survival for patients with brain metastases has improved. The updated GPA (available free at brainmetgpa.com) provides an accurate tool with which to estimate survival, individualize treatment, and stratify clinical trials. Instead of excluding patients with brain metastases, enrollment should be encouraged and those trials should be stratified by the GPA to ensure those trials make appropriate comparisons. Furthermore, we recommend the expansion of eligibility to allow for the enrollment of patients with previously treated brain metastases who have a 50% or greater probability of an additional year of survival (eligibility quotient > 0.50).


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis