↓ Skip to main content

Which Prognostic Index Is Most Appropriate in the Setting of Delayed Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Which Prognostic Index Is Most Appropriate in the Setting of Delayed Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Brain Metastases?
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2016.00248
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To determine if five commonly used prognostic indices (PIs) - recursive partitioning analysis (RPA), Score Index for Radiosurgery (SIR), Basic Score for Brain Metastases (BSBM), graded prognostic assessment (GPA), and the diagnosis-specific GPA - are valid following delay between diagnosis and treatment of brain metastases. In a single-institutional cohort, records of patients who underwent stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) more than 30 days from diagnosis of brain metastases were collected, and five PI scores were calculated for each patient. For each PI, three score-based groupings were made to examine survival differences by means of adjusted log-rank analysis and area under the curve (AUC). Of 121 patients with sufficient PI information, 72 underwent SRS more than 30 days after diagnosis. Median age and Karnofsky performance status were 60 years and 80, respectively. Forty-three (60%) patients had lung primaries. Prior to SRS, 38 (52.8%) and 12 (16.7%) patients underwent whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and surgery, respectively. Two (2.8%) patients underwent both WBRT and surgery prior to SRS. A median of two lesions were treated per SRS course. Median survival of the cohort was 9.0 months. Using adjusted log-rank analysis for pairwise comparison, BSBM and GPA showed significance between two out of the three prognostic groups, while the other scores showed either one or no significant differences on comparison. AUC demonstrated good applicability for BSBM, RPA, and GPA, although SIR was statistically less prognostic than the other PIs. The PIs analyzed in this study were applicable in the setting of delayed SRS. Although these data are hypothesis generating, they serve to encourage further analyses to validate a PI that is most optimal for these patients.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Master 3 12%
Student > Postgraduate 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 10 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Unknown 13 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2016.
All research outputs
#28,639,288
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#13,824
of 26,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#356,411
of 451,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#34
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 26,632 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 451,564 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.