MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Brain Metastases from Adult Sarcoma: Prognostic Factors and Impact of Treatment. A Retrospective Analysis from the French Sarcoma Group (GSF/GETO)

2018· article· en· W2808946203 on OpenAlexaffabout
L. Chaigneau, Anna Patrikidou, Isabelle Ray‐Coquard, Thibaud Valentin, Claude Linassier, Jacques Olivier Bay, Laurence Moureau Zabotto, Emmanuelle Bompas, Sophie Piperno‐Neumann, Nicolas Penel, Thierry Alcindor, Maryline Laigre, Cécile Guillemet, Sébastien Salas, Anne Hügli, Julien Dômont, Marie Pierre Sunyach, A. Lecesne, Jean‐Yves Blay, Virginie Nerich, Nicolás Isambert

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Oncologist · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBrain Metastases and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEuropean Society for Medical Oncology
KeywordsSarcomaOncologyRetrospective cohort studyMedicineOverall survivalInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases (BM) from adult soft tissue or bone sarcomas are rare, and sparse data exist on their prognostic factors and management. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted in 15 centers of the French Sarcoma Group, plus one Canadian and one Swiss center, to report on clinical, histological, and treatment characteristics and to identify predictive factors of outcome. RESULTS: Between 1992 and 2012, 246 patients with a median age of 50 years (range: 16-86) were managed for BM. BM included 221 cerebral and cerebellar metastases and 40 cases of meningeal sarcomatosis. The most frequent histopathological subtype was leiomyosarcoma (18.7%). Histological grade was high in 118 (48%) cases. Surgery of BM was carried out for 38 (15.5%) patients. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy were administered in 168 (68.3%) and 91 (37.0%) patients, respectively. Irrespective of treatment modality, BM were controlled in 113 patients (45.9%), including 31 partial responses (12.6%) and 18 complete responses (7.3%). The median overall survival from diagnosis of brain metastasis was 2.7 months (range: 0-133). In the multivariate analysis, the following parameters influenced overall survival: chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26-0.48), surgery (HR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.22-0.72), stereotactic radiotherapy (HR = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.19-0.90), whole-brain radiotherapy (HR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.35-0.76), and grade (HR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.43-0.98). CONCLUSION: BM of sarcomas are rare and associated with a dismal outcome. Multidisciplinary management with chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery is associated with a better survival. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The incidence of brain and meningeal metastasis in bone and soft tissue sarcomas is estimated between 1% and 8%. Published data are derived from small retrospective case series, often in the pediatric population. A prognostic index is important to guide both clinical decision-making and outcomes research, but one such is lacking for adult sarcoma patients with brain metastases. The current study describes brain metastasis in a large cohort of sarcoma patients. This study, conducted within the French Sarcoma Group, describes the natural history of sarcoma brain metastasis and enables the proposal of strategic recommendations for subsequent clinical trials and for the management of such patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe OncologistSame topicBrain Metastases and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207