The effect of tumor subtype on the time from primary diagnosis to development of brain metastases and survival in patients with breast cancer.

Our group has previously published the Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) showing the prognostic factors associated with survival in patients with brain metastases (BM). The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship of breast cancer subtype to the time interval from primary diagnosis (PD) to development of BM (TPDBM), number of BM at initial BM presentation and survival. We analyzed our previously described multi-institutional retrospective database of 865 breast cancer patients treated for newly-diagnosed BM from 1993 to 2010. Several factors found to be associated with survival were incorporated into the Breast-GPA, including tumor subtype. The GPA database was further analyzed to determine if the subtype correlated with the TPDBM, number of BM, and survival from PD. After exclusions for incomplete data, 383 patients remained eligible for analysis. The subtypes were approximated as follows: Luminal B: triple positive; HER2: HER2 positive/ER/PR negative; Luminal A; ER/PR positive/HER2 negative; Basal: triple negative. Patients with Basal (90), HER2 (119), Luminal B (98) and Luminal A (76) tumor subtypes had a median TPDBM of 27.5, 35.8, 47.4 and 54.4 months (p < 0.01), median survival from PD of 39.6, 66.4, 90.3 and 72.7 months (p < 0.01) and median survival from BM of 7.3, 17.9, 22.9 and 10.0 months (p < 0.01), respectively. Tumor subtype is an important prognostic factor for survival in patients with breast cancer and BM. Although TPDBM is not an independent prognostic factor for survival (and thus not part of the Breast-GPA), the TPDBM does correlate with tumor subtype but does not correlate with the number of BM. Patients with Basal and HER2 tumor subtypes have short TPDBM. Prospective studies are needed to determine if screening brain MRIs are indicated in patients with Basal or HER2 subtypes.

A validation study of a new prognostic index for patients with brain metastases: the Graded Prognostic Assessment.

OBJECT: The purpose of this study was to validate a new prognostic index for patients with brain metastases. This index, the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA), is based on an analysis of 1960 patients whose data were extracted from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) database. The GPA is based on 4 criteria: age, Karnofsky Performance Scale score, number of brain metastases, and the presence/absence of extracranial metastases. Each of the 4 criteria is given a score of 0, 0.5, or 1.0, so the patient with best prognosis would have a GPA score of 4.0. METHODS: Between April 2005 and December 2006, 140 eligible patients with brain metastases were treated at the Gamma Knife Center at the University of Minnesota. The GPA score was calculated for each patient, and the score was then correlated with survival. Survival duration was calculated from the date treatment began for the brain metastases. Eligibility criteria included patients treated with whole-brain radiation therapy, stereotactic radiosurgery, or both. RESULTS: The median survival time in months observed in the RTOG and Minnesota data by GPA score was as follows: GPA 3.5-4.0, 11.0 and 21.7; GPA 3.0, 8.9 and 17.5; GPA 1.5-2.5, 3.8 and 5.9; and GPA 0-1.0, 2.6 and 3.0, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The University of Minnesota data correlate well with the RTOG data and validate the use of the GPA as an effective prognostic index for patients with brain metastases. Clearly, not all patients with brain metastases have the same prognosis, and treatment decisions should be individualized accordingly. The GPA score does appear to be as prognostic as the RPA and is less subjective (because the RPA requires assessment of whether the primary disease is controlled), more quantitative, and easier to use and remember. A multi-institutional validation study of the GPA is ongoing.

Effect of tumor subtype on survival and the graded prognostic assessment for patients with breast cancer and brain metastases.

PURPOSE: The diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) was published to clarify prognosis for patients with brain metastases. This study refines the existing Breast-GPA by analyzing a larger cohort and tumor subtype. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multi-institutional retrospective database of 400 breast cancer patients treated for newly diagnosed brain metastases was generated. Prognostic factors significant for survival were analyzed by multivariate Cox regression and recursive partitioning analysis (RPA). Factors were weighted by the magnitude of their regression coefficients to define the GPA index. RESULTS: Significant prognostic factors by multivariate Cox regression and RPA were Karnofsky performance status (KPS), HER2, ER/PR status, and the interaction between ER/PR and HER2. RPA showed age was significant for patients with KPS 60 to 80. The median survival time (MST) overall was 13.8 months, and for GPA scores of 0 to 1.0, 1.5 to 2.0, 2.5 to 3.0, and 3.5 to 4.0 were 3.4 (n = 23), 7.7 (n = 104), 15.1 (n = 140), and 25.3 (n = 133) months, respectively (p < 0.0001). Among HER2-negative patients, being ER/PR positive improved MST from 6.4 to 9.7 months, whereas in HER2-positive patients, being ER/PR positive improved MST from 17.9 to 20.7 months. The log-rank statistic (predictive power) was 110 for the Breast-GPA vs. 55 for tumor subtype. CONCLUSIONS: The Breast-GPA documents wide variation in prognosis and shows clear separation between subgroups of patients with breast cancer and brain metastases. This tool will aid clinical decision making and stratification in clinical trials. These data confirm the effect of tumor subtype on survival and show the Breast-GPA offers significantly more predictive power than the tumor subtype alone.

Summary report on the graded prognostic assessment: an accurate and facile diagnosis-specific tool to estimate survival for patients with brain metastases.

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.

Diagnosis-specific prognostic factors, indexes, and treatment outcomes for patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases: a multi-institutional analysis of 4,259 patients.

PURPOSE: Controversy endures regarding the optimal treatment of patients with brain metastases (BMs). Debate persists, despite many randomized trials, perhaps because BM patients are a heterogeneous population. The purpose of the present study was to identify significant diagnosis-specific prognostic factors and indexes (Diagnosis-Specific Graded Prognostic Assessment [DS-GPA]). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective database of 5,067 patients treated for BMs between 1985 and 2007 was generated from 11 institutions. After exclusion of the patients with recurrent BMs or incomplete data, 4,259 patients with newly diagnosed BMs remained eligible for analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses of the prognostic factors and outcomes by primary site and treatment were performed. The significant prognostic factors were determined and used to define the DS-GPA prognostic indexes. The DS-GPA scores were calculated and correlated with the outcomes, stratified by diagnosis and treatment. RESULTS: The significant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis. For non-small-cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer, the significant prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance status, age, presence of extracranial metastases, and number of BMs, confirming the original GPA for these diagnoses. For melanoma and renal cell cancer, the significant prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance status and the number of BMs. For breast and gastrointestinal cancer, the only significant prognostic factor was the Karnofsky performance status. Two new DS-GPA indexes were thus designed for breast/gastrointestinal cancer and melanoma/renal cell carcinoma. The median survival by GPA score, diagnosis, and treatment were determined. CONCLUSION: The prognostic factors for BM patients varied by diagnosis. The original GPA was confirmed for non-small-cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer. New DS-GPA indexes were determined for other histologic types and correlated with the outcome, and statistical separation between the groups was confirmed. These data should be considered in the design of future randomized trials and in clinical decision-making.

Twenty-year survival in glioblastoma: a case report and molecular profile.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis for patients with glioblastoma (GB) remains grim. Historically, the median survival has been 6 to 9 months. Recent research has improved the outcome slightly. A computer search of the literature reveals few long-term survivors. METHOD: Presented here is a case report of a 20-year survivor of GB, with pathologic review to confirm the diagnosis. A battery of molecular studies was performed to develop a molecular profile of this unique patient. RESULTS: The results of the molecular genetic testing for this most unusual patient were as follows: (1) methylguanine methyl transferase (MGMT) was methylated, (2) p53 positive, (3) PTEN tumor suppressor gene positive, (4) protein kinase AKT (pAKT) negative, and (5) epidermal growth factor receptor negative. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the longest survival of any patient in the literature whose initial diagnosis was GB. Triple-positive GBM patients (MGMT methylated, PTEN, and p53 positive) are uncommon but may be associated with a better prognosis. Further research is needed to confirm whether this molecular profile is prognostic of prolonged survival. Molecular genetics will determine future treatment and prognosis in GB.