↓ Skip to main content

Novel risk scores for survival and intracranial failure in patients treated with radiosurgery alone to melanoma brain metastases

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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.
Title
Novel risk scores for survival and intracranial failure in patients treated with radiosurgery alone to melanoma brain metastases
Published in
Radiation Oncology, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13014-015-0553-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Imran H. Chowdhury, Eric Ojerholm, Matthew T. McMillan, Denise Miller, James D. Kolker, Goldie Kurtz, Jay F. Dorsey, Suneel N. Nagda, Geoffrey A. Geiger, Steven Brem, Donald M. O’Rourke, Eric L. Zager, Tara Gangadhar, Lynn Schuchter, John Y. K. Lee, Michelle Alonso-Basanta

Abstract

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone is an increasingly common treatment strategy for brain metastases. However, existing prognostic tools for overall survival (OS) were developed using cohorts of patients treated predominantly with approaches other than SRS alone. Therefore, we devised novel risk scores for OS and distant brain failure (DF) for melanoma brain metastases (MBM) treated with SRS alone. We retrospectively reviewed 86 patients treated with SRS alone for MBM from 2009-2014. OS and DF were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards modeling identified clinical risk factors. Risk scores were created based on weighted regression coefficients. OS scores range from 0-10 (0 representing best OS), and DF risk scores range from 0-5 (0 representing lowest risk of DF). Predictive power was evaluated using c-index statistics. Bootstrapping with 200 resamples tested model stability. The median OS was 8.1 months from SRS, and 54 (70.1 %) patients had DF at a median of 3.3 months. Risk scores for OS were predicated on performance status, extracranial disease (ED) status, number of lesions, and gender. Median OS for the low-risk group (0-3 points) was not reached. For the moderate-risk (4-6 points) and high-risk (6.5-10) groups, median OS was 7.6 months and 2.4 months, respectively (p < .0001). Scores for DF were predicated on performance status, ED status, and number of lesions. Median time to DF for the low-risk group (0 points) was not reached. For the moderate-risk (1-2 points) and high-risk (3-5 points) groups, time to DF was 4.8 and 2.0 months, respectively (p < .0001). The novel scores were more predictive (c-index = 0.72) than melanoma-specific graded prognostic assessment or RTOG recursive partitioning analysis tools (c-index = 0.66 and 0.57, respectively). We devised novel risk scores for MBM treated with SRS alone. These scores have implications for prognosis and treatment strategy selection (SRS versus whole-brain radiotherapy).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Romania 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Other 11 26%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 11 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 18 November 2016.
All research outputs
#13,960,063
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#749
of 2,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,431
of 387,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#16
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,057 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
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 387,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.