4.6 Article

Outcome of Elderly Patients With Surgically Treated Brain Metastases

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.713965

关键词

geriatric; brain metastasis; frailty; CCI; prognosis; cancer

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In geriatric patients with surgically treated brain metastases, pre-operative frailty is associated with poor survival, with multiple intracranial metastases, infratentorial localization, preoperative CRP >5 mg/l, and frailest patients identified as predictors for reduced overall survival.
Object In the light of an aging population and ongoing advances in cancer control, the optimal management in geriatric patients with brain metastases (BM) poses an increasing challenge, especially due to the scarce data available. We therefore analyzed our institutional data with regard to factors influencing overall survival (OS) in geriatric patients with BM. Methods Between 2013 and 2018, patients aged >= 65 years with surgically treated BM were included in this retrospective analysis. In search of preoperatively identifiable risk factors for poor OS, in addition to the underlying cancer, the preoperative frailty of patients was analyzed using the modified Frailty Index (mFI). Results A total of 180 geriatric patients with surgically treated BM were identified. Geriatric patients categorized as least-frail achieved a median OS of 18 months, whereas frailest patients achieved an OS of only 3 months (p<0.0001). Multivariable cox regression analysis detected multiple intracranial metastases (p=0.001), infratentorial localization (p=0.011), preoperative CRP >5 mg/l (p=0.01) and frailest patients (mFI >= 0.27) (p=0.002) as predictors for reduced OS in older patients undergoing surgical treatment for BM. Conclusions In this retrospective series, pre-operative frailty was associated with poor survival in elderly patients with BM requiring surgery. Our analyses warrant thorough counselling and support of affected elderly patients and their families.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据