Brain Metastases in Gynaecologic Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study Evaluating Treatment Outcomes, Prognostic Factors, and Overall Survival
2024

Brain Metastases in Gynaecologic Cancer: Treatment Outcomes and Prognostic Factors

Sample size: 103 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Cooke Carly M., Babadagli M. Ege, Wilson Hillary, Nair Vimoj J., Lupe Krystine, Malone Shawn, Burgess Laura, Faught Wylam, Samant Rajiv, Le Tien

Primary Institution: University of Ottawa

Hypothesis

What are the treatment outcomes and prognostic factors for patients with brain metastases secondary to gynaecologic malignancies?

Conclusion

Patients with brain metastases secondary to gynaecologic malignancies have a median survival of 3.6 months, but those treated with surgery combined with radiation have significantly longer survival.

Supporting Evidence

  • Median survival time post diagnosis of brain metastases was 3.6 months.
  • Patients treated with surgery combined with radiation had significantly longer survival compared to those treated with radiation alone.
  • Complete response to prior treatment was associated with a more favorable prognosis.
  • Patients with ≥3 brain metastases had poorer prognosis.
  • Extracranial disease at diagnosis was associated with shorter survival.

Takeaway

This study looked at women with brain cancer from gynecologic diseases and found that while most don't live long after diagnosis, some treatments can help them live longer.

Methodology

A retrospective cohort study of patients treated with radiation for brain metastases from gynaecologic cancers at a tertiary care center from 2004 to 2023.

Potential Biases

Potential bias due to the retrospective nature and incomplete data.

Limitations

The study is limited by its retrospective design and single-institution nature, which may affect the generalizability of the findings.

Participant Demographics

Median age at diagnosis of brain metastases was 59, with a range of 30 to 94 years.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.008

Confidence Interval

95% CI 2.2, 4.9

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.3390/curroncol31120558

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication