Introduction:Metastatic brain disease is still a major contributor to cancer treatment failure. Various treatments have improved in the recent decades, which allow for better control of brain metastatic lesions. Various prognostic scoring tools have been developed and used worldwide to stratify patients with brain metastases to determine who will benefit most from aggressive treatment. The three most commonly used prognostic scoring tools are recursive partitioning analysis (RPA), basic score for brain metastases (BSBM) and graded prognostic assessment (GPA). The aim of this study is to validate these scoring tools using an Indonesian cancer patient population.Method:A retrospective analysis of all patients presenting with brain metastases from January 2012 until December 2014, through using hospital medical records, was conducted. All patients receiving whole brain radiotherapy during this period were included in this study. A follow-up with a telephone call was carried out to determine the patient's health and survival status. Uncontactable patients were excluded from the analysis. Survival analysis was carried out by stratifying patients based on the three prognostic scoring systems.Result:A total of 80 patients were eligible to be included in the study, with 18 excluded due to being uncontactable. The remaining 62 patients' data were analysed and stratified with all three scoring systems. The RPA was found to confer better stratification than BSBM and GPA in our study population.Conclusion:GPA was non-prognostic in our study population and BSBM was less prognostic, especially in the middle group, class 1 and class 2. Those BSBM class 1 and class 2 did not provide good prognostic stratification in our study population, whereas RPA was proven to be the best in stratifying patients' prognosis with brain metastases in our study population.
- brain metastases