[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-443959-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":80,"doc-detail-443959-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","the-mfi-11-frailty-index-as-a-predictor-of-surgical-outcomes-in-elderly-patients-with-brain-metastases","The mFI-11 Frailty Index as a Predictor of Surgical Outcomes in Elderly Patients with Brain Metastases","","Frailty in elderly patients is characterized as vulnerability to disease and treatment, measurable by frailty indices that capture functional health and comorbidities. This study asks whether the 11-item modified Frailty Index (mFI-11) provides prognostic value for patients undergoing brain metastasis surgery. A retrospective cohort of 139 patients (≥60 years, 2015–2019) links higher frailty to worse overall survival and poorer functional outcome. Age was less prognostic, KPS remained predictive in multivariate analyses, and frailty was not associated with major complications.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/the-mfi-11-frailty-index-as-a-predictor-of-surgical-outcomes-in-elderly-patients-with-brain-metastases/443959/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/the-mfi-11-frailty-index-as-a-predictor-of-surgical-outcomes-in-elderly-patients-with-brain-metastases/443959.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Angel","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-09-30","2026-09-29",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":26},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What research question does the study address about mFI-11?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"The study evaluates whether the 11-item modified Frailty Index (mFI-11) offers useful prognostic information for elderly patients undergoing surgery for brain metastases.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"How was frailty measured and what patient group was analyzed?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"Frailty was assessed using mFI-11 in a retrospective analysis of 139 patients aged 60 years or older who underwent brain metastasis resection between 2015 and 2019.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"What did the results show about the relationship between frailty and outcomes?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"Increasing frailty correlated with poorer median overall survival and worse postoperative functional outcomes based on KPS ranges. In multivariate analyses, KPS was predictive, while mFI-11 and age were not independently predictive, and frailty was not linked to major complications.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},443959,1790767776,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,87,91,95,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":84,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":92,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":131},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":26,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":101,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144},687207412472,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","Brain and Spine 6 (2026) 105912  \nContents lists available at ScienceDirect  \nBrain and Spine  \njournal [homepage:](homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/brain-and-spine)[ www.journals.elsevier.com/brain-and-spine](homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/brain-and-spine)  \n| The mFI-11 frailty index as a predictor of surgical outcomes in elderly patients with brain metastases\u003Cbr>Stefanie Quacha , Roland Corasb, Florian Weissingerc, Matthias Simon a , Tunc Faik Ersoya,* \u003Cbr>a Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital OWL, Campus Bielefeld-Bethel, Bielefeld, Germany\u003Cbr>b Department of Neuropathology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universit¨at Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany c Department of Hematology, Oncology and Palliative Care, University Hospital OWL, Campus Bielefeld-Bethel, Bielefeld, Germany |  |  |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| A R T I C L E I N F O |  | A B S T R A C T |\n| Keywords:\u003Cbr>Brain metastases Elderly\u003Cbr>Frailty Comorbidities Survival Functional outcome |  | Introduction: The vulnerability towards disease but also treatment in elderly patients has been referred to as frailty and can be measured using frailty indices, which assess functional health and comorbidities. Frailty has been shown to correlate with survival and functional outcomes in brain tumor patients.\u003Cbr>Research question: Does frailty, assessed by the 11-item modified Frailty Index (mFI-11), provide useful prognostic information in elderly patients undergoing brain metastasis surgery?\u003Cbr>Material and methods: A retrospective analysis of 139 patients aged ≥60 years who underwent brain metastasis resection (2015–2019) was conducted. Frailty was assessed using the mFI-11.\u003Cbr>Results: Increasing frailty correlated with poorer median overall survival (mFI 0: 13.8 months [95 %-CI: 8.7–18.9] vs. mFI 1–2l: 8.7 [5.8–11.6] vs. mFI≥3: 2.8 [0.9–4.6], p = 0.001) and functional outcome (postoperative KPS 80–100 %, mFI 0: 27/36 [75.0 %] vs. mFI 1–2: 44/64 [68.8 %] vs. mFI≥3: 13/38 [34.2 %], p \u003C 0.001). Age was less prognostic. In the multivariate analyses, mFI-11 and age were not independently predictive, while KPS was. Frailty was not associated with major complications.\u003Cbr>Discussion: While frailty correlates with outcome, functional health rather than comorbidities and age is prognostic. The mFI-11’s predictive ability may be largely due to its inclusion of a functional health assessment. Conclusion: Functional health (KPS) is a much stronger predictor of survival and functional outcome in the elderly than the presence of comorbidities and age, i.e. age per se and comorbidities without impact on the patient’s functional health status (i.e. well-treated) should not deter from surgery. Frailty is not a predictor of complications. |\n\n1. Introduction  \nAggressive treatment of malignant tumors in elderly patients is debatable. Therapeutic risks typically increase and survival outcomes worsen with age. However, rather than age per se the individual vulnerability towards disease but also treatment resulting from the effects of age, functional health, and comorbidities seem to underlie these observations. This vulnerability has been referred to as frailty (Doodyet al., 2023) and conceptualized either as a clinical syndrome of diminished reserves and increased vulnerability to stressors (Fried et al., 2021), or as an accumulation of deficits typically quantified by comorbidities, or a combination thereof.  \nFrailty can be assessed using frailty indices. Some data suggest that frailty scores can offer improved predictive accuracy over traditional measures such as the Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) and GradedPoint-Assessment (GPA) score (Kerschbaumer et al., 2022; Youngerman et al., 2018). The most commonly used Modified Frailty index (mFI) is a tool that considers both functional health status and a number of preexisting conditions such as diabetes, history of myocardial infarction, hypertension requiring medication, and previous cerebrovascular inci","cbCairJZWBpLkYoJ","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCairJZWBpLkYoJ","pdf",2019445,"English","# Introduction\n## Frailty concept and measurement\n# Materials and methods\n## Retrospective cohort and frailty assessment\n# Results\n## Survival and functional outcomes\n## Multivariate findings and complications\n# Discussion\n## Interpretation of predictive role\n# Conclusion","[{\"question\":\"What research question does the study address about mFI-11?\",\"answer\":\"The study evaluates whether the 11-item modified Frailty Index (mFI-11) offers useful prognostic information for elderly patients undergoing surgery for brain metastases.\"},{\"question\":\"How was frailty measured and what patient group was analyzed?\",\"answer\":\"Frailty was assessed using mFI-11 in a retrospective analysis of 139 patients aged 60 years or older who underwent brain metastasis resection between 2015 and 2019.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the results show about the relationship between frailty and outcomes?\",\"answer\":\"Increasing frailty correlated with poorer median overall survival and worse postoperative functional outcomes based on KPS ranges. In multivariate analyses, KPS was predictive, while mFI-11 and age were not independently predictive, and frailty was not linked to major complications.\"}]","The mFI-11 Frailty Index as a Predictor of Surgical Outcomes in Elderly Patients with Brain Metastases | PDF",1790706217,15]