MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969981749 · doi:10.1215/s1152851702000297

Leptomeningeal dissemination at diagnosis of pediatric low-gradeneuroepithelial tumors

2003· article· en· W1969981749 on OpenAlexaff
Juliette Hukin, João Siffert, Henry Cohen, Linda Velasquez, David Zagzag, Jeffrey C. Allen

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreBC Children's HospitalChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroepithelial cellMedicineBiologyGeneticsEmbryonic stem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this study was to describe the demographic, histologic, and prognostic features of children with low-grade neuroepithelial tumors (LGN) of the CNS presenting with leptomeningeal metastases (LM) at diagnosis. We identified 528 newly diagnosed LGN children, 13 (3%) of whom had LM at diagnosis. LM was defined by neuroimaging, clinical evidence, and/or biopsy. The charts were reviewed and patients contacted to validate the demographic data, treatment, and clinical status. The distribution of LM patients by primary tumor site was diencephalon, 5; cerebrum, 2; spinal cord, 3; brainstem, 2; and cerebellum, 1. Six of 8 patients with LM had durable objective responses to chemotherapy. The 5-year progression-free survival of patients with LM at diagnosis was 17%, compared to 85% (95% CI, 80%-91%) for those with localized LGN who had a gross total resection and 51% (95% CI, 44%-52%) for those with localized LGN who had less aggressive surgery ( P < 0.0001). Only 1 of these 13 LM patients died. The 5-year overall survival of the localized LGN group with a gross total resection was 97% (95% CI, 92%-99.9%), and that of the localized LGN group with less aggressive surgery was 88% (95% CI, 84%-95%) ( P = 0.004). The 3% frequency of LM at diagnosis is likely an underestimate since patients with newly diagnosed LGN were not routinely staged. We suggest that staging be considered in the following circumstances: diencephalic primary site, unexplained hydrocephalus, clinical features suggestive of LM, and before adjuvant therapy is initiated. The prognosis for children with LM at diagnosis is favorable, and its identification alters therapeutic strategies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207