Iodine‐125 Radiotherapy for Choroidal Melanoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective was to evaluate the effect of the gender, size, and tumor location at the time of the diagnosis on the regression response of choroidal melanoma following plaque radiotherapy treatment. The paper is a longitudinal prospective study of 28 patients diagnosed with choroidal melanoma at McGill University Health Centre from 1997 to 2002. All patients were treated with episcleral iodine-125 (I(125)) plaque radiotherapy. Plaques were inserted at the tumor site under echographic visualization. All patients had medium-size tumors, except for three. Patients had periodic ophthalmic evaluation at 3 and 6 months post radiation treatment, followed by 6-month intervals thereafter. Patients' mean age was 62 +/- 15 years, 16 males and 12 females. Fifty percent of the tumors were located posterior to the equator with significant reduction in size at 12 months post plaque radiotherapy treatment. Significant regression was observed in all the tumor diameters at 5 years post treatment follow-up. Reduction in the depth diameter was significant (P < 0.01) in both male and female groups post treatment. There was a 25% (P < 0.001) reduction in the medium size of tumors at 5-year follow-up. Tumors located posterior to the equator responded best to I(125) plaque radiotherapy. Male patients responded better than females to treatment. Medium-size melanoma responded well to plaque radiotherapy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".