Long-Term Survivors of Glioblastoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unlike most patients with glioblastoma multiforme who survive less than a year, approximately 2% have an unusually long survival after diagnosis and contemporary treatment (> or = 3 or more years); rarely, the disease appears to be "cured." Understanding these rare patients may tell us something important about the biology of glioblastoma multiforme. Patients who are young, have good performance status, and receive multimodalitytherapy (i.e., surgical resection, radiotherapy, and adjuvant chemotherapy) are more likely to have a long survival than older patients with poor performance status who are treated identically. However, the aforementioned clinical characteristics of long-term survivors do not explain why most patients with glioblastoma multiforme who have this same constellation of favorable features succumb to the disease relatively quickly. "Glioblastoma multiforme" is a group of diseases, one subtype of which behaves in a more indolent fashion, or responds well to current therapies, or both. In this review, we summarize the molecular characteristics of glioblastoma multiforme and pay special attention to molecular predictors of survival outcome, an area of research that is still in its infancy. We conclude by suggesting a translational research strategy that is aimed at uncovering the molecular signatures of long survivorship.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".