Giant Petroclival Primary Intradural Chordoma: Case Report and Systematic Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Chordomas are rare, locally aggressive neoplasms thought to arise from notochordal remnants in the axial skeleton. Primary intradural chordomas are considered to be extremely rare. In this article a giant intradural petroclival chordoma is presented, and a synthesis of the available literature is performed to measure overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) and to identify prognostic factors. Methods A systematic Medline review yielded 47 patients with purely intradural tumors from 38 publications including 39 chordomas, 8 cases of ecchordosis physaliphora, and 1 case with features of both. The 5-year OS and RFS were calculated based on the Kaplan-Meier method. Risk factors for progression or mortality were analyzed using binomial logistic regression. Results Maximal tumor diameter varied from 1.5 to 6.0 cm (mean: 3.2 cm). Tumors were located predominantly in the prepontine area (66.7%). Combined 5-year Kaplan-Meier OS and RFS were 77% ± 11% and 74% ± 11%, respectively. Incomplete surgical resection, larger tumor diameter, and an elevated Ki-67 index were statistically more frequent in cases of recurrence and mortality. Conclusions Based on a systematic literature review, the behavior of primary intradural chordomas may be closer to typical chordomas than was previously thought.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".