Malignant astrocytoma in elderly patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Age is inversely correlated with clinical outcome and a strong prognostic factor for the course of most primary brain tumors including malignant astrocytoma, i.e. anaplastic astrocytoma and glioblastoma. We here review available clinical outcome data and discuss future directions of clinical research. RECENT FINDINGS: The standard of care in patients with malignant astrocytoma above the range of 65-70 years was considered radiotherapy, preferentially using a hypofractionated regimen (15 × 2.66 Gy). Two phase III clinical trials, the NOA-08 and Nordic trials, demonstrated that temozolomide (TMZ) therapy alone was not inferior to radiotherapy alone, and methylation of the O-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) gene promoter was predictive with a methylated MGMT promoter indicating a benefit from TMZ chemotherapy. Ongoing clinical trials in this patient population include the National Cancer Institute of Canada/European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer intergroup trial, investigating the combination of hypofractionated radiotherapy and TMZ chemotherapy, and the Swiss ARTE trial, investigating the combination of bevacizumab and hypofractionated radiotherapy. Recent translational studies indicate that prognostically favorable factors in malignant astrocytoma from younger patients are virtually absent in the elderly. SUMMARY: Current standard of care for elderly patients with malignant astrocytoma involves a treatment strategy based on the MGMT gene promoter methylation status. The role of combined radiotherapy and TMZ chemotherapy and a potential role for the addition of anti-VEGF therapy to radiotherapy are currently addressed in ongoing trials. The lack of favorable prognostic factors in tumor tissue might in part explain the poorer clinical outcome of elderly patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".