MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001707539 · doi:10.1136/bjo.2008.153429

Stereotactic radiotherapy for treatment of juxtapapillary choroidal melanoma: 3-year follow-up

2009· article· en· W2001707539 on OpenAlexaff
Hatem Krema, Sohel Somani, Arjun Sahgal, Weize Xu, M. Heydarian, David G. Payne, Hugh McGowan, Howard B. Michaels, E. Rand Simpson, Normand Laperrière

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Ophthalmology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEnucleationRadiation therapyBrachytherapySurgeryOptic neuropathyChoroidStereotactic radiotherapyGlaucomaMelanomaOphthalmologyRadiosurgeryOptic nerveRetina

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To report the treatment outcomes and complication rates of stereotactic radiotherapy in the management of patients with juxtapapillary choroidal melanoma. METHODS: A retrospective review of 64 consecutive patients with juxtapapillary choroidal melanoma, located within 2 mm of the optic disc, treated with stereotactic radiotherapy at Princess Margaret Hospital between October 1998 and January 2006. RESULTS: The median age was 63 years. The median tumour height was 4.2 mm, and median largest basal diameter was 9.8 mm. The prescribed radiation dose was 70 Gy in five fractions over 10 days, and the median follow-up was 37 months. Post-treatment, the actuarial rates of local tumour control, metastases and survival at 37 months were 94%, 15% and 90%, respectively. Actuarial rates of radiation-induced complications at 37 months were neovascular glaucoma 42%, cataract 53%, retinopathy 81% and optic neuropathy 64%. Secondary enucleation was necessary for 10 patients (16%), in four patients for tumour recurrence and in six for painful neovascular glaucoma. CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactic radiotherapy offers a non-invasive alternative to enucleation and brachytherapy in the management of juxtapapillary choroidal melanoma with a high tumour control rate, however, at the expense of a significant rate of long-term ocular complications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations84
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of OphthalmologySame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207