Choroid plexus tumours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Choroid plexus tumours are rare epithelial brain tumours and limited information is available regarding their biology and the best treatment. A meta-analysis was done to determine prognostic factors and the influence of various treatment modalities. A thorough review of the medical literature (1966-1998) revealed 566 well-documented choroid plexus tumours. These were entered into a database, which was analysed to determine prognostic factors and treatment modalities. Most patients with a supratentorial tumour were children, while the most common sites in adults were the fourth ventricle and the cerebellar pontine angle. Cerebellar pontine angle tumours were more frequently benign. Histology was the most important prognostic factor, as one, five, and 10-year projected survival rates were 90, 81, and 77% in choroid plexus-papilloma (n=353) compared to only 71, 41, and 35% in choroid plexus-carcinoma respectively (P<0.0005). Surgery was prognostically relevant for both choroid plexus-papilloma (P=0.0005) and choroid plexus-carcinoma (P=0.0001). Radiotherapy was associated with significantly better survival in choroid plexus-carcinomas. Eight of 22 documented choroid plexus-carcinomas responded to chemotherapy. Relapse after primary treatment was a poor prognostic factor in choroid plexus-carcinoma patients but not in choroid plexus-papilloma patients. Treatment of choroid plexus tumours should start with radical surgical resection. This should be followed by adjuvant treatment in case of choroid plexus-carcinoma, and a "wait and see" approach in choroid plexus-papilloma.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".