Management of iris melanomas with 125 iodine plaque radiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose The experience with 125Iodine (I125) plaque brachytherapy in the treatment of IM at the Princess Margaret Hospital/University Health Network is the subject of the report to follow. Methods All cases of IM submitted to I125 plaque radiotherapy were included. Patients' demographic, clinical, management, and follow‐up data were reviewed. Outcome measures included rates of tumor control, eye preservation, systemic metastases, and brachytherapy‐related complications. Results Fourteen IMs were included in the study. All patients had blue/green irises. Mean largest basal dimension and thickness were 7.1 +/‐ 2.1 mm (range, 4.0 to 11.5 mm) and 2.2 +/‐ 0.8 mm (range, 1.0 to 3.5 mm), respectively. Ten patients (71%) had seeding and 2 (14%) had glaucoma at presentation. Median follow‐up was 26.6 +/‐ 19.5 months (range, 6 to 72 months). Tumor control was achieved in 100% of the cases and no eye was enucleated because of radiation‐induced complications. At last visit, all patients were alive and free of metastasis. Final visual acuity was the same as or better than before treatment in 9 patients (75%). Cataract was the most common complication (8; 75%), followed by persistent glaucoma (2; 17%) and anterior uveitis (1; 8%). No other significant complication was seen during the follow‐up period. Conclusion Plaque radiotherapy is a safe and effective conservative treatment option for IM, although cataract is a common, yet treatable, complication. This treatment scheme circumvents an intraocular procedure and may avoid the dissemination of malignant cells, and provides a margin of safety in the treatment of clinically undetectable disease.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".