Clinical studies of photodynamic therapy for malignant brain tumors: facial nerve palsy after temporal fossa photoillumination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In two randomized prospective studies of brain tumor PDT more than 180 patients have been accrued. At the Toronto site we recognized two patients who developed a lower motor neuron (LMN) facial paralysis in the week following the PDT treatment. In both cases a temporal lobectomy was undertaken and the residual tumor cavity was photo-illuminated. The surface illuminated included the temporal fossa floor, thus potentially exposing the facial nerve to the effect of PDT. The number of frontal, temporal, parietal, and occipital tumors in this cohort was 39, 24, 12 and 4, respectively. Of the 24 temporal tumors 18 were randomized to Photofrin-PDT. Of these 18 a temporal lobectomy was carried out exposing the middle fossa floor as part of the tumor resection. In two of the 10 patients where the lobectomy was carried out and the fossa floor was exposed to light there occurred a postoperative facial palsy. Both patients recovered facial nerve function in 6 and 12 weeks, respectively. 46 J/cm2 were used in the former and 130 J/cm2 in the latter. We did not encounter a single post-operative LMN facial plasy in the 101 phase 2 patients treated with Photofrin-PDT. Among 688 supratentorial brain tumor operations in the last decade involving all pathologies and all locations no case of early post-operative LMN facial palsy was identified in the absence of PDT. One further patient who had a with post-PDT facial palsy was identified at the Denver site. Although it is possible that these patients had incidental Bell's palsy, we now recommend shielding the temporal fossa floor during PDT.
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 | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".