Longitudinal evaluation of neurocognitive function after treatment for central nervous system germ cell tumors in childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Central nervous system germ cell tumors (CNS GCT) are typically localized to midline structures of the brain, including the pineal and suprasellar/pituitary regions. Management of these tumors depends on underlying histology (germinoma or nongerminomatous germ cell tumor). Knowledge about neurocognitive outcome in these patients is limited. Longitudinal neurocognitive outcome in CNS GCT patients seen for neuropsychological evaluation at a single institution was explored. METHODS: Thirty-five patients were seen for neurocognitive evaluation after diagnosis and treatment for a CNS GCT. Mean age at diagnosis was 11.66 years. Tumor location was suprasellar in 12 patients, pineal in 9, bifocal in 10, multifocal in 3, and thalamic in 1. Standardized cognitive tests of intelligence, receptive language, visual-motor ability, memory, and academic achievement were administered. Longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Intelligence, academic functioning, and receptive vocabulary were not significantly compromised in most patients treated for CNS GCT. Working memory, information processing speed, and visual memory declined significantly over time in all patients. Patients with pineal tumors showed early and stable deficits, whereas patients with suprasellar and bifocal tumors showed more protracted declines from initial average functioning. Patients treated with ventricular versus craniospinal radiation displayed better outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Although general cognitive abilities appeared stable and intact after treatment for most children with CNS GCT, a significant decline over time in working memory, processing speed, and visual memory was evident. Tumor location appeared to be important in understanding the trajectory of stability and decline in CNS GCT patients, as did radiation field.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".