MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146756681 · doi:10.3747/co.v18i3.755

Canadian Recommendations for the Treatment of Recurrent or Progressive Glioblastoma Multiforme

2011· article· en· W2146756681 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jacob C. Easaw, Warren Mason, James Perry, Normand Laperrière, David D. Eisenstat, Rolando F. Del Maestro, K. Bélanger, Dorcas Fulton, David R. Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health Services
FundersDepartment of Medicine, University of TorontoBC Cancer AgencyMerck CanadaMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsMedicineGlioblastomaCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recommendation 1: Multidisciplinary ApproachTo optimize treatment outcomes, the management of patients with recurrent glioblastoma should be individualized and should involve a multidisciplinary team approach, including neurosurgery, neuropathology, radiation oncology, neuro-oncology, and allied health professions.Recommendation 2: ImagingThe standard imaging modality for assessment of recurrent glioblastoma is Gd-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (mri). Tumour recurrence should be assessed according to the criteria set out by the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group. The optimal timing and frequency of mri after chemoradiation and adjunctive therapy have not been established.Recommendation 3: Pseudo-progressionProgression observed by mri after chemoradiation can be pseudo-progression. Accordingly, treated patients should not be classified as having progressive disease by Gd-enhancing mri within the first 12 weeks after the end of radiotherapy unless new enhancement is observed outside the radiotherapy field or viable tumour is confirmed by pathology at the time of a required re-operation. Adjuvant temozolomide should be continued and follow-up imaging obtained.Recommendation 4: Repeat SurgerySurgery can play a role in providing symptom relief and confirming tumour recurrence, pseudo-progression, or radiation necrosis. However, before surgical intervention, it is essential to clearly define treatment goals and the expected impact on prognosis and the patient's quality of life. In the absence of level 1 evidence, the decision to re-operate should be made according to individual circumstances, in consultation with the multidisciplinary team and the patient.Recommendation 5: Re-irradiationRe-irradiation is seldom recommended, but can be considered in carefully selected cases of recurrent glioblastoma.Recommendation 6: Systemic TherapyClinical trials, when available, should be offered to all eligible patients. In the absence of a trial, systemic therapy, including temozolomide rechallenge or anti-angiogenic therapy, may be considered. Combination therapy is still experimental; optimal drug combinations and sequencing have not been established.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0080.002
Research integrity0.0120.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.012

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations108
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207