Long-Term Follow-Up of Children Treated for High-Grade Gliomas: Children's Oncology Group L991 Final Study Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: High-grade gliomas of the CNS are characterized by poor treatment response and prognosis for long-term survival. The Children's Oncology Group (COG) L991 study investigated the neuropsychological, behavioral, and quality of life (QoL) outcomes after treatment on the Children's Cancer Group (CCG) trial for high-grade gliomas (CCG-945). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-four patients (29 males, 25 females) with a median age of 8.8 years at diagnosis (range, 0.2 to 19.5 years) were enrolled at 25 institutions in North America, representing 81% of available survivors; median length of follow-up was 15.1 years (range, 9.5 to 19.2 years), and median age at study evaluation was 23.6 years (range, 11.3 to 36 years). Standardized tests of neuropsychological functioning and QoL were performed. Descriptive statistics summarized principal findings, and one-way analysis of variance identified potential predictors of outcomes. RESULTS: With an average follow-up time of 15 years, survivors demonstrated intellectual functioning within the low-average range. Executive functioning and verbal memory were between the low-average and borderline ranges. In contrast, visual memory and psychomotor processing speed were between the borderline and impaired ranges, respectively. Approximately 75% of patient reported overall QoL within or above normal limits for both physical and psychosocial domains. Nonhemispheric tumor location (midline or cerebellum), female sex, and younger age at treatment emerged as independent risk factors. CONCLUSION: These results serve as a benchmark for comparison with future pediatric high-grade glioma studies, in addition to identifying at-risk cohorts that warrant further research and proactive interventions to minimize late effects while striving to ensure survival.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".