Proton beam irradiation for non-AMD CNV: 2-year results of a randomised clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To evaluate safety and visual outcomes after proton beam irradiation (PBI) therapy for subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation (CNV) secondary to causes other than age-related macular degeneration (AMD). METHODS: This study is a prospective, unmasked and randomised clinical trial using two dosage regimens, conducted in the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary. The study included 46 patients with CNV secondary to non-AMD and best-corrected visual acuity of 20/320 or better. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 16 or 24 cobalt gray equivalents (CGE) of PBI in two equal fractions. Complete ophthalmological examinations, fundus photography and fluorescein angiography were performed at baseline and 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after treatment. RESULTS: At 1 year after treatment, 82% and 72% lost fewer than 1.5 lines of vision in the 16 CGE and in 24 CGE groups, respectively. At 2 years after therapy, 77% in the lower dose group and 64% in the higher dose group lost fewer than 1.5 lines of vision. Mild radiation complications such as radiation vasculopathy developed in 17.6% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: PBI is a safe and efficacious treatment for subfoveal CNV not due to AMD. The data with respect to visual outcomes and radiation complications trend in favour of the 16 CGE group, although differences do not reach statistical significance. PBI may be considered as an alternative to current therapies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".