MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271503896 · doi:10.1016/j.rpor.2016.01.001

Secondary malignancy following radiotherapy for thyroid eye disease

2016· article· en· W2271503896 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Gillis, Eun Hae Estelle Chang, Khalid Al-Kharazi, Tom Pickles

Bibliographic record

VenueReports of Practical Oncology & Radiotherapy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMalignancyRadiation therapyThyroid cancerThyroidCancerMeningiomaSurgeryRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To describe the first case of a secondary meningioma in a patient after radiation treatment for thyroid eye disease (TED). Secondarily to identify any additional cases of secondary malignancy resulting from radiotherapy for thyroid eye disease from our institutional experience. BACKGROUND: Thyroid eye disease (TED) is a self-limiting auto-immune disorder causing expansion of orbital soft tissue from deposition of glycosaminoglycans and collagen, leading to significant cosmetic and functional morbidity. Established management options for TED include: glucocorticosteroids, orbital radiotherapy, and surgical orbital decompression. Two large series on radiotherapy for TED have been reported without any cases of secondary malignancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The case of a patient with visual failure, found to have a sphenoid wing meningioma after previous TED radiotherapy is described. We then reviewed 575 patients with at least 3-year follow-up receiving radiotherapy for TED at British Columbia Cancer Agency to identify other possible secondary malignancies. RESULTS: The patient had postoperative improvement in her vision without any identified complications. Three additional cases of hematologic malignancy were identified. The calculated risk in our population of developing a radiation-induced meningioma after TED with at least 3 years of follow-up of is 0.17% (1/575); with hematopoetic malignancies the risk for secondary malignancy is 0.7% (4/575). CONCLUSIONS: Our calculated risk for secondary malignancy (0.17%, 0.7%) is similar to the reported theoretical risk published in the literature (0.3-1.2%). There is real risk for the development of a secondary malignancy after radiotherapy treatment of TED and treatment options should include consideration for this potential.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReports of Practical Oncology & RadiotherapySame topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207