Ophthalmological outcomes of patients treated for pineal region tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The ophthalmological outcomes of children treated for pineal tumors have received limited attention in the literature. METHODS This paper reviews the outcomes of 29 children treated for pineal and posterior third ventricular tumors in the contemporary era using chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and resection as defined by the histology and/or marker profile of the tumor. RESULTS At the time of diagnosis, all patients except 1 had hydrocephalus and all had ophthalmological involvement. Papilledema was found in 69% of patients. Seventy-five percent of patients had partial or complete Parinaud's syndrome, and diplopia or blurred vision was noted in the remaining patients. Visual acuity was impaired in 8 patients. Outcomes were dependent on the histology of the tumor and the treatment required. Those patients who did not requiring resection showed a lower rate of ophthalmological worsening during treatment and greater long-term improvement, in particular with respect to up-gaze palsy. Patients who underwent resection for postchemotherapy residual disease or primary resection showed greater worsening during treatment and lesser degrees of recovery. All patients with impaired visual acuity improved with treatment. CONCLUSIONS As the mortality of germ cell and other pineal tumors decreases, posttreatment morbidity remains, specifically that related to convergence nystagmus, accommodation, and diplopia. In addition to survival, ophthalmological morbidity should be reported in studies concerning the outcomes of treatment for pineal neoplasms.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".