EPN-38RELAPSE PATTERNS IN PEDIATRIC INTRACRANIAL EPENDYMOMA: A CANADIAN EXPERIENCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ependymomas represent 9% of childhood brain tumors with management algorithms heavily influenced by single-institution experiences. METHODS: Fourteen of 16 Canadian Pediatric Brain Tumour Consortium (CPBTC) centers performed a retrospective study of children less than 18 years of age with intracranial ependymoma from 1986-2006. Relapse patterns and outcome were evaluated. Ethics approval was obtained. RESULTS: There were 210 (139 M: 71F) intracranial ependymoma cases, 46% (92) <= 4 years. The median age was 3.66 years (0.4 -17.7). 53% (112/210) experienced a first relapse with median time to relapse 1.4 years (0.1 to 6.1). 70% (146/210) gross total resection (GTR) at diagnosis with adjuvant radiotherapy in 77% (162/210). Isolated local recurrence (IR) noted in 54% (61/112), dissemination (LM) in 44% (49/112). Salvage approaches included incomplete resection in 28, and GTR in 43. Re-irradiation was a component of therapy in 12 survivors, median follow-up 5 yrs (2-16). 19/61 IR are alive at last follow-up. Of the LM group at relapse (31M: 18F), 90% (44/49) arose from the posterior fossa (PF) and 53% (26/49) were WHO grade 3. 24% (12/49) of the LM relapse group are alive at last follow-up with a median follow-up of 4.31 years (0.08 to 16.1). Salvage included: surgery (2), surgery and radiotherapy (6), chemotherapy (2), surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy (1), and radiation (1). 72% succumbed to childhood ependymoma following first relapse. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of LM at relapse was 23%, one quarter of LM and one third of IR are alive following relapse therapy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".