PC3 - 138 Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Intracranial Hemangiopericytomas – A Multicenter Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hemangiopericytomas (HPC) are widely recognized for their aggressive clinical behavior. We report a large multicenter study, through the International Gamma Knife Research Foundation reviewing management and outcome following stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for recurrent or newly-discovered HPC’s. Methods: Eight centers participated, reviewing a total of 90 patients harboring 133 tumors. Prior treatments included embolization (n = 8), chemotherapy (n=2), and fractionated radiotherapy (n=34). The median tumor volume at the time of SRS was 4.9 ml (range 0.2-42.4 ml). WHO-grade II (typical) HPC’s formed 78.9% (n=71) of the cohort. The median margin and maximal doses delivered were 15 Gy (2.8-24) and 32 Gy (8-51), respectively. The median clinical and radiographic follow-up period was 59 months (6-190) and 59 months (6-183), respectively. Results: At last follow-up, 55% of tumors and 62.2% of patients demonstrated local tumor control. New remote intracranial tumors were found in 27.8%. 24.4% of patients developed extra-cranial metastases. Adverse radiation effects were noted in 6.7%. The overall survival was 91.5%, 82.1%, 73.9%, 56.7%, and 53.7% at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 years, respectively, after initial SRS. Local progression free survival was 81.7%, 66.3%, 54.5%, 37.2%, and 25.5% at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 years, respectively, after initial SRS. In our cohort, 32 patients underwent 48 repeat SRS procedures for 76 lesions. Margin dose greater than 16 Gy (p=0.037) and tumor histology (p=0.006) were shown to influence PFS. Conclusions: SRS provides a reasonable rate of local tumor control and a low risk of adverse effects
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".