Primary intraocular lymphoma (PIOL): An International Primary CNS Lymphoma Collaborative group report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1534 Background: PIOL is a hemopoietic tumor that arises in the retina, vitreous or optic nerve head, and carries a high risk of ocular and CNS relapse. The natural history and optimal management are unknown. Methods: A retrospective series of 81 patients with PIOL was assembled from 15 centers in 7 countries. Only patients with isolated ocular lymphoma were included; none had brain, spinal cord, or systemic lymphoma at diagnosis. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 65 (24–85). 58% were women. The median ECOG performance status was 0, and only three had a score > 1. The median latency from symptom onset to diagnosis was 6 months (0– 36). Slit lamp exam was positive in 51, negative in 6, and not reported in 24. Vitrectomy was positive in 72 and negative in 2. 6 had a positive choroidal or retinal biopsy and 1 had no ocular surgery. CSF cytology was positive in 10 (17%), negative in 48, and unknown in 23. 21 received local therapy at diagnosis: 6 intra-ocular methotrexate (400 ug), 14 ocular radiation (median 3600 cGy), and 1 both modalities. 52 received more extensive therapy including systemic chemotherapy alone in 20 and a combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy in 32. 5 received no treatment and details are unknown in 3. 47 patients (58%) relapsed a median of 19 months (0.5–180) after initial therapy. Sites of relapse included brain 47%, eyes 30%, brain and eyes 15%, and systemic 8%. Patients treated with ocular therapy alone did not have an increased risk of failing in the brain (p = 0.6). Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 29.6 and 57 months respectively and were unaffected by the choice of therapy. CNS disease was the cause of death in 19/33 (58%). Conclusions: In this series, treatment type did not affect sites of relapse, PFS or OS in patients with PIOL. To minimize toxicity, the best initial therapy should be limited to intraocular chemotherapy or focal radiotherapy. Prospective clinical trials are needed to improve our understanding and treatment of this disease. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".