Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Benign (World Health Organization Grade I) Cavernous Sinus Meningiomas—International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society (ISRS) Practice Guideline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has become popular as a standard treatment for cavernous sinus (CS) meningiomas. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the published literature specific to the treatment of CS meningioma with SRS found through a systematic review, and to create recommendations on behalf of the International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society. METHODS: Articles published from January 1963 to December 2014 were systemically reviewed. Three electronic databases, PubMed, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, were searched. Publications in English with at least 10 patients (each arm) were included. RESULTS: Of 569 screened abstracts, a total of 49 full-text articles were included in the analysis. All studies were retrospective. Most of the reports had favorable outcomes with 5-yr progression-free survival (PFS) rates ranging from 86% to 99%, and 10-yr PFS rates ranging from 69% to 97%. The post-SRS neurological preservation rate ranged from 80% to 100%. Resection can be considered for the treatment of larger (>3 cm in diameter) and symptomatic CS meningioma in patients both receptive to and medically eligible for open surgery. Adjuvant or salvage SRS for residual or recurrent tumor can be utilized depending on factors such as tumor volume and proximity to adjacent critical organs at risk. CONCLUSION: The literature is limited to level III evidence with respect to outcomes of SRS in patients with CS meningioma. Based on the observed results, SRS offers a favorable benefit to risk profile for patients with CS meningioma.
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 | 0.010 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".