MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809567626 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noy059.407

MBCL-09. SALVAGE THERAPY FOR CHILDHOOD MEDULLOBLASTOMA: A SINGLE CENTER EXPERIENCE

2018· article· en· W2809567626 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle Kameda-Smith, Alick Wang, Noora Abdulhadi, Ashley Adile, Olufemi Ajani, Blake Yarascavitch, Forough Farrokhyar, Tina Petrelli, M. Constantine Samaan, Cheryl Alyman, Sheila K. Singh, Adam Fleming

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSalvage therapyCohortVincristineMedulloblastomaRefractory (planetary science)Retrospective cohort studySurgeryEtoposideInternal medicineOncologyChemotherapyCyclophosphamidePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children diagnosed with medulloblastoma (MB) that are refractory to upfront therapy or experience recurrence have very poor prognoses. Reports of phase I and II studies for these children exist, but these therapies bear significant treatment related morbidity and mortality. A retrospective review of children diagnosed with a pediatric MB from 2002-2015 from the McMaster Pediatric Brain Tumour Study Group (PBTSG) captured a number of pediatric recurrent MB. Over the 13-year period, 31 children with a histological diagnosis of MB were treated. Thirteen children had recurrent or treatment refractory MB. The 2-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) of our cohort was 67.7% and 80.6% respectively. The mean time to recurrence was 14.6 months. The mean follow-up for survivors of recurrent MB was 4.0 years. Ten patients recurred with disseminated leptomeningeal spread and 3 patients experienced local recurrence. In 3 of the 13 recurrent MB, the disease had significantly progressed and the patients were palliated. For the remaining children, therapy offered included surgery, radiation (CSI or CyberKnife), carboplatin, cisplatin, cyclophosphamide, etoposide, imatinib, irinotecan, methotrexate, temsirolimus, temozolamide, tipifarnib, vinblastine, and vincristine either in isolation or in varying combinations. Recurrent MB in our single centre cohort carried a poor prognosis despite administration of salvage therapy. Though there is standardization of the upfront treatment for these children, we observed great heterogeneity in the treatment of our 13 patients experiencing recurrence. A greater understanding of the biology of recurrent MB has the potential to guide salvage 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207