MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2809927052 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2018.146

P.044 Salvage therapy in recurrent pediatric medulloblastoma: A single centre experience

2018· article· en· W2809927052 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M Kameda-Smith, A Wang, Ashley Adile, Branavan Manoranjan, Rebecca Voth, Anjali Sergeant, Aarti Maharaj, Olufemi Ajani, Blake Yarascavitch, Cheryl Alyman, M. Constantine Samaan, Forough Farrokhyar, JoAnn Duckworth, SK Singh, Adam Fleming

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSalvage therapyMedulloblastomaRefractory (planetary science)CohortRetrospective cohort studyPediatricsRadiation therapySurgeryChemotherapyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: 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 bear significant treatment related morbidity and mortality. Methods: 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. Results: Over the 13-year period, 31 children with a histological diagnosis of MB were treated. At two years, 21 (67.7%) of 31 patients were free of recurrence and 25 (80.6%) survived. Thirteen children had recurrent or treatment refractory MB. mean time to recurrence was 14.6 months. The mean follow-up for survivors of recurrent MB was 4.0 years. In 3 recurrent MB, the disease had significantly progressed and the patients palliated. For the remaining children, therapy offered included surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy agents either in isolation or in varying combinations. Conclusions: Recurrent MB in our cohort carried a poor prognosis despite administration of salvage therapy. Though there is standardization of the upfront treatment exists, 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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designCase report
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 venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→