Repeat Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Progressive or Recurrent Vestibular Schwannomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a highly effective management approach for patients with vestibular schwannomas (VS), with 10-yr control rates up 98%. When it fails, however, few data are available to guide management. OBJECTIVE: To perform a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent 2 SRS procedures on the same VS to assess the safety and efficacy of this practice. METHODS: This study was opened to centers of the International Gamma Knife Research Foundation (IGKRF). Data collected included patient characteristics, clinical symptoms at the time of SRS, radiosurgery dosimetric data, imaging response, clinical evolution, and survival. Actuarial analyses of tumor responses were performed. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients from 8 IGKRF centers were identified. Median follow-up from the second SRS was 51.7 mo. Progression after the first SRS occurred at a median of 43 mo. Repeat SRS was performed using a median dose of 12 Gy. Actuarial tumor control rates at 2, 5, and 10 yr following the second SRS were 98.6%, 92.2%, and 92.2%, respectively. Useful hearing was present in 30%, 8%, and 5% of patients at first SRS, second SRS, and last follow-up, respectively. Seventy-five percent of patients reported stable or improved symptoms following the second SRS. Worsening of facial nerve function attributable to SRS occurred in 7% of cases. There were no reports of radionecrosis, radiation-associated edema requiring corticosteroids, radiation-related neoplasia, or death attributable to the repeat SRS procedure. CONCLUSION: Patients with progressing VS after radiosurgery can be safely and effectively managed using a second SRS procedure.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".