Regression rate of choroidal melanoma following iodine-125 brachytherapy is not associated with metastatic spread
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nearly half of choroidal melanomas progress to the metastatic stage at 15 years. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the prognostic value of tumour-height regression rate in medium-sized choroidal melanomas treated with iodine-125 brachytherapy. A retrospective cohort study was performed on 128 patients with medium-sized choroidal melanoma who were treated with iodine-125 brachytherapy. Tumour characteristics including tumour apical height at baseline and after irradiation, recurrence, metastasis and mortality were collected from patients' records. Regression rate was defined in mm/month or in percentage of baseline apical height. Patients were statistically stratified in three groups of regression rate at 6 months using the Ward's method and Euclidian distance (slow, medium and fast regression groups). Mean initial apical height was of 5.71±1.79 mm. At 6 months, the average regression rate was 0.02±0.12 mm/month in the slow group (n=60), 0.32±0.11 mm/month in the medium group (n=52) and 0.67±0.21 mm/month in the fast group (n=16). Cox regression analysis for the recurrence, metastasis and mortality rates according to the three groups did not show any statistically significant difference. Sensitivity analyses with the regression rates at 12 months showed similar associations. Exudative retinal detachment resolved with treatment at 5.9±4.0 months, and it was more common at presentation in the fast regression rate group. The regression rate at 6 and 12 months after iodine-125 brachytherapy is not associated with a higher metastatic rate in medium-sized choroidal melanoma.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".