MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2962558435 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2019.39

Salvage Therapy for Childhood Medulloblastoma: A Single Center Experience

2019· article· en· W2962558435 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michelle Kameda-Smith, Alick Wang, Noora Abdulhadi, Rebecca Voth, Anjali Sergeant, Arjuna Maharaj, David Bakhshinyan, Ashley Adile, Akshat Pai, Olufemi Ajani, Blake Yarascavitch, M. Cheryl A. Alyman, JoAnn Duckworth, M. Constantine Samaan, Forough Farrokhyar, Sheila K. Singh, Adam Fleming

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsImpactMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSalvage therapyRefractory (planetary science)SurgeryMedulloblastomaRetrospective cohort studyTolerabilityRadiation therapyCohortChemotherapyPediatricsInternal medicineAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Children diagnosed with medulloblastoma (MB) who are refractory to upfront therapy or experience recurrence have very poor prognoses. Although phase I and phase II trials exist, these treatments bear significant treatment-related morbidity and mortality. METHODS: A retrospective review of children diagnosed with a recurrence of MB from 2002 to 2015 at McMaster University was undertaken. RESULTS: Recurrent disease in 10 patients involved leptomeningeal dissemination, with 3 experiencing local recurrence. In three recurrent patients the disease significantly progressed, and the children were palliated. The remaining 10 children underwent some form of salvage therapy, including surgical re-resection, radiation, and chemotherapy, either in isolation or in varying combinations. Of the 13 children experiencing treatment-refractory or recurrent disease, 4 are currently alive with a median follow-up of 38.5 months (75.5 months). Of the eight patients with molecular subgrouping data, none of the Wnt MB experienced recurrence. CONCLUSION: Recurrent MB carried a poor prognosis with a 5-year overall survival (OS) of 18.2% despite the administration of salvage therapy. The upfront therapy received, available treatment, and tolerability of the proposed salvage therapy resulted in significant heterogeneity in the treatment of our recurrent cohort.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→