Whole Sella vs Targeted Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Acromegaly: A Multicenter Matched Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Targeted stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) with sparing of the residual pituitary is the traditional radiosurgical method for pituitary adenomas. Whole-sella SRS is an alternative choice for radiologically indeterminate or large adenomas, the safety and efficacy of which has yet to be determined. OBJECTIVE: To determine if whole-sella SRS in acromegaly would have comparable radiographic and biochemical control to targeted SRS. We performed a multicenter, retrospective matched cohort study to compare outcomes between groups. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of acromegalic patients who underwent SRS from 1990 to 2016 at 10 centers participating in the International Radiosurgery Research Foundation. Whole-sella and targeted SRS patients were then matched in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients were eligible for inclusion. Whole-sella patients had a higher pre-SRS random serum growth hormone, larger treatment volume, and higher maximum point dose to the optic apparatus. The rates of initial/durable endocrine remission, new loss of pituitary function, and new cranial neuropathy were similar between groups. Mortality and new visual deficit were higher in the whole-sella cohort, though not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in biochemical remission or recurrence between treatment groups. Although not statistically significant, the higher rates of tumor regression and lower rates of mortality and new visual deficit may suggest consideration of targeted SRS over whole-sella SRS in acromegaly treatment. Further research is needed to determine the association between visual deficits and mortality with whole-sella SRS.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".