Preservation of long-term neurocognitive function by hippocampal avoidance whole-brain radiotherapy in patients with brain metastases.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
124 Background: To investigate the preservation of long-term neurocognitive function in patients after hippocampal avoidance whole-brain radiotherapy (HA-WBRT). Methods: For the retrospective analysis, 50 patients diagnosed with brain metastases were selected and divided into two groups from 2015-01-01 to 2017-12-31 at the Department of Oncology, Jiangsu Subei People's Hospital. Group A (n=27) was hippocampal avoidance whole-brain radiotherapy group; group B (n=23) was whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) group. Neurocognitive function was statistically analyzed at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 24 months after radiotherapy, as scored by the MMSE (Mine-Mental State Examination) scales and the MoCA (Montreal Cognitive Assessment) scales. The OS, PFS and tumor recurrence sites of the two groups was also analyzed. Results: After 12, 24 months after radiotherapy, there was a significant difference between the two groups. The cognitive function of the hippocampal protection group was significantly higher than that of the non-hippocampal protection group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in OS (P=0.2) and PFS (P=0.18) between the two groups. 14 patents in group A and 12 patents in group B had brain tumor recurrence after radiation, only one patient in group A occurred 5 mm within the edge of the hippocampus (P>0.05). Conclusions: First, HA-WBRT has a protective effect on long-term neurocognitive function. Second, there was no statistically significant different on OS and PFS in patients who underwent HA-WBRT or WBRT. Third, HA-WBRT didn’t increase the risk of brain tumor recurrence within the edge of the hippocampus.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".