MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986474427 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noz175.575

INNV-34. PATTERNS OF FAILURE AND DEVELOPMENT OF A NOVEL PROGNOSTIC SCORING SYSTEM IN ELDERLY PATIENTS WITH GLIOBLASTOMA – FOLLOW UP ON 10 YEAR ANALYSIS OF THE BC CANCER AGENCY POPULATION

2019· article· en· W2986474427 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Zeng, Kimberly DeVries, Andra Krauze

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUnivariate analysisInternal medicineGlioblastomaPerformance statusCancerPopulationSurgeryMultivariate analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract PURPOSE Glioblastomas (GBM) are the most common primary brain tumour recurring in most patients despite maximal management. Patient selection for appropriate treatment modality remains challenging resulting in heterogeneity in management. We examined the patterns of failure and developed a scoring system for patient stratification to optimise clinical decision making. METHODS 822 adults (BC Cancer Agency registry) diagnosed 2005–2015 age ≥60 with histologically confirmed GBM ICD-O-3 codes (9440/3, 9441/3, 9442/3) were reviewed. Univariate and Kaplan-Meier analysis were performed. Performance status (PS), age and resection status were assigned a score, cummulative maximal (favorable) score of 10 and minimum (unfavorable) score of 3. Patterns of failure were further analysed in the subset of patients with radiographic follow-up. RESULTS PS score of 3(KPS >80, ECOG 0/1), 2 (KPS 60–70, ECOG 2), 1 (KPS < 60, ECOG 3/4) (median OS 11, 6, 3 months respectively), age score and resection status were prognostic for OS with PS resulting in the most significant curve separation (p< 0.0001). Biopsy as compared to STR/GTR resulted in poorer OS in patients over 70 (age score 1/2) but had less impact in patients younger than 70 (age scores 3/4). The median OS for cumulative scores of 9/10 (123 patients), 7/8 (286 patients), 5/6 (313 patients), and 3/4 (55 patients) were 14, 8, 4 and 2 months respectively (p< 0.0001) allowing for stratification into 4 prognostic groups. 133 patients had >3 MRIs following diagnosis allowing for clinical and radiographic analysis of progression. Clinical/radiographic progression occurred within 3 months (29%/45%), 6 months (50%/66%), 9 months (70%/81%). Progression type (radiographic, clinical, both was not associated with OS. CONCLUSION Our novel prognostic scoring system is effective in achieving patient stratification and may guide clinical decision making. Early radiographic progression appears to precede clinical deterioration and may represent true progression in the elderly.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.274

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207