A Phase II Study of Neoadjuvant Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Large Brain Metastases: Clinical Trial Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brain metastases which require resection are treated with surgery followed by whole brain radiation therapy or postoperative cavity boost stereotactic radiosurgery (POCBS). Recently a novel strategy using neoadjuvant stereotactic radiosurgery (NaSRS) followed by resection was reported, demonstrating lower rates of postoperative leptomeningeal dissemination (LMD) and symptomatic radiation toxicity compared to a comparative cohort of patients treated with postoperative SRS. OBJECTIVE: To determine if the rate of symptomatic radiation toxicity at 1 yr in patients who receive NaSRS differs significantly from historical rates for patients treated with POCBS. METHODS: This is a multi-center, non-randomized, open phase II clinical trial. A total of 30 patients with up to 10 brain metastases, at least 1 of which is appropriate for surgical resection, will be enrolled for over 4 yr. All enrolled patients will be assigned to receive NaSRS followed by surgery. EXPECTED OUTCOME: This study will clarify whether symptomatic radiation toxicity caused by NaSRS is significantly decreased compared to historical rates associated with POCBS. Secondary endpoints will include 1-yr local control (LC) of the treated lesion, 1-yr rates of LMD, median survival and 2-yr rates of progression-free and overall survival. Tertiary analyses will include correlation between LC and radiation toxicity with pretreatment clinical factors, serum markers, radiomic features, and molecular assessments of the resected tumors. DISCUSSION: This prospective study will determine the toxicity associated with NaSRS and provide additional quantitative metrics of efficacy for future comparative trials.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".