RADT-19. EFFECTS OF RADIATION DOSE-RATE AND TUMOR CHARACTERISTICS ON LOCAL CONTROL AND TOXICITY AFTER RADIOSURGERY FOR ACOUSTIC NEUROMAS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract INTRODUCTION The effect of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) dose-rate on tumor control for acoustic neuroma (AN, or vestibular schwannoma) is unclear. METHODS This was a retrospective study of all patients treated for AN with frame-based cobalt-60 SRS at the Toronto Western Hospital between 2005-2019. Dose rates on the day of SRS were calculated from the calibration dose-rate while accounting for the cobalt-60 half-life of 5.2713 years. Local failure was defined as continued tumor growth >36 months post-SRS, tumor resection for LF, or use of any repeat SRS for LF. Cumulative incidence of LF was reported after accounting for competing risks of death, on a per-lesion basis. Comparisons of actuarial LF were made using Gray’s test. Multivariable analysis of LF was performed using a proportional hazards model. RESULTS A total of 607 patients were treated for 617 acoustic neuromas. Median follow-up was 5.0 years. 158 tumors (26%) were cystic. 71 tumors (12%) had previous resection. Nine patients received 10-11 Gy due to large tumor size; all remaining patients received 12 Gy to approximately the 50% isodose line. Median dose rate was 2.4 Gy/min (range, 1.3-3.7). There was no association between dose rate and LF (≥ 2.4 Gy/min vs. < 2.4 Gy/min, 6.07% vs. 6.12% at 5-year follow-up, p = 0.75). The adjusted local failure-specific hazard ratio (HR) for dose rate (per Gy/min) was 1.2 (95% CI 0.69-2.1, p = 0.52). Patients with previous surgery had higher LF, with a HR of 3.6 (95% CI 1.7-7.8, p = 0.0012), after adjusting for presence of cysts (HR 0.27, p = 0.034) and maximum tumor diameter (HR 1.055 per cm, p = 0.071). CONCLUSIONS In a large cohort of patients with acoustic neuromas, radiosurgery dose-rate was not associated with tumor control. Previous resection was a strong risk factor for local failure after 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".