MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3170215171 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2021.87

Pathological features determining recurrence and radioresistance in cerebral atypical meningioma

2021· article· en· W3170215171 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
ME Garcia-Segura, Sunit Das, Rishi Jairath, DG Munoz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadioresistanceNecrosisMalignant meningiomaRadiation therapyMeningiomaMedicinePathologicalPathologyAdjuvant therapyInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined recurrence after gross total resection (GTR) or subtotal resection (STR) at St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, of 181 cases of atypical meningioma (WHO grade II). In the entire group, Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that combined necrosis and brain invasion was the feature associated with the worst outcome, followed in order by necrosis, histological variants (clear cell, rhabdoid, and chordoid), high mitotic count, and brain invasion. The highly significant difference between necrosis and brain invasion and necrosis was seen only in patients receiving GTR, and lost in those treated with STR. Adjuvant radiotherapy was associated with worse outcome, more so in patients receiving GTR. In the presence of high mitotic count (defined as >4/10HPF) radiation did not affect recurrence, but necrosis and specially combined necrosis and brain invasion magnified the apparent deleterious effect of adjuvant radiotherapy. In the presence of brain invasion, radiotherapy’s small effect did not reach significance. Since patients were not randomized to adjuvant radiotherapy, these results should not be construed as indicating that this treatment is injurious. It can be stated that in the presence of necrosis and particularly necrosis and brain invasion, but not brain invasion alone, or high mitotic count, atypical meningiomas are more resistant to any possible beneficial effect of radiation in delaying recurrence. LEARNING OBJECTIVES This presentation will enable the learner to: 1. Describe histological and treatment factors determining recurrence in atypical meningioma. 2. List histological factors associated with radioresistance in atypical meningioma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicMeningioma and schwannoma management→French-language works237,207→