EMBR-03. PINEOBLASTOMA: A POOLED OUTCOME STUDY OF NORTH AMERICAN AND AUSTRALIAN THERAPEUTIC DATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Pineoblastoma (PB) is a rare embryonal brain tumour most often diagnosed in young children. To date, no clinical trials have been conducted specific to pediatric PB. Collaborative studies performed over the past 30 years have included PB in studies accruing for other embryonal tumours, primarily medulloblastoma (MB), but also including the entity formerly known as CNS-PNET and atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumors. Each of these studies have included only a small number of children with PB, making clinical features difficult to interpret and determinants of outcome difficult to ascertain. Patients and Methods Published centrally reviewed series with sufficient treatment and outcome data from North American and Australian cases were pooled. To investigate associations between variables, Fisher’s exact and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests, and Spearman correlations were used as appropriate. Kaplan-Meier plots, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional hazards models were used in survival analysis. Results We describe a 30-year review of the reported clinical features of PB and a pooled centrally reviewed, cohort analysis of cases (n=178) from the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) (n=82) groups and several published, centrally reviewed institutional series (n=96). We find young children <3 years of age have a dramatically poorer outlook compared to older children (5-year OS 16.2% +/- 5.3% vs 67.3% +/- 5%) confirming new and novel approaches are needed in future clinical trials for this at risk group. Interestingly, male gender was predictive of worse outcome possibly suggestive of gender specific subgroup risks that needs validation in future studies. Assessment of radiation therapy is not possible as the vast majority of children under age three did not receive any form of radiation therapy. Conclusion Given the relative scarcity of this tumor and the emerging data on subgroups of pineoblastoma, prospective, collaborative international studies will be vital to improving the long-term survival of these patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".