Craniospinal irradiation in the treatment of chemotherapy refractory leptomeningeal metastasis from breast cancer: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis is a relatively uncommon complication of solid tumors that is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Prognosis is typically weeks to months and the neurologic complications of this disease can significantly affect quality of life. The role of craniospinal irradiation is unclear as evidence exploring this treatment option is limited. Despite lack of evidence, its use has decreased due to its associated acute toxicities and newer intrathecal alternatives. CASE: Here we report the case of a 50-year-old patient who received craniospinal irradiation for chemotherapy-refractory leptomeningeal disease, with survival well beyond the median and good quality of life for the majority of that time. CONCLUSION: This patient's remarkable survival and performance after treatment suggests that craniospinal irradiation could be considered more frequently in the treatment of leptomeningeal metastases. To our knowledge, this is the first case with significant survival following craniospinal irradiation for chemotherapy refractory disease presented. Further study on the use of craniospinal irradiation to treat leptomeningeal metastasis is recommended.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".