Applications of Frameless Image-Guided Robotic Stereotactic Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery in Pediatric Neuro-Oncology: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: CyberKnife-based robotic radiosurgery (RRS) is a widely used treatment modality for various benign and malignant tumors of the central nervous system (CNS) in adults due to its high precision, favorable safety profile, and efficacy. Although RRS is emerging in pediatric neuro-oncology, scientific evidence for treatment indications, treatment parameters, and patient outcomes is scarce. This systematic review summarizes the current experience and evidence for RRS and robotic stereotactic radiotherapy (RSRT) in pediatric neuro-oncology. METHODS: We performed a systematic review based on the databases Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and PubMed to identify studies and published articles reporting on RRS and RSRT treatments in pediatric neuro-oncology. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were applied herein. Articles were included if they described the application of RRS and RSRT in pediatric neuro-oncological patients. The quality of the articles was assessed based on their evidence level and their risk for bias using the original as well as an adapted version of the Newcastle Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). Only articles published until 1 August 2021, were included. RESULTS: A total of 23 articles were included after final review and removal of duplicates. Articles reported on a broad variety of CNS entities with various treatment indications. A majority of publications lacked substantial sample sizes and a prospective study design. Several reports included adult patients, thereby limiting the possibility of data extraction and analysis of pediatric patients. RRS and RSRT were mostly used in the setting of adjuvant, palliative, and salvage treatments with decent local control rates and acceptable short-to-intermediate-term toxicity. However, follow-up durations were limited. The evidence level was IV for all studies; the NOS score ranged between four and six, while the overall risk of bias was moderate to low. CONCLUSION: Publications on RRS and RSRT and their application in pediatric neuro-oncology are rare and lack high-quality evidence with respect to entity-related treatment standards and long-term outcomes. The limited data suggest that RRS and RSRT could be efficient treatment modalities, especially for children who are unsuitable for surgical interventions, suffer from tumor recurrences, or require palliative treatments. Nevertheless, the potential short-term and long-term adverse events must be kept in mind when choosing such a treatment. Prospective studies are necessary to determine the actual utility of RRS and RSRT in pediatric neuro-oncology.
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 | 0.007 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".