Radiological and clinical outcomes of stereotactic radiosurgery for gangliogliomas: an international multicenter study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The optimal treatment for recurrent and residual gangliogliomas remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in the management of patients with recurrent or residual intracranial ganglioglioma. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study involved patients managed with SRS for ganglioglioma. The study endpoints included local tumor control and tumor- or SRS-related neurological morbidity following treatment. Factors associated with tumor progression and neurological morbidity were also analyzed. RESULTS: The cohort included 20 patients (11 males [55%]) with a median age of 24.5 (IQR 14) years who had been managed with SRS for ganglioglioma. Five-year radiological progression-free survival was 85.6%. After SRS, 2 patients (10%) experienced transient neurological deterioration. At a median clinical follow-up of 88.5 (IQR 112.5) months, 1 patient (5%) experienced seizure worsening and 1 (5%) required further resection of the tumor because of radiological progression. No mortality was noted in this series. CONCLUSIONS: SRS appears to be a safe and effective treatment option for surgically inaccessible, recurrent, and residual gangliogliomas. In this series, the 5-year progression-free survival rate after SRS was 85.6%. Gross-total resection remains the primary treatment of choice for patients with newly diagnosed or recurrent ganglioglioma. SRS may be considered for patients unfit for surgery and those with surgically inaccessible newly diagnosed, residual, and recurrent lesions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".