MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281654265 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noac079.082

DIPG-25. Patterns of cerebrospinal fluid diversion and survival in children with diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma: a report from the International Diffuse Intrinsic Pontine Glioma Registry

2022· article· en· W4281654265 on OpenAlexaff
Tabitha Cooney, Mariko DeWire‐Schottmiller, Adam Lane, Raya Saab, Pratiti Bandopadhayay, Kathleen Dorris, Roger Packer, Lindsay Kilburn, Jane E. Minturn, Andrew Dodgshun, Sara Parkin, Stewart Goldman, Eric Sandler, Robert Greiner, Nicholas G. Gottardo, Hetal Dholaria, Scott Coven, Tim Hassall, Jordan R. Hansford, Yvan Samson, Sarah Leary, Ute Bartels, Adriana Fonseca, Éric Bouffet, Christopher L. Tinkle, Michelle Monje, Paul A. Fisher, David S. Ziegler, Murali Chintagumpala, Lars M. Wagner, Carl Koschmann, James Leach, Blaise Jones, Elisa Carrasquedo Benito, Hailey Bond, Brooklyn Chaney, Katie Black, Anthony L. Asher, Maryam Fouladi, Lindsey M. Hoffman, Katherine Warren

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHydrocephalusGliomaVomitingIncidence (geometry)Cerebrospinal fluidSurgeryRadiation therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND: There are no standard practice guidelines for cerebrospinal (CSF) diversion for diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG), nor clear understanding of potential for palliation and life-prolongation. We evaluated CSF diversion characteristics in children with DIPG to determine incidence, indications, symptom effects, and survival. METHODS: Data were extracted from subjects registered in the International DIPG registry (IDIPGR). Univariable analyses was performed using the Fisher’s exact test or Wilcoxon rank sum test. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Evaluable patients (n=542) met criteria for DIPG diagnosis by central radiologic review; of those, 126 (23%) had permanent CSF diversion. Median time from diagnosis to diversion was 0.5 months (IQR 0.1-4.5 months). Those with permanent diversion were significantly younger (median 5.4 years vs 7.0 years, p<0.001) and had higher incidence of hydrocephalus at diagnosis (65.3% vs 11.9%, p<0.001). Permanent CSF diversion did not significantly impact overall survival (OS) (p=0.4), even amongst the 124 patients with hydrocephalus at presentation (p=0.20). Those with permanent diversion prior to radiation therapy demonstrated longer median OS than those in whom diversion was placed after radiation (14.3 vs 9.6 months, p=0.001). Patients reported significantly less headache and vomiting at last follow up after permanent CSF diversion compared to pre-diversion (p<0.0001 and p=0.001, respectively), however steroid use was also significantly higher at last follow-up after CSF diversion (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Amongst an international cohort, DIPG patients who had permanent CSF diversion were significantly younger and had higher rates of hydrocephalus at initial presentation than those without permanent diversion. Symptoms of increased intracranial pressure improved in those with CSF diversion, although a direct effect may be confounded by increased steroid use. Permanent CSF diversion did not prolong overall survival in this large cohort of patients, even amongst those who presented with hydrocephalus.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207