Adjuvant versus on-progression Gamma Knife radiosurgery for residual nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas: a matched-cohort analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Radiological progression occurs in 50%-60% of residual nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas (NFPAs). Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a safe and effective management option for residual NFPAs, but there is no consensus on its optimal timing. This study aims to define the optimal timing of SRS for residual NFPAs. METHODS: This retrospective, multicenter study involved 375 patients with residual NFPAs managed with SRS. The patients were divided into adjuvant (ADJ; treated for stable residual NFPA within 6 months of resection) and progression (PRG) cohorts (treated for residual NFPA progression). Factors associated with tumor progression and clinical deterioration were analyzed. RESULTS: Following propensity-score matching, each cohort consisted of 130 patients. At last follow-up, tumor control was achieved in 93.1% of patients in the ADJ cohort and in 96.2% of patients in the PRG cohort (HR 1.6, 95% CI 0.55-4.9, p = 0.37). Hypopituitarism was associated with a maximum point dose of > 8 Gy to the pituitary stalk (HR 4.5, 95% CI 1.6-12.6, p = 0.004). No statistically significant difference was noted in crude new-onset hypopituitarism rates (risk difference [RD] = -0.8%, p > 0.99) or visual deficits (RD = -2.3%, p = 0.21) between the two cohorts at the last follow-up. The median time from resection to new hypopituitarism was longer in the PRG cohort (58.9 vs 29.7 months, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: SRS at residual NFPA progression does not appear to alter the probability of tumor control or hormonal/visual deficits compared with adjuvant SRS. Deferral of radiosurgical management to the time of radiological progression could significantly prolong the time to radiosurgically induced pituitary dysfunction. A lower maximum point dose (< 8 Gy) to the pituitary stalk portended a more favorable chance of preserving pituitary function after SRS.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".