The Burden of Surviving Childhood Medulloblastoma: A Population-Based, Matched Cohort Study in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Survivors of childhood medulloblastoma suffer from substantial late effects. We characterized these sequelae using real-world health services data in a population-based cohort of medulloblastoma survivors. METHODS: All 5-year medulloblastoma survivors diagnosed age < 18 years between 1987 and 2015 in Ontario, Canada, were identified and matched 1:5 with population controls. Index date was 5 years from latest pediatric cancer event. Linkage to provincial administrative health data allowed for comparison of cumulative incidences of several adverse outcomes. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty survivors, 81.3% of whom had received craniospinal irradiation, were matched with 1,150 controls. The 10-year postindex cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality was 7.9% (95% CI, 3.9 to 11.8) in survivors versus 0.6% (95% CI, 0.1 to 1.1) in controls (hazard ratio [HR], 21.5; 95% CI, 9.8 to 54.0). The cumulative incidence of stroke was higher in survivors (4.8%; 95% CI, 2.2 to 9.0) compared with controls (0.1; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.7; HR, 45.6; 95% CI, 12.8 to 289.8). Hearing loss requiring an amplification device was present in 24.9% (95% CI, 18.8 to 31.4) of survivors versus 0.3% (95% CI, 0.1 to 1.0) of controls (HR, 96.3; 95% CI, 39.7 to 317.3). Disability support prescription claims were submitted by 44.5% (95% CI, 37.1 to 51.6) of survivors versus 5.5% (95% CI, 4.2 to 7.1) of controls (HR, 10.0; 95% CI, 7.3 to 13.6). Female survivors were significantly less likely to deliver a liveborn child compared with controls (HR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1 to 0.7). CONCLUSION: Survivors of medulloblastoma have significant long-term medical sequelae, increased all-cause mortality, and are frequently dependent on disability supports. Efforts to reduce the toxicity of current therapy, specifically incorporating molecularly informed risk stratification to spare low- and intermediate-risk survivors the toxicity of treatment, are urgently needed. These findings should prompt a re-evaluation of our current treatment approaches where research focused on late-effect interventions should be prioritized.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".