Proton Radiotherapy for Vestibular Schwannomas in Patients with NF2-Related Schwannomatosis: A Case Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1) Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and treatment-related toxicity of proton radiotherapy (PRT) for vestibular schwannoma (VS) in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2-related schwannomatosis (NF2). (2) Methods: Consecutive NF2 patients treated with PRT for VS between 2004 and 2016 were retrospectively evaluated, focusing on tumor volume, facial and trigeminal nerve function, hearing, tinnitus, vestibular symptoms, and the need for salvage therapy after PRT. (3) Results: Eight patients were included (median age 36 years, 50% female). Median follow-up was 71 months. Five (63%) patients received fractionated PRT and three (38%) received PRT radiosurgery for VS. Six patients (75%) received prior VS surgery; three also received bevacizumab. Six patients (75%) did not require salvage therapy after PRT. Two patients (25%) with residual hearing lost it after PRT, and six had already lost ipsilateral hearing prior to PRT. Tumor and treatment-related morbidity could be evaluated in six patients. Following PRT, conditions that occurred or worsened were: facial paresis in five (83%), trigeminal hypoesthesia in two (33%), tinnitus in two (33%), and vestibular symptoms in four patients (67%). (4) Conclusion: After PRT for VS, the majority of the NF2 patients in the cohort did not require additional therapy. Tumor and/or treatment-related cranial nerve deficits were common. This is at least partly explained by the use of PRT as a salvage treatment after surgery or bevacizumab, in the majority of cases. There remains the further opportunity to elucidate the efficacy and toxicity of proton radiotherapy as a primary treatment.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".