Outcome of brain metastases from adrenocortical carcinoma: a pooled analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Brain metastases rarely complicate the natural history of patients with adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC). No information is available regarding the life expectancy and efficacy of treatments in ACC patients with brain involvement. METHODS: A pooled analysis was performed by searching on PubMed and using the keywords: "brain metastases in adrenocortical carcinoma", and "leptomeningeal metastases in adrenocortical carcinoma". Four patients diagnosed at Spedali Civili Hospital in Brescia were added to the analysis. Data concerning demographic, disease characteristics, adopted treatments and patient prognosis were collected. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients (18 adults and 9 children) were included in this study, 22 of them had an adequate follow-up. Brain metastases occurred late in the natural history of adult patients but not in that of children. Surgery plus/minus radiation therapy was the treatment of choice. Adult patients with brain metastases had a poor prognosis with a median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of 2 and 7 months, respectively. Median PFS and OS were not attained in children. CONCLUSION: Brain metastases in ACC patients are rare and are associated with poor prognosis, particularly in adults. Surgery plus/minus radiotherapy is the only therapeutic approach that can offer patients a chance to obtain durable local disease control.
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".