Intraoperative and postoperative complications for repeat high-grade glioma resections with concurrent chemotherapy: patient series
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High-grade gliomas are aggressive primary brain tumors, the most common of which is glioblastoma multiforme. Despite advances in treatment, the prognosis for these patients remains poor. The most common chemotherapeutic agents used in the treatment of this pathology include temozolomide (TMZ), procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine. It is unclear whether chemotherapy should be held during resection for high-grade gliomas, because the perioperative risk profile is not clearly defined. OBSERVATIONS: The authors report a case series of 18 surgeries to investigate the effects of concurrent TMZ and lomustine chemotherapy on surgical complications in patients undergoing repeat resection for recurrent high-grade gliomas. The authors found no postoperative infections, self-limiting postoperative complications, or excessive intraoperative blood loss and found one intraoperative complication. LESSONS: There may not be a need to pause TMZ and lomustine chemotherapy during recurrent resections for high-grade gliomas, and continuing these medications throughout the perioperative period may be appropriate. This case series suggests that patients receiving TMZ and lomustine chemotherapy who need a repeat resection for recurrent high-grade gliomas should consider remaining on their chemotherapy regimen because it has been shown in the literature to improve recurrence-free survival time.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 it