Neuroanatomical location of brain metastases from solid tumours based on pathology: An analysis of 511 patients with a comparison to the provided clinical history
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain metastases are a frequent occurrence in neuropathology practices. The literature on their neuroanatomical location is frequently derived from radiological analyses. This work examines brain metastases through the lens of pathology specimens. All brain surgical pathology reports for cases accessioned 2011-2020 were retrieved from a laboratory. Specimens were classified by neuroanatomical location, diagnosis and diagnostic category with a hierarchical free text string-matching algorithm (HFTSMA) and also subsequently audited. All reports classified as probable metastasis were reviewed by a pathologist. The provided history was compared to the final categorization by a pathologist. The cohort had 4,625 cases. The HFTSMA identified 854 cases (including metastases from a definite primary, metastases from primary not known and improperly classified cases). 514/854 cases had one definite primary site per algorithm and on report review 538/854 cases were confirmed as such. The 538 cases originated from 511 patients. Primaries from breast, gynecologic tract, and gastrointestinal tract not otherwise specified were most frequently found in the cerebellum. Kidney metastases were most frequently found in the occipital lobe. Lung, metastatic melanoma and colorectal primaries were most commonly found in the frontal lobe. The provided clinical history predicted the primary in 206 cases (40.3%), was discordant in 17 cases (3.3%) and non-contributory in 280 cases (54.8%). The observed distribution of the metastatic tumours in the brain is dependent on the primary site. In the majority (54.8%) of cases, the provided clinical history was non-contributory; this suggests surgeon-pathologist communication may have the potential for optimization.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 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".