MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388551842 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noad195

Pediatric low-grade glioma: State-of-the-art and ongoing challenges

2023· review· en· W4388551842 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Fangusaro, David Jones, Roger J. Packer, David H. Gutmann, Till Milde, Olaf Witt, Sabine Mueller, Michael J. Fisher, Jordan R. Hansford, Uri Tabori, Darren Hargrave, Pratiti Bandopadhayay

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersDeutsches KrebsforschungszentrumBrain Tumour CharityPediatric Brain Tumor Foundation
KeywordsMedicineGliomaClinical trialQuality of life (healthcare)DiseaseNatural historyEpidemiologyIntensive care medicinePathologyInternal medicineCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The most common childhood central nervous system (CNS) tumor is pediatric low-grade glioma (pLGG), representing 30%-40% of all CNS tumors in children. Although there is high associated morbidity, tumor-related mortality is relatively rare. pLGG is now conceptualized as a chronic disease, underscoring the importance of functional outcomes and quality-of-life measures. A wealth of data has emerged about these tumors, including a better understanding of their natural history and their molecular drivers, paving the way for the use of targeted inhibitors. While these treatments have heralded tremendous promise, challenges remain about how to best optimize their use, and the long-term toxicities associated with these inhibitors remain unknown. The International Pediatric Low-Grade Glioma Coalition (iPLGGc) is a global group of physicians and scientists with expertise in pLGG focused on addressing key pLGG issues. Here, the iPLGGc provides an overview of the current state-of-the-art in pLGG, including epidemiology, histology, molecular landscape, treatment paradigms, survival outcomes, functional outcomes, imaging response, and ongoing challenges. This paper also serves as an introduction to 3 other pLGG manuscripts on (1) pLGG preclinical models, (2) consensus framework for conducting early-phase clinical trials in pLGG, and (3) pLGG resistance, rebound, and recurrence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations86
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207