Evolving concepts in margin strategies and adaptive radiotherapy for glioblastoma: A new future is on the horizon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemoradiotherapy is the standard treatment after maximal safe resection for glioblastoma (GBM). Despite advances in molecular profiling, surgical techniques, and neuro-imaging, there have been no major breakthroughs in radiotherapy (RT) volumes in decades. Although the majority of recurrences occur within the original gross tumor volume (GTV), treatment of a clinical target volume (CTV) ranging from 1.5 to 3.0 cm beyond the GTV remains the standard of care. Over the past 15 years, the incorporation of standard and functional MRI sequences into the treatment workflow has become a routine practice with increasing adoption of MR simulators, and new integrated MR-Linac technologies allowing for daily pre-, intra- and post-treatment MR imaging. There is now unprecedented ability to understand the tumor dynamics and biology of GBM during RT, and safe CTV margin reduction is being investigated with the goal of improving the therapeutic ratio. The purpose of this review is to discuss margin strategies and the potential for adaptive RT for GBM, with a focus on the challenges and opportunities associated with both online and offline adaptive workflows. Lastly, opportunities to biologically guide adaptive RT using non-invasive imaging biomarkers and the potential to define appropriate volumes for dose modification will be discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".