Skull base surgery for malignant tumors: The 2nd international collaborative study (1995–2015)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The current study presents the effort of a global collaborative group to review the management and outcomes of malignant tumors of the skull base worldwide. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 28 institutions contributed data on 3061 patients. Analysis evaluated clinical variables, survival outcomes, and multivariable factors associated with outcomes. RESULTS: The median age was 56 years (IQR 44-67). The open surgical approach was used in 55% (n = 1680) of cases, endoscopic resection was performed in 36% (n = 1087), and the combined approach in 9.6% (n = 294). With a median follow-up of 7.1 years, the 5-year OS DSS and RFS were 65%, 71.7% and 53%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, older age, comorbidities, histology, dural/intracranial involvement, positive margins, advanced stage, and primary site were independent prognostic factors for OS, DSS, and RFS. Adjuvant RT was a protective prognostic factor. CONCLUSION: The progress across various disciplines may have contributed to improved OS and DSS in this study compared to previous reports.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".