MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400345615 · doi:10.1055/s-0044-1788310

Sinonasal Malignancy Following Cranial Irradiation: A Scoping Review and Case Report of Sinonasal Teratocarcinosarcoma

2024· review· en· W4400345615 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Levy, Michael J. De Biasio, Nilo Alvarez Toledo, Sunit Das, Mandolin Bartling, Fahad Aldahari, John R. de Almeida, Ilan Weinreb, Yvonne Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurological Surgery Reports · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Surgical Oncology
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalignancyMedicineRadiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Radiation therapy is a mainstay of treatment for brain tumors, but delayed complications include secondary malignancy which may occur months to years after treatment completion. Methods We reviewed the medical records of a 41-year-old female treated with 60 Gy of radiation for a recurrent astrocytoma, who 6 years later developed a locally advanced sinonasal teratocarcinosarcoma. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science to conduct a scoping review of biopsy-proven sinonasal malignancy in patients who previously received cranial irradiation for a brain tumor. Results To our knowledge, this is the first report of a patient to present with a sinonasal teratocarcinosarcoma after receiving irradiation for a brain tumor. Our scoping review of 1,907 studies produced 14 similar cases of secondary sinonasal malignancy. Median age of primary cancer diagnosis was 39.5 years old (standard deviation [SD]: 21.9), and median radiation dose was 54 Gy (SD: 20.3). Median latency time between the primary cancer and secondary sinonasal cancer was 9.5 years (SD: 5.8). Olfactory neuroblastoma was the most common sinonasal cancer (n = 4). Fifty percent of patients died from their sinonasal cancer within 1.5 years. Conclusion Patients who receive radiation exposure to the sinonasal region for treatment of a primary brain tumor, including low doses or scatter radiation, may be at risk of a secondary sinonasal malignancy later in life. Physicians who monitor at-risk patients must be vigilant of symptoms which may suggest sinonasal malignancy, and surveillance should include radiographic review with careful monitoring for a secondary malignancy throughout the entire irradiated field.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurological Surgery ReportsSame topicHead and Neck Surgical OncologyFrench-language works237,207