MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400811773 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noae133

Risk of new tumor, carotid stenosis, and stroke after stereotactic radiosurgery for pituitary tumor: A multicenter study of 2254 patients with imaging follow-up

2024· article· en· W4400811773 on OpenAlexaff
Chloé Dumot, Georgios Mantziaris, Sam Dayawansa, Carson Brantley, Cheng‐Chia Lee, Huai‐Che Yang, Selçuk Peker, Yavuz Samanci, David Mathieu, Jean-Nicolas Tourigny, Nuria Martínez Moreno, Roberto Martínez Álvarez, Thomas Chytka, Roman Liščák, Herwin Speckter, Erwin Lazo, Anderson Brito, Piero Picozzi, Andrea Franzini, Juan F. Álzate, Elad Mashiach, Kenneth E. Bernstein, Douglas Kondziolka, Manjul Tripathi, Greg Bowden, Ronald E. Warnick, Darrah Sheehan, Kimball Sheehan, Angelica M. Fuentes, John A. Jane, Mary Lee Vance, Jason P. Sheehan

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersInstitut ServierServierHospices Civils de Lyon
KeywordsRadiosurgeryMedicineStenosisInternal medicineStroke (engine)RadiologyCardiologyRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A higher risk of secondary brain tumor, carotid stenosis, and stroke has been reported after conventional sella irradiation for pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNET). Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), which is a more focused approach, is now increasingly used instead. The aim was to assess the risk of secondary brain tumor, carotid stenosis/occlusion, and stroke after SRS. METHODS: In this multicentric retrospective study, 2254 patients with PitNET were studied, 1377 in the exposed group, and 877 in the control group. RESULTS: There were 9840.1 patient-years at risk for the SRS and 5266.5 for the control group. The 15-year cumulative probability of secondary intracranial tumor was 2.3% (95% CI: 0.5%, 4.1%) for SRS and 3.7% (95% CI: 0%, 8.7%) for the control group (P = .6), with an incidence rate of 1.32 per 1000 and 0.95 per 1000, respectively. SRS was not associated with an increased risk of tumorigenesis when stratified by age (HR: 1.59 [95% CI: 0.57, 4.47], Pp = .38). The 15-year probability of new carotid stenosis/occlusion was 0.9% (95% CI: 0.2, 1.6) in the SRS and 2% (95% CI: 0, 4.4) in the control group (P = .8). The 15-year probability of stroke was 2.6% (95% CI: 0.6%, 4.6%) in the SRS and 11.1% (95% CI: 6%, 15.9%) in the control group (P < .001). In Cox multivariate analysis stratified by age, SRS (HR 1.85 [95% CI:0.64, 5.35], P = .26) was not associated with risk of new stroke. CONCLUSIONS: No increased risk of long-term secondary brain tumor, new stenosis or occlusion, and stroke was demonstrated in the SRS group compared to the control in this study with imaging surveillance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207