Molecular classification to refine surgical and radiotherapeutic decision-making in meningioma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment of the tumor and dural margin with surgery and sometimes radiation are cornerstones of therapy for meningioma. Molecular classifications have provided insights into the biology of disease; however, response to treatment remains heterogeneous. In this study, we used retrospective data on 2,824 meningiomas, including molecular data on 1,686 tumors and 100 prospective meningiomas, from the RTOG-0539 phase 2 trial to define molecular biomarkers of treatment response. Using propensity score matching, we found that gross tumor resection was associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS) across all molecular groups and longer overall survival in proliferative meningiomas. Dural margin treatment (Simpson grade 1/2) prolonged PFS compared to no treatment (Simpson grade 3). Molecular group classification predicted response to radiotherapy, including in the RTOG-0539 cohort. We subsequently developed a molecular model to predict response to radiotherapy that discriminates outcome better than standard-of-care classification. This study highlights the potential for molecular profiling to refine surgical and radiotherapy decision-making. In a large, partially prospective cohort of patients with molecularly profiled and clinically annotated meningioma, the extent of surgical resection and radiotherapy (RT) response correlate with molecular classification, which can be used in a molecular model to predict clinical outcomes in response to RT.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".