Surgical Resection Followed by Stereotactic Radiosurgery (S+SRS) Versus SRS Alone for Large Posterior Fossa Brain Metastases: A Comparative Analysis of Outcomes and Factors Guiding Treatment Modality Selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Around 20% of cancer patients will develop brain metastases (BrMs), with 15–25% occurring in the posterior fossa (PF). Although the effectiveness of systemic therapies is increasing, surgery followed by stereotactic radiosurgery (S+SRS) versus definitive SRS remains the mainstay of treatment. Given the space restrictions within the PF, patients with BrMs in this location are at higher risk of brainstem compression, hydrocephalus, herniation, coma, and death. However, the criteria for treating large PF BrMs with S+SRS versus definitive SRS remains unclear. Methods: We reviewed a prospective registry database (2009 to 2020) and identified 64 patients with large PF BrMs (≥4 cc) treated with SRS or S+SRS. Clinical and radiological parameters were analyzed. The two endpoints were overall survival (OS) and local failure (LF). Results: Patients in the S+SRS group were more highly symptomatic than patients in the SRS group. Gait imbalance and intracranial pressure symptoms were 97% and 80%, and 47% and 35% for S+SRS and SRS, respectively. Radiologically, there were significant differences in the mean volume of the lesions [6.7 cm3 in SRS vs. 29.8 cm3 in the S+SRS cohort, (p < 0.001)]; compression of the fourth ventricle [47% in SRS vs. 96% in S+SRS cohort, (p < 0.001)]; and hydrocephalus [0% in SRS vs. 29% in S+SRS cohort, (p < 0.001)]. Patients treated with S+SRS had a higher Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). LF was 12 and 17 months for SRS and S+SRS, respectively. Moreover, the S+SRS group had improved OS (12 vs. 26 months, p = 0.001). Conclusions: A higher proportion of patients treated with S+SRS presented with hydrocephalus, fourth-ventricle compression, and larger lesion volumes. SRS-alone patients had a lower KPS, a lower GPA, and more brain metastases. S+SRS correlated with improved OS, suggesting that it should be seriously considered for patients with large PF-BrM.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".