Vestibular Schwannoma Koos Grade I International Study of Active Surveillance Versus Stereotactic Radiosurgery: The VISAS-K1 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This investigation evaluates the safety and efficacy of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) vs observation for Koos grade I vestibular schwannomas (VS). METHODS: In a multicenter study, we retrospectively analyzed data of patients with Koos grade I VS who underwent SRS (SRS group) or were observed (observation group). Propensity score matching was used to equilibrate demographics, tumor size, and audiometric data across groups. The outcome analyzed included tumor control, preservation of serviceable hearing, and neurological function. RESULTS: The study matched 142 patients, providing a median follow-up period of 36 months. SRS significantly enhanced tumor control compared with observation, with a 100% control rate at both 5- and 8-year marks in the SRS group vs 48.6% and 29.5% in the observation group at the same time intervals, respectively ( P < .001). Preservation of serviceable hearing outcomes between groups showed no significant difference at 5 and 8 years, ensuring a comparable quality of auditory function (SRS 70.1% vs observation 53.4% at 5 years; P = .33). Furthermore, SRS was associated with a reduced likelihood of tinnitus (odds ratio [OR] = 0.46, P = .04), vestibular dysfunction (OR = 0.17, P = .002), and overall cranial nerve dysfunction (OR = 0.49, P = .03) at last follow-up. CONCLUSION: SRS management of patients with Koos grade I VS was associated with superior tumor control and reduced odds for cranial nerve dysfunction, while not compromising hearing preservation compared with observation. These findings support the safety and efficacy of SRS as a primary care approach for this patient population.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".