MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404236710 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noae165.0885

NCOG-03. DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS AND OUTCOME COMPARISON BETWEEN PATIENTS WITH GLIOBLASTOMA MULTIFORME WHO RECEIVE 15 VERSUS 30 FRACTIONS OF RADIOTHERAPY: A RETROSPECTIVE CHART REVIEW

2024· article· en· W4404236710 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua J. Gnanasegaram, Gregory Paulin, Ethan Kutanzi, Maria Kalyvas, Melinda Mushonga, Sofia Genta, Teresa Purzner, James Purzner, Katie Goldie, T Olding, Fábio Ynoe de Moraes

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlioblastomaRadiation therapyMedicineChartDescriptive statisticsOncologyInternal medicineStatisticsMathematicsCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The morbidity and efficacy of abbreviated radiotherapy (RT) courses for Glioblastoma (GB) in patients over 60 years have been studied, however, outcomes in younger patients are not yet well-described. This study aims to characterize the outcomes of patients receiving either a standard versus abbreviated RT course. A retrospective chart review at Kingston Health Sciences Centre from June 2014 to March 2021 included patients with GB receiving either 40Gy in 15 fractions (Fr) or 60Gy in 30Fr. Data on age, ECOG score, and concurrent chemotherapy (Temozolomide, TMZ) were collected. Outcomes compared were treatment completion, hospital admission during treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Records of 156 patients (median age 61 years, range 25-87 years) were reviewed. Of these, 89 received 30Fr and 67 received 15Fr (p=0.51). MGMT methylation was recorded in 54 (35%) patients; of these, 27 received 15Fr and 27 received 30Fr. Median follow-up was 12 months. While PFS did not significantly differ between 15Fr vs. 30Fr (6 vs. 11 months, respectively; p=0.08), OS was significantly different (8 vs. 16 months, respectively; p<0.001). Patients receiving 15Fr vs 30F tended to have higher ECOG scores (p<0.001) and were older (median: 71 [range 45-87] vs. 57 [range 25-69] years; p<0.001). Individuals receiving TMZ were more likely to receive 30Fr (67.5% vs. 32.5% for 15Fr; p<0.001). Completion rates were higher for 30Fr (94.3%) than 15Fr (83.6%; p=0.03). Hospital admission rates did not differ (p=0.51). In summary, patients receiving 15Fr (40Gy) typically have poorer functional status, are less likely to receive chemotherapy, and less likely to complete treatment compared to those receiving 30Fr. Hospital admission rates during treatment are low (13%) and similar for both groups. OS, but not PFS, is better for patients receiving 30Fr compared to 15Fr.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→