MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404237342 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noae165.0308

RADT-24. WALLERIAN DEGENERATION OF THE CORTICOSPINAL TRACT IN GLIOMAS: A RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS AND A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF MOTOR FUNCTION IN ELOQUENT AREAS POST-RADIATION THERAPY. HOW IMPORTANT IS MOTOR FUNCTION FOR PATIENTS WITH GLIOMAS IN RADIATION THERAPY?

2024· review· en· W4404237342 on OpenAlexaff
Mònica Santos, Natasha Maranhão Vieira Rodrigues, Franceliny Gibram, Julia Brunelli, Anselmo Mancini, F.Y. Ynoe de Moraes, Gustavo Nader Marta, Samir Abdallah Hanna, Marcos Vinícius Calfat Maldaun

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorticospinal tractWallerian degenerationMotor functionMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuroscienceMagnetic resonance imagingAnatomyPsychologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND The quality of life for patients with gliomas is significantly impacted by tumor characteristics, treatment modalities, and radiation dosages. Variability in radiotherapy protocols and differences in tissue tolerance necessitate a detailed risk-benefit assessment, especially in eloquent brain areas responsible for motor functions. METHODS A retrospective analysis of electronic medical records from a Brazilian Radiation Therapy Department (2018-2023) was conducted. Patients with gliomas who underwent surgical resection and adjuvant radiochemotherapy, subsequently developing Wallerian Degeneration of the Corticospinal Tract (WDCT), were included. Additionally, a systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases, focusing on radiotherapy in eloquent areas and evaluating motor function. Of the 1,064 studies identified, 11 underwent full-text review by two independent examiners. RESULTS Among 192 glioma patients, 13 (6.77%) developed WDCT, all with high-grade gliomas, including 3 post-reirradiation cases. Retrospective dosimetric analysis of the corticospinal tract was performed for two patients who had tractography. Patient 1, with right frontoparietal tumor, had an ipsilateral corticospinal tract volume of 10.6 cm³, a max dose of 62.81 Gy, and 0.5 cc receiving 62.2 Gy; the contralateral tract volume was 18.5 cm³, with 0.5 cc receiving 51 Gy. Patient 2, with right frontal tumor, had an ipsilateral corticospinal tract volume of 31.1 cm³, a max dose of 42.76 Gy, and 0.5 cc receiving 42.37 Gy; the contralateral tract volume was 30.3 cm³, with 0.5 cc receiving 24.19 Gy. The systematic review identified 5 studies reporting pre- and post-radiotherapy motor outcomes in eloquent areas, with 4 focusing exclusively on gliomas. However, heterogeneity in radiotherapy techniques and outcome assessments precluded a meta-analysis. CONCLUSION Motor function in glioma patients undergoing radiation therapy remains an underexplored area. Future studies should focus on standardized assessments of functional outcomes to establish dose constraints and optimize treatment protocols, thus improving the quality of life for glioma patients.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.007
Bibliometrics0.0240.023
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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→