Brain Metastasis in Pediatric Patients with Osteosarcoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brain metastases in pediatric osteosarcoma are infrequent but associated with a dire prognosis. METHODS: This retrospective study examined six pediatric patients at Johns Hopkins Hospital who developed brain metastases from osteosarcoma between April 2015 and November 2023. RESULTS: Median survival post-brain metastasis was 2.5 months. The patients underwent various treatments, including chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation. Despite these interventions, outcomes were uniformly fatal. Notably, one patient survived over 13 months post-brain metastasis with a treatment regimen of cabozantinib and nivolumab along with surgical resection and radiation, highlighting the potential efficacy of multimodal treatment regimens. This case demonstrated changes in the immune microenvironment, hinting at an anti-tumoral response, although no histologic response was observed. CONCLUSIONS: These findings emphasize the critical need for vigilant clinical monitoring, especially in patients with new neurological symptoms. The study highlights the diagnostic challenges and the rapid progression of brain metastases, underscoring the necessity for further research. Prospective studies and clinical trials focusing on novel therapeutic strategies are essential to improve outcomes. Disease biology studies examining tumor features across primary, pulmonary, and brain metastatic sites may offer insights into the mechanisms of metastasis and potential therapeutic targets, providing a foundation for better management of this devastating complication.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".