MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407250867 · doi:10.1055/s-0045-1803279

Vestibular Schwannoma Koos Grade I International Study of Active Surveillance versus Stereotactic Radiosurgery: The VISAS-K1 Study

2025· article· en· W4407250867 on OpenAlexaff
Hussam Abou‐Al‐Shaar, Othman Bin-Alamer, Selçuk Peker, Yavuz Samancı, Isabelle Pelcher, Sabrina Begley, Anuj Goenka, Michael Schulder, Jean-Nicolas Tourigny, David Mathieu, Andréanne Hamel, Robert G. Briggs, Cheng Yu, Gabriel Zada, Steven L. Giannotta, Herwin Speckter, Sarai Palque, Manjul Tripathi, Saurabh Kumar, Rupinder Kaur, Narendra Kumar, Brandon Rogowski, Matthew J. Shepard, Bryan A. Johnson, Daniel M. Trifiletti, Ronald E. Warnick, Sam Dayawansa, Elad Mashiach, Fernando De Nigris Vasconcellos, Kenneth Bernstein, Zane Schnurman, Juan Diego Alzate, Douglas Kondziolka, Jason P. Sheehan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurological Surgery Part B Skull Base · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiosurgerySchwannomaMedicineVestibular systemRadiologyRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The appropriate management of Koos grade I vestibular schwannomas (VS) remains controversial. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) versus observation for Koos grade I VS. Methods: In a multicenter study, this report gathered and analyzed data retrospectively on Koos grade I VS patients who underwent SRS (SRS group) or were observed (observation group). Propensity score matching was utilized to equilibrate demographics, tumor size, and audiometric data across groups. The outcome analyzed included tumor control, preservation of serviceable hearing (SHP), and neurological function. Results: The study matched 142 patients, providing a median follow-up period of 36 months. SRS significantly enhanced tumor control compared to observation, with a 100% control rate at both 5- and 8-year marks in the SRS group versus 49.7 and 33% in the observation group at the same time intervals, respectively ( p < 0.001; [ Fig. 1 ]). SHP 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 = 0.33; [ Fig. 2 ]). Furthermore, SRS was associated with a reduced likelihood of tinnitus (OR = 0.46, p = 0.04), vestibular dysfunction (OR = 0.17, p = 0.002), and overall cranial nerve dysfunction (OR = 0.49, p = 0.03) at last follow-up. Conclusion: SRS management of Koos grade I VS patients was associated with superior tumor control and reduced odds for dysfunction of various cranial nerves, while not compromising hearing preservation compared to observation. These findings support the safety and efficacy of SRS as a potential management modality for this patient population. Publication History Article published online: 07 February 2025 © 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

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)0.002
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurological Surgery Part B Skull Base→Same topicMeningioma and schwannoma management→French-language works237,207→