Isolated restricted diffusion in glioblastoma: incidence, progression, and survival impact ‘
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma (GB) is the most malignant primary brain tumor. Isolated restricted diffusion (IRD) is restricted diffusion outside the confines of enhancing tumor with no corresponding enhancement on post contrast study. The aim of our study was to prospectively assess the incidence of IRD in GB patients, determine how often these foci proceed to contrast enhancement on follow up, and analyze the survival pattern of patients with IRD. METHODS: In a prospective pilot cohort study, consecutive adult patients (≥ 18 years old) suspected of having GB on initial MRI of brain, were included and screened for the presence of IRD. All images were independently analyzed by two experienced radiologists for inter-rater reliability. The survival pattern of patients with IRD was assessed with Cox-regression and Kaplan-Meier curve analysis. RESULTS: Of the 52 patients (median age- 63 years; male-63.5%) included, 21% (11 of 52) exhibited foci of IRD. Inter-rater agreement on the diagnosis of IRD foci was fair (kappa = 0.29) between the two readers. Among the 11 patients with IRD, only 7 (64%) showed enhancement in the IRD focus on imaging at a median follow up time of 110 days. The Kaplan Meier analysis revealed a significant decrease (p = 0.035) in the survival among patients with IRD focus. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, IRD foci were seen in 21% of patients with GB, with 64% of these demonstrating enhancement at the IRD focus on follow up imaging. A shorter survival was associated with IRD foci.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".