Semi-automated segmentation and quantification of adipose tissue in calf and thigh by MRI: a preliminary study in patients with monogenic metabolic syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the growing prevalence of obesity and metabolic syndrome, reliable quantitative imaging methods for adipose tissue are required. Monogenic forms of the metabolic syndrome include Dunnigan-variety familial partial lipodystrophy subtypes 2 and 3 (FPLD2 and FPLD3), which are characterized by the loss of subcutaneous fat in the extremities. Through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of FPLD patients, we have developed a method of quantifying the core FPLD anthropometric phenotype, namely adipose tissue in the mid-calf and mid-thigh regions. METHODS: Four female subjects, including an FPLD2 subject (LMNA R482Q), an FPLD3 subject (PPARG F388L), and two control subjects were selected for MRI and analysis. MRI scans of subjects were performed on a 1.5T GE MR Medical system, with 17 transaxial slices comprising a 51 mm section obtained in both the mid-calf and mid-thigh regions. Using ImageJ 1.34 n software, analysis of raw MR images involved the creation of a connectedness map of the subcutaneous adipose tissue contours within the lower limb segment from a user-defined seed point. Quantification of the adipose tissue was then obtained after thresholding the connected map and counting the voxels (volumetric pixels) present within the specified region. RESULTS: MR images revealed significant differences in the amounts of subcutaneous adipose tissue in lower limb segments of FPLD3 and FPLD2 subjects: respectively, mid-calf, 15.5% and 0%, and mid-thigh, 25.0% and 13.3%. In comparison, old and young healthy controls had values, respectively, of mid-calf, 32.5% and 26.2%, and mid-thigh, 52.2% and 36.1%. The FPLD2 patient had significantly reduced subcutaneous adipose tissue compared to FPLD3 patient. CONCLUSION: Thus, semi-automated quantification of adipose tissue of the lower extremity can detect differences between individuals of various lipodystrophy genotypes and represents a potentially useful tool for extended quantitative phenotypic analysis of other genetic metabolic disorders.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".