MO‐G‐BRF‐02: Enhancement of Texture‐Based Metastasis Prediction Models Via the Optimization of PET/MRI Acquisition Protocols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: We have previously identified a prediction model of lung metastases at diagnosis of soft‐tissue sarcomas (STS) that is composed of two textural features extracted from FDG‐PET and T1‐weighted (T1w) MRI scans. The goal of this study is to evaluate whether the optimization in FDGPET and MRI acquisition parameters would enhance the prediction performance of texture‐based models. Methods: Ten FDG‐PET and T1w‐ MRI digitized tumor models were generated from imaging data of STS patients who underwent pre‐treatment clinical scans between 2005 and 2011. Five of ten patients eventually developed lung metastases. Numerically simulated MR images were produced using echo times (TE) of 2 and 4 times the nominal clinical parameter (TEc), and repetition times (TR) of 0.5, 0.67, 1.5 and 2 times the nominal clinical parameter (TRc) found in the DICOM headers (TEc range: 9–13 ms, TRc range: 410‐667 ms). PET 2D images were simulated using Monte‐Carlo and were reconstructed using an ordered‐subsets expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm with 1 to 32 iterations and a post‐reconstruction Gaussian filter of 0, 2, 4 or 6 mm width. For all possible combinations of PET and MRI acquisition parameters, the prediction model was constructed using logistic regression with new coefficients, and its associated prediction performance for lung metastases was evaluated using the area under the ROC curve (AUC). Results: The prediction performance over all simulations yielded AUCs ranging from 0.7 to 1. Notably, TR values below or equal to TRc and higher PET post‐reconstruction filter widths yielded higher prediction performance. The best results were obtained with a combination of 4*TEc, TRc, 30 OSEM iterations and 2mm filter width. Conclusion: This work indicates that texture‐based metastasis prediction models could be improved using optimized choices of FDG‐PET and MRI acquisition protocols. This principle could be generalized to other texture‐based models.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".